Single-payer Healthcare Gave Me Back My Life; Its Selection Is Not A Choice
29 Monday Mar 2021
Written by redqueeninla in Public Health
I have personal experience with single-payer health care, directly contrasting treatment for the same medical diagnosis under America’s for-profit private insurance formula, with Canada’s single-payer paradigm.
It happened in the late-‘oughts after decades of targeted barbs in the media about Canada’s healthcare system. In retrospect studies found this narrative of long “wait times”, medical “refugees” and substandard, even rationed care to be, simply, propaganda.
But just personally, it has been my lived experience in America as a survivor of several head and neck tumors, to be excluded from any employment not bundled with the benefit of large-group insurance, which accepts preexisting conditions. By necessity of my very existence, my lifelong work experience from the get-go has been limited to enormous institutions with premium insurance contracts, e.g., academia, government. The fiction of “choice” afforded by the free market has quite simply been a permanent, existential, cruel tease.
In my 40’s I developed neurological problems treated with ganglia blocks and then surgery. And subsequent to this I was diagnosed with a pain syndrome I concluded to be like “phantom limb” syndrome where perception is of a physical reality that does not exist: and there is no way to “fix” what isn’t there. The very real, excruciating pain I experienced was an interpretation, not a reality.
The prognosis is poor and treatment is inexact. Physical therapy with expensive, never-ending copayments appropriated a significant fraction of each session to gathering metrics for the insurance company rather than therapy to address my pain. After one such session devoted entirely to untherapeutic measurements I dragged myself into a stairwell and just sobbed. I could not have explained my anguish to concerned passersby if I tried. I was out of options. And when the insurance company refused to pay for more treatment I agreed that assuming full responsibility for such tenuous care could well be pointless.
Then my husband accepted a sabbatical position in Canada. As a guest of the government his family was entitled to their national insurance coverage. I was inducted into the Canadian medical system following a serious bicycle accident. And when they undertook to treat me for my unrelated, preexisting condition, to my skepticism regarding appropriateness and ROI, they responded: “it does not matter how or when you acquired this problem, the task is to address it.”
In fact, I was lectured with all solemnity, that my responsibility was to work hard, and to miss no appointments because this would displace others in need, thereby contributing to the efficiency of the system. They covered the monetary expense.
In contrast with the American facilities, the Canadian’s was not high tech, without fancy water baths and tape and measuring or exercise equipment. The benefit was derived through my own effort internally using coffee cans and pencils, not received as a magical high-tech gift externally. And it worked. Without personal cost to me beyond that of my responsibilities as citizen and guest.
The story of rationed care and unobtainable therapy turned out to be just so much misinformation – variously irrelevant, inappropriate, wrong, deceitful, distracting. Unless resources are literally infinite, constraint is inescapable. Management is achieved internal to the system, minimizing displacement to all; the alternative simply imposes hidden limitations. For example by mandating personal responsibility for treatment, by accepting triage from an independent adjudicator rather than usurping it through one’s personal pocketbook.
Canada gave me my life back. Canada’s single payer healthcare system cared about my physical challenges while a guest in their country. Under for-profit insurance in my own country, my value is measured in capacity to extract treasure for the corporation, even while my freedom and “choice” is imprisoned within this serf status.
I tried earnestly to discuss this with a Canadian friend, to question the tales of Canadians flocking in droves to our northern hospitals, the reported complaints and dubious tales of malaise we were fed in America. My friend simply refused to engage: “You Americans are all crazy. I just don’t want to talk about it; what’s to talk about? Why would anyone willingly choose an expensive, inadequate system? Why choose to pay for what should come to you for free as a right of citizenship? There just isn’t anything more to say; you all are simply crazy.”
On February 19, 2021, California State assembly members Kalra, Lee and Santiago introduced for consideration AB1400, Guaranteed Health Care For All. If you live in California, please contact your state legislators to request their support for this legislation. California’s Governor Newsom must apply to the federal government for waivers to implement the proposal. If it is true that as goes CA, the fifth largest economy in the world, so goes the nation, then it is everyone’s prerogative to urge that he apply for this vital waiver: here.
7 Comments
Andrew Gale said:
March 30, 2021 at 1:09 pm
This blog implied that just being a Canadian guaranteed free healthcare. Obviously it’s not free. It’s paid by everyone contributing via taxes. Which should be the way here in the usa, if the politicians got out of the way!!
redqueeninla said:
March 30, 2021 at 1:13 pm
Absolutely. It’s a basic human right, that we can absolutely afford. And afford it more comfortably we will with consolidation of management. But I don’t mean to imply it is without cost – my apologies for that. It is a cost we can, should and must bear; and that cost will be far lower without competing interests taking a swipe at the trough. It is a cost we cannot afford to forswear. And it is a cost that includes more than dollars and cents; it includes effectiveness as well.
Caroline Grannan said:
March 29, 2021 at 4:50 pm
We have a family friend about 70 from L.A. who moved permanently to Vancouver as a young adult, so he has only dealt with the U.S. health system as a healthy young person. A few years ago he needed serious heart surgery. He worried that there would be a wait in the Canadian system and said he planned to get the surgery at the Cleveland Clinic and pay out of pocket from his savings. When next heard from he had successfully gotten the surgery in Canada. Apparently he figured the surgery in the U.S. would be, oh, maybe $10,000. Well, ha ha ha — once he checked it out, add a zero or lots more — well into six figures. And the wait was minimal in Canada after all. Basically the folks Rose ran into probably had no clue about major procedures and were getting ingrown toenails fixed or something.
Caroline Grannan said:
March 29, 2021 at 4:56 pm
“Single-payer healthcare” is ineffective branding, though. It’s not self-explanatory and sounds mystifying and bureaucratic. I prefer Medicare for All since most Americans grasp what Medicare is.
redqueeninla said:
March 29, 2021 at 4:59 pm
Yes, and so it is put about. But “Medicare For All” (M4A) is actually not the same thing as single-payer. So I tend to use the more accurate moniker, though folks are saying M4A these days. I started saying it too, but it feels wrong. Medicare is so *problematic*! As anyone who actually deals with medicare knows. And then suddenly you’re in an argument defending medicare, which isn’t right, or explaining that in fact you’re looking for a better system than Medicare… ugh. A hot mess very quickly. So I went back to “single-payer” because that’s the point. Consolidate, pull all the administration under one roof, quit enabling carpet-baggers, do it once, do it right: everyone in, nobody out.
Rose Reiss said:
March 29, 2021 at 12:39 pm
Hi Sara,
I understand the benefits of Single-Payer Healthcare and your personal experience is amazing. However, what still disturbs me is the wait time involved for care. This nagging question came up when I met some Canadians at an LA restaurant who shared their experiences with waiting for a doctor in Canada based upon priority of illness and found shorter duration to get treated by coming to the US. Will this problem also exist in the US for single-payer?
Best, Rose Reiss
redqueeninla said:
March 29, 2021 at 12:49 pm
What was the condition they were waiting for? And presumably this was some while ago as you mentioning meeting in an LA restaurant. More, my own experience at least in waiting for healthcare is tremendous, here in this country. It’s anecdotal and I don’t know how to compare it directly with your friend’s. But I can tell you last week I called for an appointment and was told the wait list was two years long. I am not kidding. Two years.
So it depends on what you’re talking about. This happens to be critical care, too. But I was wanting to switch services because my care at the one I want to switch from was so terrible I haven’t been in a decade. Thus, two years v 10 years feels, well, a deal…. In this particular case it’s a chronic, serious condition I’m referencing.
But the other reason I’m curious about the timeline here is that when I went to look for articles on that whole scare-story from a decade ago about huge wait times, I could discover almost no such stories and a raft of serious studies looking into the claimed problem of wait times. It was studied by several groups, at least one of which I’ve referenced in the links to this article – please have a look. The fears turn out to have been quite explicitly engineered by right wing think tanks here on this side of the border while conversely on the other, the situation was largely exaggerated and improperly reported.
I don’t know how that dovetails with your friend’s personal experiences. That of course could be as they claim, personally. But the generality of these claims depends on the details of their complaints. What was their need? How do you define “long”? How do you distribute resources to best benefit most overall?
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.21.3.19
There are another half-dozen such studies. The Canadian govt was seriously alarmed about such reports which turn out to have largely vaporized on scrutiny.