View Entire Collection
By Clinical Topic
Diabetes – Summer 2012
Future of Nursing Initiative
Heart Failure - Fall 2011
Influenza - Winter 2011
Nursing Ethics - Fall 2011
Trauma - Fall 2010
Traumatic Brain Injury - Fall 2010
Fluids & Electrolytes
WEDNESDAY, June 17 (HealthDay News) -- Reforming the health insurance market so that all individuals are required to obtain at least a minimum amount of health insurance would eliminate the problem of adverse selection that the current system enables insurers to avoid, according to a perspective published online June 17 in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Linda J. Blumberg, Ph.D., and John Holahan, Ph.D., from the Urban Institute in Washington, D.C., write that the consequence of the current system is a health care system segmented according to health risk rather than being focused on providing efficient access to high-quality medical care.
Requiring everyone to have at least a set minimum level of health insurance would eliminate adverse selection, poor health would no longer prevent people from obtaining insurance, and public funds currently spent protecting the uninsured could be redirected to finance a system based on income-related subsidies, the authors argue.
"Enforcement of the mandate is the final issue. Once adequate subsidies exist, enforcement is essentially a matter of fairness to people who are playing by the rules. We believe enforcement through the tax system is the most efficient approach," the authors write. "An enforceable individual mandate, with adequate subsidies and benefits, as well as a choice of plans, is the most politically feasible route to universal coverage in the United States today."
Sign up for our free enewsletters to stay up-to-date in your area of practice - or take a look at an archive of prior issues
Join our CESaver program to earn up to 100 contact hours for only $34.95
Explore a world of online resources
Back to Top