Madam, – I welcome Minister for Health James Reilly’s proposal for universal health insurance and the abolition of the public/private divide, along with his move to bring accountability into health care. However, I have some concerns about the nature of the proposed universal health insurance: will this be public universal socially- based insurance funded by taxes, or come from private “for profit” insurers? In the light of Muiris Houston’s recent concerns around VHI becoming a “US style Medicare entity” which might not reimburse provision of essential elements of care, and possibly deny cover for certain treatments (Opinion, April 23rd), are we risking the problems which arise in the US where insurance companies, rather than clinical concerns, dictate the forms of treatment available?
A recent letter (Matt Harper, April 26th) expresses well the growing concern about suicide and emotional distress in general as being linked to the impingement of significant psycho-social events in a person’s life. In all health care, but especially in mental health care, the social context of professional care matters. If an insurance company can dictate which health care professional a client should attend, this not only deprives the client of free choice, but also potentially disrupts the continuity of relationship which is so important for someone in emotional distress.
Could we please have full information and debate on the nature of the universal insurance proposed, along with its likely effect on patient care? – Yours, etc,