Alaska faces formidable health care challenges
Published Tuesday, December 2, 2008
ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Patty Boily has had a ringside view of health care challenges for patients in Alaska, where industry observers conservatively estimate costs run 20 percent higher than the rest of the nation.
Boily, a medical coder who spent 21 years working in a small Homer clinic, watched patients deal with the high prices, struggling to decide between buying milk or medicine.
Then in May, she experienced her own flaw in Alaska's system. She found out her seemingly healthy 27-year-old son needed surgery to repair a heart valve.
He worked in a small restaurant. Like many small Alaska businesses, the restaurant could not afford to offer employer-based health insurance.
A cardiologist told the young man he likely faced a $200,000 bill.
"It was like, what are we going to do?" she said.
High costs of care and insurance are just two of the problems for Alaskans with health problems.
For the elderly, private doctors routinely reject Medicare patients because federal reimbursement does not cover their expenses.
There's a chronic problem recruiting doctors and nurses to many parts of the isolated state, and challenge persuading residents to lay off tobacco and junk food, which contribute to serious rates of cancer, diabetes and heart disease.
Health care has been marginally addressed by Gov. Sarah Palin during her two years in office. A spokesman says she will unveil health care proposals Thursday.
"It wasn't something she put a great deal of effort in, from what I could tell," said Rep. Sharon Cissna, an Anchorage Democrat who champions health care in the Alaska Legislature.
Palin's not the first Alaska governor to emphasize other issues, Cissna said.
"Then and now, the state of Alaska has ignored health in a way that is creating enormous problems," Cissna said.
Boily lost her own insurance a year ago when her employer's carrier went out of business. At 58 years old, she was rejected by a private carrier.
She found help for her son by filling out a mound of paperwork that led to him being declared presumptively disabled, and therefore eligible for Medicaid. She doubts that people with less familiarity with the system would know about that option.
She finds that lack of action by state leaders frustrating. More than 25 percent of employed Alaskans work for local, state or federal government, jobs that come with insurance.
"When you start talking about insurance, their eyes glaze over," she said. "For the rest of us, it's a big issue."
Alaska's high medical costs start with its location and small population. The cost of living in the north is already higher and the population is so small, it has attracted no HMOs or other significant managed health care that hold down prices in other states.
Costs are driven higher by the 100,000 Alaskans - about 15 percent of the population - who do not have insurance, including 60,000 who have jobs, as medical providers who provide uncompensated care shift the expense to people who do have the means to pay.
Palin's health care initiatives in nearly two years in office can be boiled down to budget and proposed laws.
Palin in 2007 created a health care strategies council that set lofty goals - health care costs below the national average, quality health care accessible to all Alaskans, increasing the number who are insured. The goals have been minimally addressed and none have been realized.
Palin in 2008 used the state budget, flush with surplus cash tied to an oil tax change and crude oil prices over $100 per barrel, to address the shortage of health care workers. She supported money for recruiting and training doctors, nurses, dental hygienists and EMTs at the University of Alaska.
Palin approved $3.85 million for 26 federal community health centers so they could expand services to medically underserved areas.
Outside the budget, Palin's main health care effort in the 2008 legislative session was a three-prong bill.
It would have set up a medical information clearinghouse, allowing patients comparison shop for doctors and prescription drugs.
The measure would have set up a health care commission, a measure Rep. Cissna said was crucial for planning and setting up a comprehensive approach to health care problems.
Both measures were well-received, but Palin insisted they be tied to a measure that fit in with her "less government is better" philosophy: elimination of Alaska's Certificate of Need requirement, a regulatory tool that prohibits duplicate medical services in communities.
"Eliminating the CON program, with certain exceptions, will allow free-market competition and reduce onerous government regulation," Palin said in a newspaper opinion piece.
"She thought it was a no-brainer, that people needed increased access, provided by competition," said Anna Kim, a health issues aide in the governor's office.
The measure was strongly opposed by Alaska hospitals, especially outside Anchorage. They said it would jeopardize their few profitable services, such as surgery and imaging, which help pay for emergency rooms and other money losers.
Princeton University economics Professor Uwe E. Reinhardt, who researches health economics, said costs have not dropped in other states that have dropped Certificate of Need. What it has done in some cases, he said, is set off a medical arms race, which he and other economists say does not lower costs or improve mortality rates.
Hospitals have a legitimate argument that competition with specialty offices is not fair if the federal regulation component requires them to subsidize the uninsured, he said.
"Competition isn't fair when someone has a ball and chain around their leg," Reinhardt said.
Elliott Fisher, professor of medicine at Dartmouth Medical School, said overbuilding may lead to slightly lower prices for procedures. But the system is flawed because both institutions must stay full to maintain their revenues, creating "supplier-induced demand."
Kim, Palin's aide on health issues, acknowledged that Palin's focus has been resource development. But less than two years into her term as governor, Kim said, it's premature to give Palin a final grade on health issues.
"I'm hoping we're going to gain some speed on the topic in the remainder of her term now that the resource development part has passed through the legislature," she said.
Digg
delicious
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
A health insurance policy that would protect a 27 year old from catastrophic medical expenses can be purchased in Alaska for less than the cost of a pack of cigarettes or a latte' per day.
That is not to say that medical services can't be provided more cost effectively, but the vast majority of people who say they cannot afford health insurance coverage simply do not want to take responsibility for their own actions. What they are really saying is that they choose to spend their money for immediate gratification rather than to protect themselves from unexpected expenses.
The third party payor system that we've established to address medical expenses is itself a significant contributor to the cost of the service. But if we wouldn't get carried away with regulating the insurance industry and we didn't provide tax incentives for employer provided coverage over policies purchased in the private market, the interaction of providers and consumers would automatically mitigate the added expense of the insurance service.
Licensing and regulation of medical service providers increases the cost of providing the services and limits the supply. This results in significant added cost to the consumer.
Finally, we've allowed an abusive and punative tort system to develop in our state and country. This dramatically increases the cost of the service and therefore our cost of insuring against the potential expense.
We should insist that the government reduce regulation of the medical industry and remind ourselves when we sit on a jury that the defendant doesn't pay the cost of the award. It is passed right back to us when we need medical services. This would temper our propensity to award vindictive compensation and focus on the real goal of the civil tort system, which is to provide just compensation for actual damages.
But we should think twice about asking the entity that operates our road system to manage our health care system if we want to control expense.
Sorry.. my eyes glazed over for a moment there.
The medical industry, like the oil companies, know they have something we can't really live without. As such, they charge the max rates they can get away with. Since government sold us out, and decided to bribe our state into accepting the CON (certificate of need) Program, with the promise it would lower health care costs, we should expect them to be held accountable for it. The medical institutions that have benefited from the CON, should also be held accountable for it. Where are those lower health care costs?
Seekins sponsored a bill that was passed into law, limiting malpractice law suits, to $250,000. A small price paid, to someone who for instance, lost their ability to walk, due to negligence. Especially so when you factor in the attorneys 40%. This too was passed on the promise it would decrease medical costs by increasing the number of doctors in Alaska, and decrease the amount malpractice insurance would cost doctors.
Anyone seen that savings yet?
A basic visit to many of the clinics is what? about $150 to $200. My family practice doctor left a major clinic and told us he'd charge us much less, (about $75 a visit), if we just pay cash so he doesn't have to deal with insurance company hassles, . (and no, I wont tell you who my doctor is. Find your own.)
I know there are other doctors that do the same. It's the clinics and the hospitals that do the most price gouging.
Let's not forget dental. Seen the price of getting a filling? Once you factor in the $500 for some xrays, office visit, and a filling, the price ranged about $800 to $1,200. Brush those teeth well.
To sum it up, our government gave them the power to have such inflated prices, and we expect the government to step in and fix it. The same government that enjoys the luxury of the best damn health care insurance available, thanks to it's public.
It's time our public servants, actually serve it's public. Drive the costs of health care down, so we ALL can afford to get it when we need it. You can bet that if they couldn't have health insurance till we all had it, this song would be over and done with.
Affordable health care: It really is a matter of life and death.
Healthcare here in th USA is a big rip-off! These doctors have 2 to 3 homes positioned all around the USA and vehicles, Holly-cow man. And yet they bitch about services that they ordered like, repair a broken water line or a leak or even service there boiler. Yeap, you play hell collecting what they owe you, the serviceman.
Preventive maintenance folks, no smoking, no drinking, excercise, eat healthy, take your vitamins.....B-O-R-I-N-G!! LOL
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.