Is Our Healthcare System Racist?

Is Our Healthcare System Racist?

By Patrick Comer
Editor

(Editorial)

There, I said it. I raised the question of whether the U.S. healthcare system, as it is now, favors whites over minorities. What do you think? Since unemployment is often higher among minorities, they are the first to feel the effects of not being able to afford healthcare. So, as a consequence of that reality, are whites receiving better healthcare than minorities?

Of course, I’m not suggesting that any healthcare professional makes a conscious decision to not provide healthcare to a minority. But the decision is made thousands of times every day across the county to not provide the same level of healthcare to someone without insurance as they would to someone with insurance. Even 501c3, not-for-profit hospitals and clinics still have a bottom line and finite resources. Healthcare is not a bottomless well with unending services. Someone gets left out, and sadly, those getting left out are the less fortunate among us, which certainly includes whites but very often the less fortunate are minorities.

Speaking on the subject “Institutional Racism in the US Health Care System,” Vernellia R. Randall, Professor of Law with The University of Dayton School of Law
said, “since 1975 minority health status has steadily eroded and there have been no significant improvements in the removal of barriers that are due to institutional racism.”

Healthcare Already Rationed
Is it racism or rationing? You might ask what is the difference, healthcare is apportioned now based on color. The color green. In a recent interview with the Lee County Times, I spoke with Dr. Larry Antonucci about the debate over healthcare reform. “I’ve heard people say they are concerned that healthcare reform will lead to rationing of healthcare services,” said Antonucci, Chief Operating Officer of Hospital Services for Lee Memorial Health System. “The reality is, it is already rationed on whether you have health insurance.”

If you ponder that statement for a moment, which in all honesty I probably never would have until I was thrust into that situation, it is a frightening and sobering statement of reality. Basically, someone decides ‘this person gets treatment because he has insurance or money,’ and ‘this person will not get treatment because he does not have insurance or money.’ So, does it not follow then, that if minorities often fall into a lower socioeconomic scale, they receive less healthcare? You might say “well then, pull yourself up by your bootstraps and get a better job.” Tell that to the unemployed 60 year-old Nuclear Engineer in California who called into NPR radio a few weeks ago. “I was laid off two years ago,” he said. “We’ve used up all our savings and now I’m losing my house and no one wants to hire a 60-year-old Nuclear Engineer.” He appears to have done everything right. He was educated and hardworking. Now he is unemployed and uninsured.

I’m white and always had a good job and decent health insurance. But due to the terrible economy I was laid off, am now unemployed and will soon not have health insurance because of the tremendous cost. We’re endeavoring to start our own business, but until that is successful, will my family’s quality of healthcare continue the same as someone fortunate enough to still have full-time employment? Will we still be able to afford our prescriptions? Will we still visit our doctor when sick? The simple answer to those questions is no, not without affordable health insurance. Like millions of other families we will try to stay healthy and hope nothing serious happens, until we either can afford health insurance again or get old enough to receive Medicare.

Is Medicare “Socialized Medicine?”
As a journalist, I’ve always endeavored to give a voice to the powerless, not the powerful. This is one of those times and one of those editorials. I’m not writing from the figurative ivory tower, smug and comfortable with a 6-figure income, and patting myself on the back for my work ethic. I’m writing this because it seems political rhetoric too often muddies the discussion over reform and those who suffer are the powerless.

Much of the debate on healthcare reform seems to come from two opposing political views rather than on how to reform what is obvious to most, that the current system is too expensive and too exclusive. The political argument against reform often is that it is “socialized medicine.”  But many times, it seems the ones arguing that point are old enough to be receiving Medicare. Whenever the opportunity arises I always ask someone on Medicare but who is complaining about reform they perceive to be “socialized medicine, “are you better off with Medicare, or would you rather see it disappear?”  So far, not a single person receiving Medicare has told me they would rather not have it. To the contrary they are very thankful to have it. How about you?

I’m not saying Medicare is perfect, but at least it appears to be colorblind, providing the same level of care, good or bad, to everyone regardless of race, religion or ethnic background. Unfortunately, even Medicare is going bankrupt and is in need of reform.

So, here’s my question: If you believe universal healthcare is “socialized medicine,” will you refuse Medicare when you qualify, or if you are already receiving Medicare, would you rather you did not receive it?

I would love to hear from someone who doesn’t receive healthcare benefits from their employer or former employer, and who refuses to accept Medicare and is complaining that reform is equivalent to socialized medicine. What say you?