I agree that this also crucial because improving the other sectors of the community would also translate to improvement of health and also economic growth. The third issue is that there should be a “better balance between cure-oriented and care-oriented medicine” (Callahan, 2009, p. 14). Because most of the problems addressed by health reforms are diseases with no immediate cure yet such as cancer, then care-oriented medicine should also be given special attention.
The explanation of the author on this issue was agreeable because medical researches should also give sufficient attention to care-oriented medicines since they are also prominently taken. The fourth issue is about prevention and the author suggest the importance of taking care of oneself before it reaches the point that only medical miracles could save you. I also agree with the author because correct information on the capabilities of prevention would make people more mature and not wasteful of what medical progress could do for them.
The last issue addressed by Callahan is that the progress should be focused “in removing the health disparities that keep millions from reaching seventy-seven” (p. 14). I agree with him that the life expectancy of Americans is already long and research on further extending it should not be the focus of people. Rather, solutions should be sought for conditions that burden the economy and make the life of people miserable like asthma and obesity. Quality: Where it came from and why it matters by Frank Davidoff 1. Frank Davidoff’s essay is focused on the American core value of quality.
This value translate to the need of health reforms to focus on delivering better health, better care, and better learning to the people. He also tackled the rules for achieving quality of the Institute of Medicine and these rules include “transparency and the free flow of information, continuous decreases in waste, and customization based on patients’ needs and values” (Davidoff, 2009, p. 22). 2. The value of quality and safety are given emphasis in Davidoff’s work. He highlighted the need for the means of achieving these two to be dynamic in order to not become misguided, static, or unproductive.
And, the combination of the fields of medicine and commerce has resulted to health care becoming, at least, “as much a business as a profession” to everybody (Davidoff, 2009, p. 22). This resulted to the introduction of pay for performance model in health services. Critics argue that this model might result to stagnant quality and safety. However, I think the pay for performance model is very optimistic and is more inclined to improve or make clinical widgets better. This model makes room for real improvements and efficient, quality results.
And since performance will be the basis for the payment, more attention would really be given an individual’s well being. A good and not abusive combination of business and medicine could actually result to more quality health care and financial savings for the public. Efficiency: Getting Clear on our Goals by Marc J. Roberts 1. In Marc J. Roberts’ essay about the value of efficiency, he said that “to be efficient means to use our resources in the best possible way to achieve our ends” (p. 24). Efficiency entails putting all possible resources in their most functional and productive uses in order to achieve all goals and plans.
2. The essay provided two perspectives on what would be efficient as health care systems. The first is a perspective “oriented towards need” (Roberts, 2009, p. 25). It is centered on creating a system that values what would make everyone healthy and what could lessen the need of health care in the future. This perspective aims to be more focused on what people need in order to reduce spending and wasting of resources. On the other hand, the second perspective is focused on the demand and it entails “satisfying individuals’ desires to the maximum extent possible” (Roberts, 2009, p. 25).
This would mean that costs would only be controlled if it would benefit and could still contribute to the demand for happiness of the people. As the essay of Roberts highlighted, America has the “highest health care costs in the world among industrial countries” (p. 25). Therefore, I support the first perspective because genuine happiness can be achieved easier if the needs of the people will be taken care of and there would be more supply of resources left for more people. The first perspective presents a more efficient and logical health system that could address all the needs of the population.
3. Roberts also discussed the need for distributive efficiency, something that is often forgotten or not given enough attention to when planning health reforms. Distributive efficiency is defined in the essay as the efficient distribution of equal, quality care to all people. Health reforms usually face major problems with allocating resources and distributive efficiency focus on the idea that all hospitals should be able to provide the same care to all people, regardless if they are rich or poor.
I agree with the author because for a system to really practice the value of efficiency, it should be able to deliver to everyone fairly and address where the reforms are really needed.
Callahan, D. (2009). “Medical Progress: Unintended Consequences. ” Connecting American Values with Health Reform. Ed. by Crowley, M. New York: Hastings Center. Pp. 13-14 Retrieved on 2 June 2010 from http://www. thehastingscenter. org/Publications/Detail. aspx? id=3528