logo

56 pages 1 hour read

T.R. Reid

The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2009

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Chapters 6-7Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapter 6 Summary: “Japan: Bismarck on Rice”

Dr. Nakamichi Noriaki is one of the best-known orthopedic surgeons in Japan and runs a clinic in the Orthopedic Surgery Department of Keio Daigaku Hospital in Tokyo. To treat Reid’s shoulder, Dr. Nakamichi recommended acupuncture and steroid injections, though he also offered to perform the total shoulder arthroplasty that Reid’s American doctor had recommended. Japanese health insurance would cover all treatments. For his consultation, Reid paid only $19, though the doctor’s charge is $64 dollars; insurance covers 70% of the fee. If Reid had chosen to have the surgery, insurance also would have mostly covered the surgery and a five-day hospital stay. The cost would have been around $10,000—a quarter of the price in the US.

In Japan, doctors and hospitals are privately-operated and insurance plans pay their fees. The Japanese visit the doctor far more often than both Americans and Europeans and make house calls at least once per week. When Japanese patients enter hospitals, their average stay is 36 nights. In the US, patients, on average, remain hospitalized for six nights. New Japanese mothers also stay hospitalized with their infants over a week longer than new American mothers. Japan has the world’s highest rate of life expectancy. Other factors, in addition to outstanding health care, also impact longevity, including lower rates of violent crime, less drug use, and less obesity.

While Americans believe that the cost of health care will inevitably rise, particularly with the advent of new technologies, the cost of Japanese health care has fallen each year. The Japanese spends around 8% of its GDP on health care—half of what the US spends. The Japanese insurance companies must accept every patient and pay every claim. What is remarkable about Japan’s insurance system is that it offers a wealth of insurance plans—around 3,500. The plans are divided into three types: plans set up by large companies and government agencies to cover employees; government-subsidized health insurance at smaller companies; and a Citizens Health Insurance plan for retirees and the self-employed in which the patient and the local government split the cost of care.

As in France and Germany, everyone in Japan is required to sign up for health care. This is the notion of the “individual mandate,” which has been maligned by conservatives and libertarians in the US. Patients who don’t sign up for health care are assigned a provider by their local governments. Those who don’t pray premiums get bills from the insurance company. If they still refuse to pay, all back due premiums will be owed during the next doctor’s visit. No treatment will be provided without paying what is due to the insurance company. The government pays for those who are too poor to cover their premiums.

The Japanese adopted their system of health care in the mid-19th century, during the Meiji era—a period marked by modernization. When developing its health care system, the Japanese looked to Germany and imported German doctors and economists to teach the nation how to practice and manage Western-style medicine. However, the Japanese health care system differs from the German health care system in three ways: everyone must buy insurance, while the Germans excuse the wealthy from purchasing a state-managed plan; patients must get insurance from either their employers or the local municipality; and the Ministry of Health and Welfare negotiates prices with providers, as opposed to allowing insurance companies to negotiate with providers in each region.

To know the fee for each doctor, therapist, or hospital, the Japanese refer to a hefty book that, in English, is called the “Quick Reference Guide to Medical Treatment Points.” As in France and Germany, Japanese doctors don’t become wealthy, and their fees are set every two years. The ministry “determines which treatments and drugs the insurance plans have to pay for, and negotiates the prices that insurance has to pay” (92). Doctors must accept the prices, otherwise they’ll not be paid at all.

Companies that produce medical equipment also don’t receive a lot of money. While conventional wisdom would assume that access to high-tech equipment would require high prices, cost controls have stimulated innovation in Japan. When Japanese doctors go to major manufacturers and ask for low-cost MRI machines, the industry responds with scanners that cost around $150,000—nearly one-tenth of what one of the bigger machines would cost in the US. These scanners perform their basic functions, but they don’t have the advanced features of the more expensive MRI scanners.

The losers in the Japanese health care system are the providers. When Reid visits Dr. Kono Keiko, an ophthalmologist at the Kono Medical Clinic in Tokyo, he finds a doctor who charges for parking to help make additional income. His waiting room is full from morning to mid-afternoon with patients, many of whom walk in without an appointment. Doctors are required to see all of them and not keep them waiting for long. On the other hand, Dr. Kono makes a six-figure income and only pays about $1,200 yearly for malpractice insurance, which he knows he’ll probably never need.

Reid’s experience with the Japanese health care system was a good one. He and his family never had to wait to get an appointment, and the doctors were always helpful, kind, and knowledgeable. He also had the benefit of a free comprehensive annual physical—a service that he was refused in Great Britain. 

Chapter 7 Summary: “The UK: Universal Coverage, No Bills”

Lord William Beveridge and Nye Bevan, two British politicians from very disparate backgrounds, instituted the British National Health Service. Beveridge designed the system on which so many British citizens rely for health care, while Bevan “muscled [it] into existence” on the principle that no one should ever be required to pay a medical bill (104). It doesn’t matter if patients go to a general practitioner’s office for cold medication or to a cardiac surgeon for a quadruple bypass, the bill is also paid by the government. While private health insurance plans still exist in Britain, few people bother with them. About 90% of the British population uses the NHS, which is funded through tax revenue.

Reid recalls that he and his family were satisfied with the care that they received through the NHS, despite waiting for weeks to see specialists. For the problem of his bad shoulder, a doctor told Reid that the NHS would not provide coverage. The NHS is so popular with the public that, in the 1980s when Margaret Thatcher privatized other public services, she never dared touch the NHS. Thirty years later, Prime Minister David Cameron “promised severe cutbacks in government spending,” but offered to provide more funding to the NHS (106).

During World War II, most British medical services were managed by the Emergency Hospital Service—a centralized agency. This was the precursor of the single health care system that Beveridge invented. The doctors who belonged to the British Medical Association, however, protested the idea of becoming government employees. Moreover, the health insurance programs that existed, called “friendly societies,” were worried that a national health care system would render them unnecessary.

Bevan decided that all hospitals would become a part of the National Health Service and all specialists who worked in them would be government workers. However, the doctors could continue to see patients based on their own schedules and charge fees. Bevan also agreed that general practitioners could also operate privately and treat patients in their own practices. Finally, Bevan assured the insurance industry that it could still sell insurance to those who opted out of the NHS. On July 5, 1948, the National Health Service began.

Its first problem was dealing with too many people using too much health care. As a result, the service exceeded its budget within its first year. This remained a problem for many years thereafter. To offset the costs, treasury officials demanded that patients pay some fees. Bevan, in his role as health minister, agree to charges on prescriptions, as long as children and the elderly were exempt. Then, in 1951, the Labour government also agreed to charge fees “for spectacles and false teeth,” prompting Bevan to resign (111). He argued that this would eventually lead to charges for doctor’s visits and hospital treatment. His prediction turned out to be untrue.

Currently, more than 1 million people work full-time for the NHS, making it the largest employer in Europe. The NHS operates 2,000 hospitals and operates what many experts consider to be “one of the most cost-efficient health care plans ever devised” (113). To access the NHS, everyone must register with a general practitioner in their community. If a patient wants to see a specialist, he or she must be referred to one by a GP. This is a cost-control measure. Another cost-control measure is the waiting list. It can sometimes take weeks or months to get an appointment with a specialist. American politicians use this as proof that “socialized medicine” doesn’t work properly. However, both prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown increased funding to the NHS in the late-1990s and early-2000s, causing a reduction in queues. Now, lines are much shorter, but patients must still wait to receive treatment for procedures that the NHS deems elective. For serious problems, such as cancer screening, a patient will see a consultant within 14 days. For chest pains, a cardiac specialist will see the patient within an hour.

To control costs, the NHS strictly rations which medications, tests, and treatments it will pay for. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, referred to by its acronym, NICE, makes those decisions. Sometimes, the organization makes decisions that are unpopular with the public, but its harshness prioritizes longevity. For instance, NICE may decline to pay for a sick grandmother’s operation if it allows for more money to treat children who are ill.

Consultations with NHS doctors usually last for about 10 minutes, which is the same length of time in which an American doctor sits with a patient. The NHS is less likely to perform X-rays and tests than American doctors and the system refuses to pay for annual physicals. A patient reserves the right to pay for it out-of-pocket, however, at the cost of about $500. Reid was even refused a prostate test, though it’s common for men his age in the US. The NHS, however, has determined that it isn’t “a proper indicator of cancer” (120). On the other hand, his GP did advise him to get a colonoscopy, given the prevalence of colon cancer in his family.

In Great Britain, around 60% of all doctors are general practitioners. In the US, only around 35% are GPs. In Britain, GPs earn twice as much as specialists and they find other ways to make income, such as making house calls and writing off their cars as a business expense. Doctors who meet targets for best practices receive a bonus of up to $125,000 per year. British general practitioners pay about as much for malpractice insurance as an American GP would but would likely never face legal action as long as the doctor can prove that he or she was following NICE guidelines when providing treatment. Also, medical school tuition fees are so low—and, in many cases local governments pay medical students’ tuitions—that doctors graduate without debt. 

Chapters 6-7 Analysis

Reid shifts from Europe to the third Bismarck system—that of Japan, which boasts the world’s highest life expectancy. The Japanese health care system offers the widest array of options and manages to keep costs incredibly low—significantly lower than expenditures in France and Germany, while its citizens get more medical treatment than anyone else in the industrialized world. Reid’s detailing of Japan’s health care system shows the skeptical reader that nationalized health care can still be cost-effective and could even offer a dizzying array of options if efforts are made to streamline services and get control over costs.

Reid then shifts to the United Kingdom, where cost-control is tantamount to the maintenance of its National Health Service. When conservatives balk at socialized medicine, one of the exemplary systems that they have in mind is the British NHS. When the plan, built on the Beveridge Model, was instituted, the British medical community resisted it. Similarly, in present-day America, the American Medical Association has worked to stall political traction on health care reform. It is clear from Reid’s analysis that neither the Bismarck nor the Beveridge Models offer medical providers opportunities to maximize their salaries.

The British reformers who created the NHS emphasized the suffering that occurred, particularly among the poor, when citizens lacked access to health care. William Beveridge and Nye Bevan were unabashed in their willingness to address that suffering directly and to push on the public a sense of moral obligation to alleviate it—something that no US president who attempted or achieved some degree of health care reform has ever done. Presidents Clinton and Obama may have had sentiments similar to those of Beveridge and Bevan—that is, they may have regarded health care as a human right, but they failed to communicate that to the public while retaining control of the message.

 

In Britain, part of the reason why the NHS remains popular is due to the British media’s efforts to publicize the NHS through programming. This is a clear way to educate the public and future generations about the service and to maintain its image as a permanent fixture of British life.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text