Please Log in to Vote.

12 out of 12 members found this useful.

The 1-2-3 of Healthcare Reform

I am one of the many faces of the recent and current healthcare and financial crisis. It all began when I became ill after having lost my health insurance. I ended up going into major debt paying for my own care, which led to financial ruin and near-homeless. I experienced first-hand the profound tetra-enmeshed nature of the healthcare and financial crisis in our country…feeling and perceiving loss, isolation, and pain on the physical, emotional, communal, and systemic levels of experience. During this whole process I felt a strange kind of connection between the inner and the outer as my own personal health and financial crisis appeared to be reflected in the greater culture and society. I could not help but feel that this was all part of a tetra-evolutionary process. On the individual level, besides my outer physical healing work throughout all this, I have also been attempting to process this whole experience on the using various inner Integral Life Practices, including Shadow work to uncover my own personal Shadow patterns that contributed to this situation. Concurrent with this individual inner-outer work, I have also been attempting to reflect on the collective and social dimensions of my experience by exploring the current healthcare debate from an Integral perspective, using various Integral lenses.
 
Looking at the issue from Integral Theory’s Big Three of I-We-It or 1st-2nd-3rd Person dimension-perspectives, it seems to me that within the boiling healthcare debate-soup there are 1st Person (1p), 2nd Person (2p), and 3rd Person (3p) competing healthcare reform approaches:
 
  • Individual-Freedom-oriented (1p) free-market “private” healthcare approaches;
  • Social-Systemic-oriented (3p) government-run “public” healthcare approaches; and
  • Collective-Community-oriented (2p) co-operative/non-profit “semi-public/private” healthcare approaches.
 
The private (1p) approaches appear to be most heavily associated with the conservative and mythic value meme (vMeme) political camps; The semi-public/private (2p) approaches associated with the centrist and rational vMeme political camps; and public (3p) approaches associated with the progressive and pluralistic vMeme political camps. In between these centers-of-gravity there appears to be varying degrees of attempted integration from those who are on the borders (between mythic/rational and rational/pluralistic vMemes).
 
Within this debate there also appears to be a fundamental question of whether healthcare is an “inalienable right” or “a privilege.” I believe this question is rooted in the central duality of our country’s doctrines which attempt to include equal measures of individual freedoms and certain socially-protected “inalienable” equal rights. Many of the 1p or private approaches to healthcare appear to champion freedom (individual and market) while forsaking some level of equality (degree of healthcare depends on economic class) and inalienable rights (degree of health is often directly related to an individual’s capacity to pursue the inalienable rights of Life, Liberty, and Happiness). Alternatively, many of the 3p or public healthcare approaches appear to sacrifice some degree of freedom (individual and market) in exchange for healthcare equality and inalienable rights, and most of the 2p or semi-public/private approaches seem to sacrifice some degree of both freedom and equality.
 
Then we have the issues of cost and quality. The private (1p) healthcare approaches tend to cost more for the individual person or group directly and cost less in taxation, while offering a relatively high degree of quality for those who can afford it and often a poor degree of quality for those who cannot afford it. The public (3p) approaches appear to cost the individual or group less in direct costs and more in taxation, while offering a more moderate degree of quality to a greater and more equal population. The semi-public/private (2p) approaches generally seem to offer a moderate degree of both cost and quality.
 
I believe this type of public/private/semi- (1p-2p-3p) tension can also be observed in our approaches to education. While our system is far from perfect, we seem to have achieved some degree of integration between the three perspectives by simultaneously offering public (3p) education, private (1p) education, and semi- public/private (2p) education (charter schools, home-schooling, etc). I think education is a good correlation to healthcare because both education and health affect an individual’s ability to pursue the inalienable rights of Life, Liberty, and Happiness.
 
In light of our country’s dual aspiration of individual freedom and socially-protected inalienable equal rights, I believe that a 100% private or a 100% public healthcare system is untenable and fundamentally incongruent with the aspirations and doctrines of our republic. While the nuts and bolts of our education system still needs a lot of work, I believe the 3-tiered structure that has evolved is inherently natural to our country’s ideals and current vMeme structures. Using this model, here is one possible scenario for an Integral “Big Three” approach to healthcare reform…
 
Basic Healthcare System Design:
 
  • Public Healthcare: Expansion of Medicaid and Medicare into a full-blown public healthcare system for those who cannot afford private care.
  • Private Healthcare: Strike a healthy balance of regulation and freedom for the Private Healthcare system (i.e.: Stronger patient rights; allow competition across state-lines; insurance pooling system; and balanced tort-reform).
  • Semi-Public/Private Healthcare: Regulatory support and incentives for Cooperative, Charter, and Non-Profit healthcare groups.
 
Obviously within this kind of three-tiered (1p-2p-3p) system there are a lot of complicated details that would have to be worked out, but I do believe a more Integral approach, like the basic template of the above three perspectives and the inherent dual aspirations of our system, can help a great deal. For example, with this awareness in mind, it seems to me that the notion of requiring all citizens to buy health insurance may go against the individual freedoms doctrines of our country. Interestingly, it seems that with the above proposed three-tier healthcare system, this requirement would be unnecessary, since the public system would be a free system for those who cannot afford private or semi-private/public healthcare.
 
So here it is…my own personal attempt to jump into the healthcare debate. I toss these words into the healthcare tetra-evolutionary soup with my prayers for vertical transformation for myself, for those in similar and worse situations, and for the greater system in which we live and co-create and co-evolve...

---------------

Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

dual aspiration

Hi Mark. I like how you have laid out the situation - I especially like that you have articulated the "dual aspiration" nature and legacy of the US (and probably, in different balancings, around the human world). Dual aspirations has a positive ring to its articulation that might soften bipartisan polarization.

I hear you on that terrible indebtedness you incurred in trying to keep your health and life. Good that you and we are quite resilient.

ambo

Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

Rework some bits...

Hi, Mark. Excellent starting place.

I'll throw in my 2 cents by chopping off one of the legs of your theory. :-{  Sorry, man.

You cannot compare health care with education. Anyone can buy a textbook and teach their son/daughter algebra. Individual citizens cannot buy a textbook and operate on their son's appendix or diagnose and prescribe a mental illness. Not any more. Not in this country.

Medicine has quality control costs that are way, way, way more expensive to bear than readin', writin' and 'rithmatic. Someone has to pay for those things one way or another. Medicine, in this way, is more like the military or police and emergency services.

So!

Do I have to pay insurance to certify that police will come to my rescue if I call them? No. Whattabout the military? Do they fight for those who can pay them only and let the rest die? No. Well.... not theoretically, anyway.

So, the difference between them lies in how to draw the line between safety - which should be a human right - and quality of life - which is so, so, so subjective and impossible to quantify at this point. Because the "quality of care" that I get from publicly funded service agencies is not lacking in terms of preventing my death (unless it's just reallyfuckingsloppy which does happen both in medicine and in the military and emergency services). It is mainly lacking in terms of giving me the quality of life as I determine it. They do the bare minimum. And this ends up being more expensive to them in the long run - but they can't afford to do that advanced math. Maybe I should have my daughter teach them trig... 

The problem of quality of control costs must be looked at again. Back to the drawing board.

--

For just $14.95 a month, YOU TOO can offset your Karma Footprint by becoming a Member of Integral Life!

[has that already been done?]

Please Log in to Vote.

2 out of 2 members found this useful.

Sorry

Sorry for all the challenges you have been through Mark. I hope all turns out well for you. My prediction would be that before we can solve the problems of the world we will become a community that supports each other. I am not sure what that would look like but at least we can offer each other encouragement.

Stan

Please Log in to Vote.

2 out of 2 members found this useful.

Mark: I hear you!

 

Dear Mark:

  I feel obliged to add my two bits, not only because I am a physician, but because for some reason my name was put beside your photograph in the Integral Life Weekly Member Update, Featured Perspectives section! 

   First I wanted to say that I’m impressed you’re still smiling and have been using this situation to work on your development.   From my experience, myself included, most people won’t work on themselves unless something is going on that forces the issue, at least somewhat.  If it ain’t broke, most people don’t know there is something to fix. 

  Second, as a physician I do feel badly about your situation, having seen this happen only too many times.  Just yesterday a family physician wanted to refer a patient to me, but since she has no insurance, I said I would be glad to see her, but that while I can make all the recommendations I want, I doubt nothing will happen.  This is because the patient is “self-pay” and what I recommend is usually very expensive, such as therapies and MRI’s, so most patients just can’t afford it.  For that reason, I still can’t quite figure out why people aren’t clamoring for more healthcare coverage, such as Obamacare.   It would significantly help even small businesses.  I suspect part of it is just denial, but part of the issue is developmental.  Or both, as denial can be a developmental issue.

  However, what I was really referring to under the “developmental” umbrella is related to the ethnocentric or egocentric level of development of so many people, such that they just don’t want to help anyone outside of their particular group.  Sometimes this is only a group of one!  I personally would be glad to take a 20% cut in my salary…but only if they would take that money and give it to Internal Medicine or other primary care physicians who presently have the most responsibility, the worst life style, and make the least amount of money.  It makes you understand why of all the graduates from one of Washington state’s medical schools, only ONE out of over a hundred graduates went into primary care.  We, the USA Boomers, are so screwed, vis a vis getting good health care as we age.  Who is to blame?  I just suggest we look in the mirror.

  We’ve known for decades this was going to happen, but we just spent all our money on other things anyway.   Hmm, I think maybe that is also a developmental problem, but how to fix it is really the question, right?

  Hence my idea of an “Integral City,” a possibly soon to be posted blog, but it really only deals with what you alluded to in one of your and Stanley’s later blog:  Perhaps forming communities that support each other is one of the ways in which we will solve the problems of the world...”  I’ve been around the block a few times and from what I’ve seen, that is the only way to do it.  You have to have the support and you have to have the numbers, which also equals dollars and political representation.  Right now Green meme people tend to be too individualistic and the Teals are too few.  We need our own “Integral Conveyor Belt”, which includes schools from K through graduate college, that teach integral ideas and values, at a level commensurate with the level of the person being taught. 

  Well, once again, I wax too much and probably not eloquently, but wanted to say that “I hear you” and as a physician, I’m doing what I can to support people like you having some sort of affordable medical insurance!

Yours,

mb

 

Please Log in to Vote.

0 out of 0 members found this useful.

goverment run companies

Dear Mark,

Thanks for posting a report on what's it's like dealing with the current buisness of healthcare insurance both personally and the industry suggestions with a Integral Model. It's impossible to solve an intellect consciousness problem with emotions and feelings. Sure eveyone should have care Mark. Trying to get the current politicians to create a healthcare payment system for services that's fair for doctor and the masses would be like trying to get peace in the middle east...not going to happen, too much greed and back room deals. There also appears to be little or no input from the doctors and the insurance industry. We lose 35,000 doctors every year to retirement and only graduate 25,000 from med school.The private insurance companies take less the one cent of profit from premiums.The Feds are trillions in debt with what they already do without healthcare, Feds want the money to run thru their pockets first in DC.

The private insurance companies pay far more questionable claims than the current federal insurance programs of medicaid and medicare.Who do want to fight with for claim coverage or payment? The feds, or a private company. The goverment turns down 75% more claims than the private insurance companies. The goverment companies suffer from 53% fraud and abuse of tax payer funding for every dollar and suffer huge financial losses in the billions every year.The government programs want to cover pre existing conditions...that's not "insurance". There's no incentive to remain proactive in taking care of our greatest gift, body/mind/spirit on all levels. To cover "pre existing" conditions is like getting fire insurance the day after your house burns down, doesn't make sense, is that fair? The feds started the problem about 60 years ago, not the private sector, thet respond to the market and the new laws. Folks should shop themselves and their famlies around to insurance carriers alone, not their employer paying for coverage.

The current system has many problems and it's not going to be resolved with traditional out dated thinking. The free market system has problems with folks telling the truth.The goverment doesn't have any accountabillity for the huge debt it runs up. Each generation should clean up its' own mess, don't dump this 13 trillion dollar debt onto our kids, that's just really really wrong on so many levels.

Thank you for your service to this subject.The Integral maps,systems and quadrants are great way to look at the current system for the private insurance sector. I just think we need to keep as much of our personal capital out of Washington DC, there is no accountability, politicians have a great health program for their families. They aren't going to change their program, their changing ours. We need to take back our fundamental freedoms and build an Integral Model for the next generation and plant some quality seeds for the future.

Thanks for your post Mark

 

Please Log in to Vote.

0 out of 0 members found this useful.

it appears we have a new health policy

I simply want to mark that it appears we have a new health policy. As you all probably know, last night the house passed the bill, trusting that the senate won't mess with it. Obama will sign it. Wow (disclosure - I'm biased for it), it'll be so good to have that source of politico-emotional heat ease up.


ambo