A little over a year ago my wife had two seizures within an hour of each other. This was traumatic, but overall, I'd argue that it was a positive experience (although, one which I hope to never experience again).
A little less than a year ago I was exposed to what the health care world looked like to the non-healthy. Apparently my wife now has a "pre-existing" condition, which means that insurance companies laugh at you when you ask if they will cover this "pre-existing" condition.
It's a strange thing to have a health care system that only covers the healthy. Now, I'm fairly new to the health care debate, but I'd like to say that my "pre-existing" opinions are beginning to change.
Perhaps another example is more helpful. This week I listened to a lecture by a guy named
Arthur Jones. Arthur Jones is a Medical Doctor who has chosen to practice and live in Lawndale, Chicago. He's also the CEO of Lawndale Christian Health Center. Among other things, he told me that if a uninsured patient from Lawndale wants a hip replacement there's a 5 year wait.
A 5-year wait...? ...Excuse the stereotyping, but whenever the topic of socialized/universal medicine bears its head toward the conservative side of the political spectrum, the immediate comeback is "waiting in lines"...you've probably heard it before...if we have universal health care, we'll have to wait in lines for the doctor, etc. Is a 5-year wait is acceptable? My answer - No.
Two things immediately come to mind:
1) "They're poor, they deserve it." Many would describe that statement as pejorative. But, I think that's the attitude of many. If the poor and homeless worked hard enough, if they straightened up, they could get a job and get insurance. This may be 100% true, but is it 100% Biblical? Consider verses about the poor (Matt. 25). Consider the concept of grace and the strong focus on making what is un-deserved available for free. Additionally, in the Bible, God seems to be the one doing the judging, not us. So, whatever exists in our hearts excusing a system that ignores the poor should be dismissed.
2) The second thing that pops into my mind is very unscientific. However, I think there's an element of truth to it...perhaps small, but I think it's still there. What happens in a "universalized" world of medicine? What if we jam all the waiting periods into one big equation, averaging the "wait times"? What happens? Things definitely get better for the poor person in Lawndale. They probably get a little worse for me. My question is....who says my health care needs to be a) immediate, or b) cutting edge. Isn't their something right and moral in sacrificing a little so that others can be helped?
I don't have any answers yet. Only questions. However, my questions don't seem to have answers that align themselves nicely to political parties. In the past I've always thought of the Republican party as being Pro-Life. I'm not 100% sure I agree with that thought anymore. I'm also not 100% for sure I think universal health care is a bad idea...in fact, at the moment I'd need some convincing that it's not a good idea.
Good idea or bad idea, something needs to be changed. As a Christian I'd like to support and vote for things that align themselves with the Bible. Call me a slow learner, but I'm becoming more and more aware that neither party fits in well with that alignment.
No comments:
Post a Comment