This is a pretty good analysis of what is happening and published as the major opinion piece in today's Dompost.
New Zealand's so-called universal healthcare system is actually rationed healthcare. The government gives it a certain amount of money each year and district health boards ration the care in various ways based on how sick people are, or through waiting lists. Pharmac – the state's drug buyer – is the same. If the cost-benefit ratio for a drug isn't high enough, it isn't funded and people die.
These decisions are made all the time – the difference is that these are not acute cases happening all at once, but around the country, all the time. Unless waiting lists get particularly long for some procedures, no-one seems to mind too much. The point is not that we should not care that people die, but that we should have some perspective.
1 comment:
I noted recently that NZ has something like 4 ICU beds per 10,000 population, Germany (that apparently has a seperate health system levy) has 29 beds, and America has 35 beds per 10,000 population.
That's rationing right there.
The real quesion is how much tax per head of population does it take to provide a functional 'free' health system, and are we willing (or able) to afford it? The American system not withstanding, would full privitisation measurably improve outcomes for most New Zealanders?
Which politician is prepared to speak honestly about the reality of competing priorities upon tax revenues? While we remain gulible enough to believe everything they tell us, there is no insentive to engage in honest dialogue.
Perhaps COVID-19 will change these dynamics.
Post a Comment