I've got this dumbass assignment for medical school, we have to make a discussion post discussing the downsides of universal healthcare (not the positives, for obvious reasons).

My main thesis is that the downsides are largely nonexistent but I don't think I know enough to articulate that position well. I feel like the main argument people make against universal healthcare is "how are we going to pay for it," which is easy to address.

However, I think the thing more people don't talk about is how increasing access for everybody to get healthcare will functionally decrease access for people who already have insurance. Doctors' offices will be overwhelmed, ER's will be overwhelmed, and more and more people are going to have to see midlevels and receive subpar care because doctors can't see them. I'm not sure that I see this as a downside, as healthcare should be a right that everyone has access to and universal healthcare will increase equity, but it's hard to put into words why it isn't a bad thing that rich people can't just buy their way to the front of the line anymore (as their health outcomes would surely decrease to a degree, right?).

If anybody knows of any good review articles that discuss what outcomes would look like if the US introduced universal healthcare that would be greatly appreciated. Or if anyone has further thoughts/sees real downsides that I haven't considered, please share :)

  • Omegamint [comrade/them, doe/deer]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Downsides are likely that absurdly expensive cures might take longer to develop, which is easily overshadowed by preventative medicine and overall better outcomes among the population.

    Like, first rate brand new cancer treatments don't mean shit when only a small segment of the population can afford them. It's the truth that your outcomes medically in the US tend to be better, but the cost is completely fucking over the lower classes.

    It's all class warfare really. Shit I'm like 4 drinks in and this has set me off lol

    • darkchapofantasy [he/him]
      hexagon
      ·
      3 years ago

      Outcomes better than where? I mean we are ok in some locations but our life expectancy has decreased for the past 3 consecutive years. Maternal mortality is insanely high.

      And the outcome inequality is so outrageous. In the rich suburb of my city, outcomes and life expectancy are on par with the best in the world (like Japan), while just a 30 minute drive away downtown life expectancy is equivalent to some war torn countries.

      • Omegamint [comrade/them, doe/deer]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Like I said, it's outcomes for those who can afford expensive treatments here versus universal healthcare systems. Fyi, from what I remember it's not even much higher. And the overall mortality rate for cancer, say, is higher here than in universal healthcare systems. Obviously because people have access to care continuously.

    • Omegamint [comrade/them, doe/deer]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      Also the profit motive leads to SOME things being researched, but also leads to companies literally abandoning medicine/treatments if it seems unprofitable. Like every downside of universal medicine is garbage, unless you're fucking rich as sin.