重新定义"医疗保健"

Q2 Social Sciences Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy Pub Date : 2017-01-01
Lauren R Roth
{"title":"重新定义\"医疗保健\"","authors":"Lauren R Roth","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>President Donald J. Trump has said he will repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and replace it with health savings accounts (HSAs). Conservatives have long preferred individual accounts to meet social welfare needs instead of more traditional entitlement programs. The types of \"medical care\" that can be reimbursed through an HSA are listed in section 213(d) of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) and include expenses \"for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body.\" In spite of the broad language, regulations and court interpretations have narrowed this definition substantially. It does not include the many social factors that determine health outcomes. Though the United States spends over seventeen percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on \"healthcare\", the country's focus on the traditional medicalized model of health results in overall population health that is far beneath the results of other countries that spend significantly less. Precision medicine is one exceptional way in which American healthcare has focused more on individuals instead of providing broad, one-size-fits-all medical care. The precision medicine movement calls for using the genetic code of individuals to both predict future illness and to target treatments for current illnesses. Yet the definition of \"medical care\" under the Code remains the same for all. My proposal for precision healthcare accounts involves two steps-- the first of which requires permitting physicians to write prescriptions for a broader range of goods and services. The social determinants of health are as important to health outcomes as are surgical procedures and drugs--or perhaps more so according to many population health studies. The second step requires agencies and courts to interpret what constitutes \"medical care\" under the Code differently depending on the taxpayer's income level. Childhood sports programs and payments for fruits and vegetables may be covered for those in the lower income brackets who could not otherwise afford these items and would not choose to spend scarce resources on them if they could. This all assumes that the government takes funds previously used to subsidize the purchase of health insurance under the ACA (or allocates new funds) and puts the funds in individual accounts so the poor or near poor have money to pay for these expenses. Section I of this Article will explore the current definition of medical care, which excludes the social determinants of health from \"healthcare\" spending. I then address how precision medicine has changed the types of services and treatments that it makes sense to reimburse for each individual. If efficacy can vary from person to person based on genetic code, then it also can vary depending on environment. There is an opportunity to not only vary the types of \"medical care\" that can be reimbursed or deducted within the traditional range of services and drugs, but also outside of that range. Section II addresses the historical shift towards health financing through individual accounts, and specifically through HSAs. If this is the only avenue for health reform in the next few years, I advocate using it to engage in the type of experiments that are typically only possible under the cover of tax expenditures. My proposal for precision healthcare accounts moves the government to experiment with individual social spending that can lead to improved overall health outcomes. Finally, in Section III, I address two dichotomies that affect any healthcare proposal: (1) entitlement programs v. grants-in-aid, and (2) pooled insurance v. consumer-driven health plans (CDHPs). In the end, I argue that an entitlement method of funding precision HSAs along with pooled insurance subsidized by the government is the most realistic resolution to these dichotomies. Only a broad-based entitlement to funding for all healthcare expenses (medical and social) allows for significant improvements in overall population health.</p>","PeriodicalId":39833,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy","volume":"27 1","pages":"65-106"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Redefining \\\"Medical Care.\\\"\",\"authors\":\"Lauren R Roth\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>President Donald J. Trump has said he will repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and replace it with health savings accounts (HSAs). Conservatives have long preferred individual accounts to meet social welfare needs instead of more traditional entitlement programs. The types of \\\"medical care\\\" that can be reimbursed through an HSA are listed in section 213(d) of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) and include expenses \\\"for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body.\\\" In spite of the broad language, regulations and court interpretations have narrowed this definition substantially. It does not include the many social factors that determine health outcomes. Though the United States spends over seventeen percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on \\\"healthcare\\\", the country's focus on the traditional medicalized model of health results in overall population health that is far beneath the results of other countries that spend significantly less. Precision medicine is one exceptional way in which American healthcare has focused more on individuals instead of providing broad, one-size-fits-all medical care. The precision medicine movement calls for using the genetic code of individuals to both predict future illness and to target treatments for current illnesses. Yet the definition of \\\"medical care\\\" under the Code remains the same for all. My proposal for precision healthcare accounts involves two steps-- the first of which requires permitting physicians to write prescriptions for a broader range of goods and services. The social determinants of health are as important to health outcomes as are surgical procedures and drugs--or perhaps more so according to many population health studies. The second step requires agencies and courts to interpret what constitutes \\\"medical care\\\" under the Code differently depending on the taxpayer's income level. Childhood sports programs and payments for fruits and vegetables may be covered for those in the lower income brackets who could not otherwise afford these items and would not choose to spend scarce resources on them if they could. This all assumes that the government takes funds previously used to subsidize the purchase of health insurance under the ACA (or allocates new funds) and puts the funds in individual accounts so the poor or near poor have money to pay for these expenses. Section I of this Article will explore the current definition of medical care, which excludes the social determinants of health from \\\"healthcare\\\" spending. I then address how precision medicine has changed the types of services and treatments that it makes sense to reimburse for each individual. If efficacy can vary from person to person based on genetic code, then it also can vary depending on environment. There is an opportunity to not only vary the types of \\\"medical care\\\" that can be reimbursed or deducted within the traditional range of services and drugs, but also outside of that range. Section II addresses the historical shift towards health financing through individual accounts, and specifically through HSAs. If this is the only avenue for health reform in the next few years, I advocate using it to engage in the type of experiments that are typically only possible under the cover of tax expenditures. My proposal for precision healthcare accounts moves the government to experiment with individual social spending that can lead to improved overall health outcomes. Finally, in Section III, I address two dichotomies that affect any healthcare proposal: (1) entitlement programs v. grants-in-aid, and (2) pooled insurance v. consumer-driven health plans (CDHPs). In the end, I argue that an entitlement method of funding precision HSAs along with pooled insurance subsidized by the government is the most realistic resolution to these dichotomies. Only a broad-based entitlement to funding for all healthcare expenses (medical and social) allows for significant improvements in overall population health.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39833,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"65-106\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

唐纳德·j·特朗普总统表示,他将废除平价医疗法案(ACA),代之以健康储蓄账户(HSAs)。长期以来,保守派倾向于用个人账户来满足社会福利需求,而不是更传统的福利项目。《国内税收法》第213(d)条列出了可通过HSA报销的"医疗保健"类型,包括"诊断、治愈、缓解、治疗或预防疾病,或为影响身体任何结构或功能的目的"的费用。尽管措辞广泛,但法规和法院解释已大大缩小了这一定义。它没有包括决定健康结果的许多社会因素。尽管美国将国内生产总值(GDP)的17%以上用于“医疗保健”,但该国对传统医疗化健康模式的关注导致总体人口健康状况远远低于其他花费少得多的国家。精准医疗是美国医疗保健更多地关注个人而不是提供广泛的、一刀切的医疗保健的一种特殊方式。精准医疗运动呼吁利用个人的遗传密码来预测未来的疾病,并针对当前的疾病进行针对性的治疗。然而,《法典》对"医疗"的定义对所有人都是一样的。我提出的精准医疗账户包括两个步骤——第一步是允许医生为更广泛的商品和服务开处方。根据许多人口健康研究,健康的社会决定因素对健康结果的影响与外科手术和药物一样重要,甚至可能更为重要。第二步要求各机构和法院根据纳税人的收入水平对《法典》下的"医疗保健"作出不同解释。儿童体育项目和水果和蔬菜的费用可能会覆盖那些收入较低的人,他们负担不起这些项目,即使有能力也不会选择在这些项目上花费稀缺的资源。这一切都是假设政府将以前用于补贴购买ACA医疗保险的资金(或分配新的资金)存入个人账户,这样穷人或接近穷人的人就有钱支付这些费用。本文的第一节将探讨医疗保健的当前定义,该定义将健康的社会决定因素排除在“医疗保健”支出之外。然后,我将阐述精准医疗如何改变了服务和治疗的类型,从而使每个人都能得到合理的补偿。如果基于遗传密码的功效因人而异,那么它也会因环境而异。不仅有机会在传统服务和药品范围内,而且在传统服务和药品范围之外,改变可报销或扣除的"医疗保健"类型。第二节论述了通过个人账户,特别是通过健康储蓄账户向卫生筹资的历史性转变。如果这是未来几年医疗改革的唯一途径,我建议用它来进行通常只有在税收支出的掩护下才有可能进行的实验。我关于精准医疗账户的提议,促使政府对个人社会支出进行试验,从而改善整体健康状况。最后,在第三部分,我提出了影响任何医疗保健提案的两个二分法:(1)权利计划vs .补助;(2)集中保险vs .消费者驱动的健康计划(CDHPs)。最后,我认为,一种资助精确HSAs的权利方法,以及由政府补贴的集中保险,是解决这些二分法最现实的方法。只有广泛享有为所有医疗保健费用(医疗和社会)提供资金的权利,才能显著改善总体人口健康。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Redefining "Medical Care."

President Donald J. Trump has said he will repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and replace it with health savings accounts (HSAs). Conservatives have long preferred individual accounts to meet social welfare needs instead of more traditional entitlement programs. The types of "medical care" that can be reimbursed through an HSA are listed in section 213(d) of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) and include expenses "for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body." In spite of the broad language, regulations and court interpretations have narrowed this definition substantially. It does not include the many social factors that determine health outcomes. Though the United States spends over seventeen percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on "healthcare", the country's focus on the traditional medicalized model of health results in overall population health that is far beneath the results of other countries that spend significantly less. Precision medicine is one exceptional way in which American healthcare has focused more on individuals instead of providing broad, one-size-fits-all medical care. The precision medicine movement calls for using the genetic code of individuals to both predict future illness and to target treatments for current illnesses. Yet the definition of "medical care" under the Code remains the same for all. My proposal for precision healthcare accounts involves two steps-- the first of which requires permitting physicians to write prescriptions for a broader range of goods and services. The social determinants of health are as important to health outcomes as are surgical procedures and drugs--or perhaps more so according to many population health studies. The second step requires agencies and courts to interpret what constitutes "medical care" under the Code differently depending on the taxpayer's income level. Childhood sports programs and payments for fruits and vegetables may be covered for those in the lower income brackets who could not otherwise afford these items and would not choose to spend scarce resources on them if they could. This all assumes that the government takes funds previously used to subsidize the purchase of health insurance under the ACA (or allocates new funds) and puts the funds in individual accounts so the poor or near poor have money to pay for these expenses. Section I of this Article will explore the current definition of medical care, which excludes the social determinants of health from "healthcare" spending. I then address how precision medicine has changed the types of services and treatments that it makes sense to reimburse for each individual. If efficacy can vary from person to person based on genetic code, then it also can vary depending on environment. There is an opportunity to not only vary the types of "medical care" that can be reimbursed or deducted within the traditional range of services and drugs, but also outside of that range. Section II addresses the historical shift towards health financing through individual accounts, and specifically through HSAs. If this is the only avenue for health reform in the next few years, I advocate using it to engage in the type of experiments that are typically only possible under the cover of tax expenditures. My proposal for precision healthcare accounts moves the government to experiment with individual social spending that can lead to improved overall health outcomes. Finally, in Section III, I address two dichotomies that affect any healthcare proposal: (1) entitlement programs v. grants-in-aid, and (2) pooled insurance v. consumer-driven health plans (CDHPs). In the end, I argue that an entitlement method of funding precision HSAs along with pooled insurance subsidized by the government is the most realistic resolution to these dichotomies. Only a broad-based entitlement to funding for all healthcare expenses (medical and social) allows for significant improvements in overall population health.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Founded in 1991, the Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy (JLPP) has quickly risen to become one of the leading public policy journals in the nation. A fixture among the top 10 policy journals, JLPP has consistently been among the top 100 student-edited law journals. JLPP publishes articles, student notes, essays, book reviews, and other scholarly works that examine the intersections of compelling public or social policy issues and the law. As a journal of law and policy, we are a publication that not only analyzes the law but also seeks to impact its development.
期刊最新文献
Environmental Law and Policy Civil Rights Law and Policy A Historic Introduction to Law and Public Policy Security Law and Policy Institutions and Power—Congress, the Courts, and the President
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1