Panel agrees health system needs fixing

From patients to physicians, many are feeling the state of America’s current health system, which a panel of IU professors agreed cannot be left alone. Something must be done.

But the panel didn’t agree on what should be done. Some advocated a single-payer system while others opposed it.

The six-person panel of IU professors shared various opinions concerning the methods of answering the current health care problem during “A Non-Partisan Look at Health Care Reform” on Monday night at the Whittenberger Auditorium.

The event was coordinated by groups such as the Union Board, the IU College Democrats and the IU College Republicans. Each panelist spoke for a few minutes about their views on how to solve the problem, which was followed by a question-and-answer session.

“I hope they get a deeper understanding of health care reform,” said AnnElyse Gibbons, president of the IU College Democrats. In the end, she said, it didn’t matter to her what side someone followed, just as long as the person is educated about the issue.

Accounting and business professor John Hill proposed emulating the Swiss system of health care, which he said is near universal, while philosophy professor Milton Fisk opted for the single-payer system and economics professor Martin Spechler opposed it.
Other panelists included optometry professor Edwin C. Marshall and School of Public and Environmental Affairs professor Nicole C. Quon.

Sophomore Russell Conard said it was nice to hear the academic opinion but it would have been ideal to balance the panel with more doctors from the frontline.

“Physicians are too often ignored in this debate,” he said.

Conard’s father, an opthamologist, retired three weeks ago after 30 years of private practice.

In order to “put a face” to the problem, panelist Dr. Rob Stone, who has worked as an emergency department physician at Bloomington Hospital since 1983, shared one couple’s predicament.

During this past summer, a man was rushed to the Bloomington Hospital for a suspected heart attack. Stone confirmed the condition and attended to him but nothing more could be done until the cardiologist arrived.

Meanwhile, a woman was crying. Stone, suspecting her to be the wife, approached to comfort her. She was distraught, not only because of her suffering husband, but because of the hospital bills that would follow.

She explained that since her husband was self-employed and had a pre-existing condition, they were not eligible for health care and thus had not been able to consult the cardiologist before. At that time, they were also settling a suit in a small claims court about the man’s previous visit.

Whether the man lives or dies, Stone said, they’ll lose everything.

“We’ve got to make this right; this is so, so wrong,” Stone said.