Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Owning our own health

By Peter Baume - posted Wednesday, 8 March 2006


Meanwhile, as the current provision means chronic shortages then some other form of mass provision must be thought about: possibilities should not be dismissed out of hand with cries that the sky is about to fall in. Providers should remember that our society dictates its own rules and human care monopolies could end as quickly as the wheat marketing monopoly.

Many patient representatives do not really understand the problems and some only speak for disease specific groups (this latter fact is the reason that the Oregon experiment was not a complete success).

Medical research is directed towards achieving immortality and is Cartesian in its intellectual basis - as if the human body is a machine which just needs “fixing” to keep it running perfectly. Too often those doing research do not consider or discuss the consequences of any possible successes. And the consequences can be great, for example, the ethical consequences of genetic engineering. But from the community’s perspective these expensive fix-it solutions do not address the basics - that prevention is better than cure.

Advertisement

The media is also guilty. Too often there is talk of “breakthroughs” when what has been found is not a breakthrough at all, but rather a thinly disguised bid for money. The “breakthrough”, whatever it is, is often five years away. What the media never tell you is that a cure for one set of illnesses may leave you to suffer and die from another set of worse illnesses later.

Expectations in Australia are high and many customer complaints occur when these high expectations are not realised. The most serious failure occurs when services are not available. Less serious, but still significant, failures occur when queues are used to limit access to services.

For example, some hospitals have a budget limiting the provision of prosthetic joints; or a specialist has a four-week waiting time for consulations for serious conditions; or the waiting times for radiotherapy can be as long as the median life expectancy for someone with malignant brain tumours; or a general practice has a three-day waiting time before you can be seen for a routine consultation; or community services to help the aged are offered less frequently than is requested by experts; or there are not enough specialists (in some specialties), nurses or trained technicians to provide the care that has been promised.

These are all just crude and arbitrary ways to ration services.

Vicious inequalities have made matters worse. Health is poorer where people are poorer and access to services is easier if you are rich. That might offend those with egalitarian principles, but it is true. That partly explains the poor health of Aboriginal people - they are also poor.

What the debate should be about is how to make rationing decisions well by making the best use of limited resources. Those with the budgets make these decisions daily, which affects the public who has to live with the decisions.

Advertisement

Rationing decisions should be made deliberately, openly and by the public. The experiments with citizen juries has demonstrated one way that good rationing decisions can be made.

Health Areas make rationing decisions every day and providers make rationing decisions most days. They have people queuing for appointments, or procedures, and they put the urgency of some conditions ahead of other conditions.

Early in my career we decided unilaterally that certain people over a certain age should not have access to a particular procedure. This decision was a hidden one which was never validated. It was never tested publicly and it was never justified. We just did it and it was inappropriate.

The rationing of health is a fact of life and it is time the public that bears the outcomes becomes part of the decision making. It can be done. It has been tried (successfully) in Western Australia. Premiers and Prime Ministers should be working together for the public good.

At the same time the absurdity of a country our size having health responsibilities divided between two levels of government should be addressed along with the ridiculous position where only about 3 per cent of our expenditure goes on prevention.

What occurs now is a shifting of costs and blame between levels of government - and that should be fixed by one or other level of government taking the money and the responsibility for the area.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

15 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Professor Peter Baume is a former Australian politician. Baume was Professor of Community Medicine at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) from 1991 to 2000 and studied euthanasia, drug policy and evaluation. Since 2000, he has been an honorary research associate with the Social Policy Research Centre at UNSW. He was Chancellor of the Australian National University from 1994 to 2006. He has also been Commissioner of the Australian Law Reform Commission, Deputy Chair of the Australian National Council on AIDS and Foundation Chair of the Australian Sports Drug Agency. He was appointed a director of Sydney Water in 1998. Baume was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia in January 1992 in recognition of service to the Australian Parliament and upgraded to Companion in the 2008 Queen's Birthday Honours List. He received an honorary doctorate from the Australian National University in December 2004. He is also patron of The National Forum, publisher of On Line Opinion.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Peter Baume

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Peter Baume
Article Tools
Comment 15 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy