英语论文网

has improved due to technology, it has decreased in quality, particularly in the hospitals, because HMOs have intervened and have not been willing to 'pick up the tab.' From the moment the idea of insurance materialized, insurance became a means to actually afford care. The depression in the 1930s left many penniless and without hope for any form of health care. Over the next few years, insured care became more and more prevalent in America. The famous Blue Cross health care provider came about by 'a group of 1250 schoolteachers in Houston asking Baylor University Hospital to guarantee them a certain number of days with medical care in the hospital for a set monthly fee of fifty cents per person' (Sherrow ). Later, Blue Shield was added to provide surgical procedures to its participants, further developing the care system, and finally establishing insurance. As time passed, more kinds of 'insurance' were established. Most of these companies provided care to the people themselves through their businesses. One of these kinds was the Health Maintenance Organization, or HMO, as it is commonly known. During the 1970s, when these organizations became renowned, their original goal was to provide preventative care for their patients in order to lower sick population (Sherrow 30, 46-49). Inevitably, they found out the costs of this were too steep, and, therefore, they tried other methods of cost reduction. One of these plans was to limit the stay of new mothers to a single day in the hospital. But alas, when new mothers were given only one day to recover because of HMO, political leaders began to step in. Eventually, the President himself decided to do his part. Bill Clinton, developed a bill to require 48 hour stay for mothers, effective in 1998. Clinton's strong feelings about the situation are expressed as follows: 'This law [48-Hour Hospital Stay Bill] is common sense and will now be the law of the land' (CNN Article). In several aspects, these HMO institutions provided an isolated and cold environment, and failed to provide proper care for their patients.

In many instances, HMOs have been known to have numerous disadvantages. When providing care as a whole, the enormous companies have removed the personal relationship between patient and doctor. The idea that the patient may not be able to have his or her desired physician hinders the pleasantness of care. Even doctors themselves agree to this observation. William Schell M.D., a private practice doctor, expressed this by stating: 'When the traditional doctor is replaced with a contracted health-care provider, he is replaced with someone who is working for the corporation, not for you [the patient]. If you want someone to work for you, you should direct payment.' - (Bloom 110). In addition, when joining a HMO, you are limited to the provided doctors and nurses to look after you. During the majority of the time, you don't even see the same doctor or nurse. Therefore, there are limitations on how much the doctor knows about you, the patient, because he or she has no experience with you personally. Obviously, second opinions would provide a better base to make decisions concerning your health.

Many people are amazed at the way that HMOs magically make the bills go away in hospitals. The answer is quite simple. Medical costs are reduced because the quality of care is reduced. As recent studies have shown, '... HMOs do reduce medical costs. But the reason