I can hardly agree more with a viewpoint than with this of my esteemed colleagues. Our only possible diff-erence is the best way to achieve the same end.
Their ‘suspicions’ about my economic position and what I ‘can access’, however, appear prejudiced and stereotyped. Actually one of ‘the 85% without health insurance’ myself, I have empathy with those in the same situation. Offering my services, and often medicines, for free where the need was obvious, taught me how much more the same resources can achieve in the absence of ‘management’ by bureaucracy.
But also, I noted how much better medical intervention worked when the patient took ‘ownership’ thereof by paying, even if with a chicken or a few vegetables from their country garden …
It likely makes political sense taking credit for supplying services to ‘all’, and economic sense using other people's money (tax) to fund it. If the objective is purely philanthropic, however, surely we should all endeavour to find ways of getting maximal ‘mileage’ out of every penny spent.
Even if my good intentions wrongly came over as a ‘stinging rebuke’ it would be worth while if this helps re-focus priorities.
- © British Journal of General Practice, 2004.
