By Shefali Luthra
August
10, 2018
When
the American Medical Association met in Chicago this June, its medical student
caucus seized an opportunity for change.
Though
the medical students had tried for years to advance a resolution calling on the
physicians’ lobby group to drop its decades-long opposition to single-payer
health care, this was the first time they got a full hearing. The debate grew
heated — older doctors warned their pay would decrease and said the younger
advocates were naïve about the consequences of a single-payer system. But by
the meeting’s end, the group — including its older members — had agreed to at
least study the possibility of changing the stance of the organization, which
is one of the nation’s most powerful health care groups.
“We
believe health care is a human right, maybe more so than past generations,”
said Dr. Brad Zehr, a 29-year-old pathology resident at Ohio State University,
who was part of the debate. “There’s a generational shift happening, where we
see universal health care as a requirement.”
California
doctors — young and old — advocated on behalf of the single-payer advocates
during the debate, said Dr. Anna Yap, 26, an emergency medicine resident at
UCLA, who served as a medical student delegate to the AMA until June.
“They
said, ‘At the end of the day, we should support our younger physicians, who
will be practicing in this environment,’” she said.
Despite
the role that some of them played in the discussion, Golden State doctors as a
whole remain opposed to single-payer in their own backyard — even as the topic
has become a flashpoint in the state’s gubernatorial election.
Last
October, when some California Medical Association members called for a vote to
support the most recent single-payer measure,
“it was resoundingly defeated,” said Dr. Ted Mazer, a head and neck surgeon in
San Diego who is president of the association. The measure ultimately stalled
in the legislature, partly because of its exorbitant cost.
The
policymaking deliberations of these doctor groups may sound like inside
baseball. But this year’s youth uprising at the nexus of the medical
establishment speaks to a cultural shift in the profession, one with big
political implications.
Amid
Republican attacks on the Affordable Care Act, an increasing number of
Democrats — ranging from candidates to established members of Congress — are
putting forth proposals that would vastly increase the government’s role in the
health system. These include single-payer, Medicare-for-all and an option for
anyone to buy in to the Medicare program. At least 70 House Democrats have
signed on to the new “Medicare-for-all” caucus.
Organized
medicine, and previous generations of doctors, have for the most part staunchly
opposed any such plan. The AMA has thwarted public health insurance since the
1930s and has long been considered one of its most powerful opponents.
The
California Medical Association has fought every statewide single-payer proposal
that has come before lawmakers. “There just hasn’t been a single-payer model
that’s viable,” Mazer said.
But the
battle lines are shifting as younger doctors flip their views, a change that
will likely assume greater significance as the next generation of physicians
takes on leadership roles.
The AMA
did not make anyone available for comment.
Many
younger physicians are “accepting of single-payer,” said Dr. Christian Pean,
30, a third-year orthopedic surgery resident at New York University.
And
Mazer acknowledged that the growing support for a single-payer system within
the California doctors’ association is “dominant in the younger physicians.”
In
prior generations, “intelligent, motivated, quantitative” students pursued
medicine, both for the income and because of the workplace independence,
running practices with minimal government interference, said Dr. Steven
Schroeder, 79, a longtime medical professor at the University of California-San
Francisco.
In his
50 years of teaching, students’ attitudes have changed: “The ‘Oh, keep
government out of my work’ feeling is not as strong as it was with maybe older
cohorts,” Schroeder said. “Students come in saying, ‘We want to make a
difference through social justice. That’s why we’re here.’”
Though
“single-payer” health care was long dismissed as a left-wing pipe dream,
polling suggests a slim majority of Americans now support the idea — though it
is not clear whether people know what the term means, or that it could
significantly boost their taxes.
A full
single-payer system means everyone gets coverage from the same insurance plan,
usually sponsored by the government. Medicare-for-all, a phrase that gained
currency with the presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), means
everyone gets Medicare, but, depending on the proposal, it may or may not allow
private insurers to offer Medicare as well. (Sanders’ plan, which eliminates
deductibles and expands benefits, would get rid of private insurers.)
In California,
single-payer has emerged as a key issue in the gubernatorial campaign.
Democratic candidate Gavin Newsom supports it in principle, but he has not
spelled out what that system would look like. His opponent, Republican John
Cox, adamantly opposes it and government involvement in health care more
broadly.
Meanwhile,
many countries have achieved universal health care in which everyone is
covered, though the methods vary. In France, for example, citizens are required
to sign up with the national health system, which is funded mostly through
taxes and administered by a series of quasi-public insurance funds. In Germany,
most people get insurance from a government-run “public option,” while others
purchase private plans. In England, health care is provided through the
tax-funded National Health System.
American
skeptics often use the phrase “socialized medicine” pejoratively to describe
all of these models.
“Few
really understand what you mean when you say single-payer,” said Dr. Frank
Opelka, the medical director of quality and health policy for the American
College of Surgeons, which opposes such a policy. “What they mean is, ‘I don’t
think the current system is working.’”
But the
willingness to explore previously unthinkable ideas is evident in young
doctors’ ranks.
Recent
surveys through LinkedIn, recruiting firm Merritt Hawkins and the trade
publication NEJM Catalyst indicate growing support. In the March NEJM survey,
61 percent of 607 doctors who responded said single-payer would make it
easier to deliver cost-effective, quality health care.
Delving
further, that survey data shows support is stronger among younger physicians,
said Dr. Namita Mohta, a hospitalist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and
clinical editor at NEJM Catalyst.
But
it’s unclear whether these findings reflect young doctors’ feelings about
single-payer or are mostly tapping in to broader frustrations with the American
health system.
Much
like the general public, doctors often use terms like single-payer,
Medicare-for-all and universal health care interchangeably.
“Our
younger generation is less afraid to come out and say we want universal health
care,” but it’s not always clear what they mean by that, said Yap, the
emergency medicine resident at UCLA.
In
interviews, younger doctors also pointed to growing concern about how best to
keep patients healthy. They cited research that broadly suggests having health
insurance tracks with better health outcomes.
“Medical
students, I would say, are very interested in public health and improving
social determinants of health — one of them being access to health insurance,”
said Dr. Jerome Jeevarajan, 26, a neurology resident at the University of
Texas-Houston. He was referring to non-medical factors that improve health,
such as food or housing.
Some of
the shift in opinion has to do with the changing realities of medical practice.
Doctors now are more likely to end up working for large health systems or
hospitals, rather than starting individual practices. Combined with the
increasing complexity of billing private insurance, many physicians said, that
means contracting with the government may feel like less of an intrusion.
At this
point, the debate is still theoretical. Republicans — who control all branches
of the federal government — sharply oppose single-payer. And single-state
efforts in California, Colorado and New York have fallen flat.
Moreover,
doctors represent only one part of the sprawling health care industrial
complex. Other health care interests — including private insurance, the drug
industry and hospital trade groups — are less amenable to catchphrases like
single-payer or universal health care, which would likely mean a drop in
income.
Increasingly,
though, physicians seem to be switching sides in the debate, and young
physicians want to be part of the discussion.
“There’s
tremendous potential,” Pean said, “to be at the table if single-payer becomes a
significant part of the political discourse and create a system that is more
equitable.”
California
Healthline reporter Pauline Bartolone contributed to this report.
This
story was produced by Kaiser Health News, an
editorially independent program of the Kaiser Family
Foundation.
Shefali
Luthra: sluthra@kff.org,
@shefalil
No comments:
Post a Comment