Sicko

This past Friday was the nationwide release date for Michael Moore’s new movie, Sicko. Michael Moore has taken the rank of most controversial film producer away from Oliver Stone and done so much more with the role. Love him, like him, or hate him he succeeds in at least getting you (and a good portion of the country) thinking, feeling and talking about issues. I’ve only seen two of his other films and they were quite a bit more partisan than Sicko, just based on where subject matter alone tends to fall politically. This film is far less partisan, thought I don’t think masses of conservatives will be flocking to see any Moore movie anytime soon, regardless of its content. If I’m proven wrong, fine. I shouldn’t think so narrowly anyway I suppose.

This film was on healthcare in the US. It’s not about the large number of our citizens living without healthcare. It didn’t delve into our existing social medicine programs either, Medicaid or Medicare. Its focus was on those of us with healthcare – either private healthcare or healthcare through our employers.

We met person after person, via interviews, who were denied care by their providers. While doctors deemed tests and procedures necessary to diagnosis and treat their patients, the healthcare providers disagreed. In essence this section of the movie boiled down to a) insurance companies are making medical decisions for our doctors and b) some insurance companies have bonuses setup so those employees who save the company more and more money by denying care get higher bonuses & promotions.

Another portion of the movie looked at healthcare in other countries. The study Moore sited lists the US as #37, just above Slovenia & Cuba. This study listed France and Italy as numbers 1 and 2. Moore visited Canada, Britain, and France. He talked to doctors and patients in each country. Of course the point here was to show that other countries do things differently but they are as healthy as us if not healthier. Moore sited a few studies (I don’t have the specifics) that showed even the poorest and most unhealthy UK citizen has a longer life expectancy than the richest and healthiest US citizens. The same was true in France. Why is this? The implication was that they have better healthcare. The citizens did not appear burdened by exorbitant taxes, and the doctors were making a very nice living just like US doctors. The point to this section is apparent – the US should consider socialized medicine for everyone – not just our elderly and poor. Our current system is broken; socialized medicine may be a good fix. It works elsewhere.

My thoughts on this are that if we even rank 1/2 as poorly as the study sites (#37) then we have 15-plus countries ranked higher than us that we could study to see what works and what doesn’t in their systems. We could take the best ideas and incorporate them into something amazing for ourselves and our fellow citizens. So in the end, I think the system is broken and does need fixed. But I don’t personally have any suggestions for how that should look. I know some of the problems and where changes might want to begin, but that’s it. I think most of us know where problems lie.

I believe the issue of healthcare is completely non-partisan. We all get sick; we all need good, reliable healthcare for ourselves, our friends, our families, our children. I really think we could make a change. The movie showed HMOs and healthcare as we know it having started in the early 1970s. That’s only 30 some years ago, so it shouldn’t be so ingrained in our society that it can’t change again.

See the movie. Let me know what you think. Better yet, let your representatives and senators know what you think – and your friends and families too.