Universal Health Care

What is universal health care? And why is it the subject of so much debate during a presidential election?

This purposely vague, somewhat-utopian concept takes the earthly form of access to medical consultations, testing, and treatments—regardless of an individual’s ability to pay and his or her current health status. Sounds like a plan, so be sure to vote for the candidate whose double-talk and blather most closely resemble your own views on the subject.

Can we deconstruct this term before proceeding further? Health, as defined by the World Health Organization in 1948, is “a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” Health care, according to UNICEF in 2001, embraces “preventive, curative and palliative interventions, whether directed to individuals or to populations.” Universal, as defined in the aforementioned political debates, refers solely to the United States, not, thankfully, to the entire solar system and distant galaxies.

Universal health care represents an effort to minimize the cost of office visits, medication, surgery, and hospitalization to the individual consumer. Because the threat of injury and illness seemingly affects all people equally, a one-size-fits-all system appears ideal. Of course, logic needs to be temporarily suspended for this idea to resonate: drivers, smokers, mountain climbers, and diabetics all have varying risks to different body parts.

Part, if not all, of the appeal of universal health care is that the term presupposes that health care is something that is done to us. We, seemingly, are passive entities upon whom physicians, nurses, their assistants, pharmacists, and psychologists bestow their wisdom and experience. Of course, they might recommend weight loss, exercise, smoking cessation, or serious introspection, but these are unnecessary when there is an endless amount of money to cover any subsequent medical expenses.

Even in the somewhat “universal” area of infectious diseases, disparity exists despite a human desire for homogeneity. Does the influenza virus affect all of its victims uniformly? Contrast the able-bodied businessperson with a nursing-home resident who might easily develop a secondary bacterial pneumonia. Who will decide which patient to vaccinate, or is universal access to vaccines also “guaranteed”?

Health care, in contradistinction to its current misdefinition, is something that is done primarily by us. A country where 66% of the adult population is overweight or obese is an unlikely place for grand, utopian medical initiatives to flourish. Perhaps 2009 will see the transformation of the United States into Shangri-La—the mythical kingdom where no one ages. If it doesn’t happen that way, be sure you redefine health care as a personal issue, delineated by the boundaries of your own body—and unaffected by mountebanks of any political party.