The present state of health care in this country to an increasing extent involves strangers caring for strangers, with patients' narratives and life stories no longer a key element guiding decisions about their own health care.
The Republicans will say and do anything to help their rich friends. In the world of post-shame politics, they're the poster children -- they just don't seem to care how extreme and unconscionable their hypocrisy is.
This is the last of my five posts on the PPACA wherein I will analyze whether the legislation delivers enough to be worth the $1 trillion investment over the next 10 years and whether it will really work.
In our last three posts, we examined how the PPACA stacks up against the goals of reform for cost containment, affordability and access to care. Here we consider what its likely impact will be on the quality of care.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 is being touted by its proponents as moving the country to near-universal coverage and a great step ahead in U.S. health care. But what does this really mean?
We are told regularly by advocates of the free market that more choice, as granted by the unfettered private marketplace, is the key to greater efficiency and value for consumers. So what does this look like?