So on the one hand there will probably be downsizing in certain sectors of the health care system but, on the other, we may also be looking at some shortages. For example, as this article from the Times points out, people in Massachusetts are facing long delays before seeing general practitioners. Some of the problem is a part of a larger trend; nationally, particularly in rural and many urban areas, there is a widening gap between the number of general practitioners and the need for their services. But the situation is exacerbated in Massachusetts, where you suddenly have a large number of newly-insured people who are looking to make appointments with doctors when they previously would have gone to the emergency room or just forgone treatment altogether.
Once we have health care reform, any shortage of general practitioners/primary care providers is likely to become a bigger problem. It would be a tragic irony to trade a system where people can get in to see their doctor relatively easily (at least in part) because so many cannot afford health care for one where everyone can afford health care but no one can get in to see a doctor. The Times article touches on a few possible solutions: recruiting more foreign medical school graduates, student loan forgiveness for those who go work in underserved areas, and altering the reimbursement scheme for primary care providers. What are some other possibilities? Perhaps we could take some of the resources that are freed up as a result of having a more efficient system and reinvest in programs that would make sure there are enough primary care providers?
Oh, and speaking of job training programs, also noted in the Times is President Bush's proposal to eliminate $48 million in federal support for primary care training programs . . . .
Comments are closed for this post.
