Staatliche Gesundheitsfürsorge

From a writer and founder of national online support group Caregiver Collective and a caregiver herself, Jennifer N. Levin offers a comprehensive look at our current culture of care, with an emphasis on Millennial caregivers—providing a roadmap to solutions and an immediate call for policy change. <BR><BR> More than 10 million Millennials are caring for aging parents before they've been able to fully launch their own careers and consider starting their own families, and that's not including the incalculable numbers of people affected by long COVID. Yet no one is naming this problem, talking about how it feels, or offering resources to ease the pressure of Millennial caregiver burnout. <BR><BR> Jennifer N. Levin was 32 when her father was diagnosed with a rare degenerative illness. As she struggled with few resources and little support, she created Caregiver Collective, a national online support group for Millennial caregivers. Now Levin brings the wisdom from her own experience and that of her support group to Generation Care, a comprehensive look at this generation's culture of care. Filled with the voices of caregivers, expert commentary and research, and a roadmap to the solutions that can begin helping people now as well as build the policies of the future, Generation Care addresses the financial costs, the ambiguous sense of loss for millennials grieving the lives they thought they'd have, the impact of COVID and Long Covid, and strategies for getting help on the individual level and in relation to policy.<BR><BR> Caregiving is an increasingly urgent crisis, with more than 10 million millennials caring for their aging parents before they're prepared for it. Generation Care brings this crisis to the fore, illuminates the real stories and people who are most affected, underscores the need for shifts in policy and giving support where it is most needed, and sounds a clarion call for change.

A sweeping history of the American health care state that reveals the public has been intentionally misled about the true role of government. The US government has always invested federal, state and local dollars in public health protection and prevention. Despite this public funding, however, Americans typically believe the current system is predominantly comprised of private actors with little government interference. In Grow & Hide, Colleen M. Grogan details the history of the American health care state and argues that the public has been intentionally misled about the true role of government. The US created a publicly financed system while framing it as the opposite in what Grogan terms the "grow-and-hide regime." Today, the state's role is larger than ever, yet it remains largely hidden because stakeholders-namely, private actors and their allies in government-have repeatedly, and successfully, presented the illusion of minimal government involvement. The consequences of this narrative are scarce accountability and a highly unequal distribution of benefits.In the wake of a pandemic that has killed over one million Americans--with the highest death rates among minorities and lower-income people--the time has come for an honest discussion about the health care system. As Grogan reveals, America has never had a system that resembles a competitive, free-market model. Given how much the government already invests in the health care system, means how these funds are distributed and administered are fundamental political questions for the American public, not questions that should be decided by the private sector. If we want to fix care in America, we need to reimagine the way it is organized, prioritized, funded, and, perhaps most importantly, discussed. Grow & Hide is an important contribution to this reimagining.

Fortunately, we are still a nation of skeptics. Fortunately, there are those among us who study pandemics and are willing to look unflinchingly at worst-case scenarios. Michael Lewis's taut and brilliant nonfiction thriller pits a band of medical visionaries against the wall of ignorance that was the official response of the Trump administration to the outbreak of COVID-19.The characters you will meet in these pages are as fascinating as they are unexpected. A thirteen-year-old girl's science project on transmission of an airborne pathogen develops into a very grown-up model of disease control. A local public-health officer uses her worm's-eye view to see what the CDC misses, and reveals great truths about American society. A secret team of dissenting doctors, nicknamed the Wolverines, has everything necessary to fight the pandemic: brilliant backgrounds, world-class labs, prior experience with the pandemic scares of bird flu and swine flu...everything, that is, except official permission to implement their work.Michael Lewis is not shy about calling these people heroes for their refusal to follow directives that they know to be based on misinformation and bad science. Even the internet, as crucial as it is to their exchange of ideas, poses a risk to them. They never know for sure who else might be listening in.

Proof that high health care spending is linked directly to poverty.In Poverty and the Myths of Health Care Reform, Dr. Richard (Buz) Cooper argues that US poverty and high health care spending are inextricably entwined. Our nation's health care system bears a financial burden that is greater than in any other developed country in large part because impoverished patients use more health care, driving up costs across the board.Drawing on decades of research, Dr. Cooper illuminates the geographic patterns of poverty, wealth, and health care utilization that exist across neighborhoods, regions, and states--and among countries. He chronicles the historical threads that have led to such differences, examines the approaches that have been taken to combat poverty throughout US history, and analyzes the impact that structural changes now envisioned for clinical practice are likely to have. His research reveals that ignoring the impact of low income on health care utilization while blaming rising costs on waste, inefficiency, and unnecessary care has led policy makers to reshape clinical practice in ways that impede providers who care for the poor.The first book to address the fundamental nexus that binds poverty and income inequality to soaring health care utilization and spending, Poverty and the Myths of Health Care Reform is a must-read for medical professionals, public health scholars, politicians, and anyone concerned with the heavy burden of inequality on the health of Americans.

This biography of James Edmund Reeves, whose legislative accomplishments cemented American physicians' control of the medical marketplace, illuminates landmarks of American health care: the troubled introduction of clinical epidemiology and development of botanic medicine and homeopathy, the Civil War's stimulation of sanitary science and hospital medicine, the rise of government involvement, the revolution in laboratory medicine, and the explosive growth of phony cures. It recounts the human side of medicine as well, including the management of untreatable diseases and the complex politics of medical practice and professional organizing. Reeves' life provides a reminder that while politics, economics, and science drive the societal trajectory of modern health care, moral decisions often determine its path.

Whether it is called shell shock, soldier's heart or PTSD, the devastation that war leaves in its wake is present throughout history. Soldiers and healthcare workers alike experienced such symptoms as depression, anxiety, rapid pulse and cardiac complications during the Civil War. Prominent figures such as Frederick Douglass, Medal of Honor winner Mary Edwards Walker, Clara Barton and others were instrumental in supporting healthcare for soldiers and medical workers. After the war, medical establishments in New York and Washington, D.C., arose to heal veterans physically and mentally. In 1866, Congress created the National Asylum for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers, one of many vital attempts to provide postwar medical support. Author Heather Butts recounts the heroism of those who fought, healed and suffered long after the war ended.

In 2008, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Centers (UPMC) hoisted its logo atop the U.S. Steel Building in downtown Pittsburgh, symbolically declaring that the era of big steel had been replaced by the era of big medicine for this once industrial city. More than 1,200 miles to the south, a similar sense of optimism pervaded the public discourse around the relationship between health care and the future of Houston's economy. While traditional Texas industries like oil and natural gas still played a critical role, the presence of the massive Texas Medical Center, billed as "the largest medical complex in the world," had helped to rebrand the city as a site for biomedical innovation and ensured its stability during the financial crisis of the mid-2000s. Taking Pittsburgh and Houston as case studies, The Medical Metropolis offers the first comparative, historical account of how big medicine transformed American cities in the postindustrial era. Andrew T. Simpson explores how the hospital-civic relationship, in which medical centers embraced a business-oriented model, remade the deindustrialized city into the "medical metropolis." From the 1940s to the present, the changing business of American health care reshaped American cities into sites for cutting-edge biomedical and clinical research, medical education, and innovative health business practices. This transformation relied on local policy and economic decisions as well as broad and homogenizing national forces, including HMOs, biotechnology programs, and hospital privatization. Today, the medical metropolis is considered by some as a triumph of innovation and revitalization and by others as a symbol of the excesses of capitalism and the inequality still pervading American society.

Many workers in medicine, healthcare administration, science, and technology, no matter how strong their academic degrees or how distinguished their careers, find themselves baffled, frustrated, and even angered by their encounters with the law. Some of those occasions may lead to the need for a lawyer. But many of the bafflements and frustrations arise from ignorance about what the law is, including how it operates.Over more than a half century of inquiry into the relations between law and science, and through numerous conversations with physicians, scientists, and healthcare professionals whose work rests on technological development, the author realized that they often desire more knowledge about the operations of the law and the legal system. This book seeks to provide basic knowledge about the law in realms where these professionals often encounter it, primarily in areas where activities pose risks of personal injury.This book discusses two basic types of law: civil litigation and other remedies afforded to persons who ascribe injuries to the conduct or product of others, and direct regulation by the government of the levels of safety in those areas. Principal practical applications of this knowledge lie in ways to minimize risk, both in the primary sense and in efforts to avoid litigation over injuries, and in how to present arguments about policy to government officials who write laws and regulations.

From the obesity epidemic to antibiotic resistance, firearm injuries, and health disparities, many health issues surface to the public domain in the form of controversies. In this innovative new text, author Jan Kirk Carney engages the reader in understanding public health and health policy through a study of current controversies. Many issues connect public health and health care, an important perspective given the Affordable Care Act and health system changes at the state level. To get to the root of the controversy-and gain insight as to what must be done to advance the health issue-learners must grasp the breadth and scope of the issue and evidence-base for prevention, dissect root causes and barriers, then propose strategies for progress. Controversies in Public Health and Health Policy uses a structured format to carefully examine each controversy, with background, evidence-base, discussion questions, and additional learning resources.Some of the topics covered include the acceptance of obesity as a cultural norm, e-cigarettes, binge drinking on college campuses, prescription drug abuse, antibiotic resistance, gun control, preventing concussions, climate change, and more.

David M. Craig traveled across the United States to assess health care access, delivery and finance in this country. He interviewed religious hospital administrators and interfaith activists, learning how they balance the values of economic efficiency and community accountability. He met with conservatives, liberals, and moderates, reviewing their ideas for market reform or support for the Affordable Care Act. He discovered that health care in the US is not a private good or a public good. Decades of public policy and philanthropic service have made health care a shared social good.Health Care as a Social Good: Religious Values and the American Democracy argues that as escalating health costs absorb more and more of family income and government budgets, we need to take stock of the full range of health care values to create a different and more affordable community-based health care system. Transformation of that system is a national priority but Americans have failed to find a way to work together that bypasses our differences. Craig insists that community engagement around the common religious conviction that healing is a shared responsibility can help us achieve this transformation-one that will not only help us realize a new and better system, but one that reflects the ideals of American democracy and the common good.

An expert debunks popular misconceptions about health policy, including the merits of single-payer plans, and offers an alternative.In the battle over health care reform we can try to fashion new policies based on old ideas--or we can acknowledge today's demographic and economic realities. In Health Care Turning Point, health policy expert Roger Battistella argues that the conventional wisdom that dominates health policy debates is out of date. Battistella takes on popular misconceptions about the advantages of single-payer plans, the role of the market, and other health policy issues and outlines a pragmatic new approach.Few would disagree that the current system is broken. But, Battistella asserts provocatively, a government takeover of health insurance patterned after Medicare and Medicaid won't work either. Battistella argues that contrary to popular belief, single-payer coverage will not lower health spending but would encourage overconsumption and drive costs up. If consumers were responsible for buying their own health insurance (as they are for buying their own car and home insurance), he argues, they'd look for value and demand greater price and quality transparency from providers.The economic shibboleth that the principles of market competition don't apply to health care is nonsense, Battistella says. We won't achieve real health care reform until policy makers adjust to this reality and adopt a more pragmatic view.

In Entitled to Nothing, Lisa Sun-Hee Park investigates how the politics of immigration, health care, and welfare are intertwined. Documenting the formal return of the immigrant as a "public charge," or a burden upon the State, the author shows how the concept has been revived as states adopt punitive policies targeting immigrants of color and require them to "pay back" benefits for which they are legally eligible during a time of intense debate regarding welfare reform. Park argues that the notions of "public charge" and "public burden" were reinvigorated in the 1990s to target immigrant women of reproductive age for deportation and as part of a larger project of "disciplining" immigrants. Drawing on nearly 200 interviews with immigrant organizations, government agencies and safety net providers, as well as careful tracking of policies and media coverage, Park provides vivid, first-person accounts of how struggles over the "public charge" doctrine unfolded on the ground, as well as its consequences for the immigrant community. Ultimately, she shows that the concept of "public charge" continues to lurk in the background, structuring our conception of who can legitimately access public programs and of the moral economy of work and citizenship in the U.S., and makes important policy suggestions for reforming our immigration system.