Abstract
To the Editor. —There are several reasons that I am not reassured by Drs Brock and Daniels' 1 discussion of the ethical basis for President Clinton's health care plan. First, having worked in the Indian Health Service, I am familiar with how government budgetary restraints can interfere with patient care. Right now, if a utilization clerk denies payment for medical care, physicians and hospitals usually ignore the clerk's decision and do it anyway, keeping themselves solvent by overcharging other patients. In President Clinton's plan, we will all be working for the government/ health care alliances. The pressure to conform will be severe. Since nonalliance health care would be forbidden, we may be unable to ignore the clerk's decision and may be unable to give care until the appeal is heard, by which time, of course, some patients will no longer need the care. Second, there is an underlying public distrust
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
