In Retooled Health-Care System, Who Will Set Limits?

Washington Post by Alec MacGillis | Jul. 8, 2009 (News Analysis)

In U.S. "rationing" remains a dirty word, but who will say "no" remains the ultimate question.How will tough decisions be made about what to spend money on? In a country where "rationing" is a dirty word, who will say no?

The question permeates all levels of medicine: the use of tests that many argue are unnecessary (U.S. doctors order five times as many MRIs as doctors do in Germany); how early to intervene with common conditions such as heart ... Full Story »

Posted by Derek Hawkins - via Washington Post

More Info

Tags Help
Subjects: U.S., Politics, Business, Living, Health
Topics: U.S. Budget, Obama Administration, Health Care, Money
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Derek Hawkins - Jul 7, 2009 - 10:20 PM PDT
Reviewed by: Derek Hawkins (review), Samuel W. Velsor IV (review), Kaizar Campwala (review), Kristin Gorski (review), Patricia L'Herrou (review), Lisa LaRosee (review), Daniel Callahan (review)
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Derek Hawkins - Jul 7, 2009 - 11:53 PM PDT
Related Comments: Health Care (8) | Obama Administration (3)

Reviews

Show All Comments
Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Kristin Gorski
4.0
 by Kristin Gorski - Jul. 8, 2009

An informative report that cuts through spin and attempts balance on the sometimes-hysteria-inducing issue of "rationing". Stakeholders from diverging sides are quoted throughout.

Many physicians and health care-experts argue, though, that it is precisely by marshaling better research data, partly with the help of electronic health records, that a ... More »

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Samuel W. Velsor IV
4.7
 by Samuel W. Velsor IV - Jul. 9, 2009

One of the most in depth articles on Health Care that I have (yet) to read. Very well sourced.

I am so so glad to see this article prove that the Rationing scare- almost totally stilled herein. There are many quoted sources that all should read this article; to be used, to some degree, against many of the other articles on the Great Health Care debate.

See Full Review » (16 answers)
Patricia L'Herrou
3.6
 by Patricia L'Herrou - Jul. 16, 2009

altho this addresses an important question, the problem for me is that the statements quoted by a number of sources are little bites; one important issue is given an a "retort" rather than the context which may have been a thoughtful analysis. i would rather see more complete statements about this vital issue

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Derek Hawkins
3.0
 by Derek Hawkins - Jul. 7, 2009
Derek posted this story.
See Full Review » (2 answers)
Kaizar Campwala
4.1
 by Kaizar Campwala - Jul. 16, 2009
See Full Review » (10 answers)
Lisa LaRosee
3.8
 by Lisa LaRosee - Jul. 16, 2009

Yes, it has both facts and insight

Something has to be done about the medical problem in this country. 16% of the budget, is quite a chunk. there has to be a way, to clear the misuse of medical care that goes on.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Daniel Callahan
5.0
 by Daniel Callahan - Jul. 15, 2009

This topic is one studied much in my Masters in Healthcare Administration courses at Seton Hall University. It is great to see it posted so articulately in a national newspaper.

See Full Review » (7 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

Sort by: Oldest | Newest Hide All Replies
NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

4.0

Good
from 7 reviews (57% confidence)
Quality
3.9
Facts
4.0
Fairness
4.3
Information
5.0
Insight
4.0
Sourcing
4.0
Style
3.8
Context
4.0
Depth
4.0
Enterprise
3.8
Originality
4.0
Relevance
4.8
Responsibility
4.0
Popularity
4.1
Recommendation
4.3
Credibility
4.3
# Reviews
3.5
# Views
5.0
# Likes
3.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!