“Sick Around America,” a Frontline documentary about the dysfunctional U.S. health care system, aired March 31 on PBS.
Billed as a sequel to the widely hailed “Sick Around the World,” a 2008 Frontline production featuring veteran Washington Post correspondent T.R. Reid, the new documentary was eagerly awaited by U.S. supporters of fundamental health reform.
In the first film, Reid gave an accurate portrayal of several single-payer health systems overseas. Many reform advocates hoped this new documentary would discuss single payer as an option for the United States, too, particularly given its popularity among the U.S. public.
Alas, that was not to be the case. Nor, incidentally, was Reid’s name to be found anywhere in the credits.
Instead, filmmaker Jon Palfreman, who also directed the first documentary, concentrates on telling dramatic patient stories that illustrate the utter failure of the present private-insurance-based system. But he offers little in the way of what to do about it.
To the extent that any reform proposal is cited as a possible pathway for change, it is the flawed, mandates-based Massachusetts model. While some of the serious problems of that faltering model are pointed out, viewers are nonetheless left with the impression that mandates may be the way to go. That’s certainly the point made by Karen Ignagni, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans, who makes multiple appearances in the film.
Frontline publishes a blog of viewer comments on its documentaries, and a number of PNHP members and other single-payer supporters were quick to express their disappointment. In fact, single-payer supporters from all over the country were heavily represented in the blog discussion during the first 12 hours after the film’s release. Below is a small sampling of their comments. You can join the discussion at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundamerica/talk/
Dear FRONTLINE,
Americans are totally frustrated by our health care system and this documentary illustrates why the current health reform debate is moving in the wrong direction. Congress is about to force all Americans to buy private health insurance under the pretense of “universal health care” using the Massachusetts model. This is not what Americans want and to compel us to buy into the outrageous behavior of the private health insurance industry is totally disgusting.
We need single payer, national health insurance and begin with a totally different cultural orientation — everybody in, nobody out.
Walter Tsou, M.D.
Philadelphia
And…
Dear FRONTLINE,
Massachusetts — Election Day 2008. A ballot initiative put forward in 10 legislative districts read:
“Should the representative from this district be instructed to support legislation creating a cost-effective single payer health insurance system that is available to all residents, and oppose laws penalizing those who fail to obtain health insurance?”
73 percent of the 181,895 people voted YES.
Why oh why, from the very state where the health insurance “mandate” — a law criminalizing the uninsured — is held up as a model for the nation, in spite of its obvious failure?
Single payer national health insurance, H.R. 676, will SAVE hundreds of billions of dollars and COVER EVERYONE.
Health is a human right!
Andrew D. Coates, M.D.
Delmar, N.Y.
And…
Dear FRONTLINE,
This program is heavy on interviews of insurance executives. Where are the voices for Single Payer, Medicare For All?
You stated that all other countries require all residents to buy health insurance. This is not true. Canada and UK cover everyone through taxes. Taiwan has a system like our Medicare.
If the US mandates insurance, the for-profit insurance industry will rake in tax payer money to support share holders, complex administration costs and excessive executive salaries and bonuses. This show is disappointing.
Karen Green Stone
Bloomington, Ind.
And …
Dear FRONTLINE,
Thank you, Frontline, for your inspiring programs first on health care around the world and now on health care in the U.S. We should draw three conclusions:
1. As Dr. Delbanco stated so eloquently, the first step is to provide health care to everyone. Only then, and at the same time, should we tackle the problems of cost and quality. If we wait to expand health coverage until we have succeeded in curtailing costs, we will wait forever and acquiesce in the suffering of those without access to the care they need.
2. If we truly want everyone to have health insurance, we need to provide it to them, i.e. to make signing up as automatic and easy as possible. Mandates to purchase health insurance are inefficient, expensive, incomplete, and unnecessary.
3. To make universal health care as efficient and inexpensive as possible, we need to institute a single payer system, i.e. to eliminate the hassle imposed on patients and providers by the private insurance system and eliminate the waste of health care dollars in marketing, claims processing, administrative salaries, and profits. The models are the single payer bills introduced by Representative Conyers in the House and by Senator Sanders in the Senate.
Thank you again, Frontline, for teaching us these lessons.
Paul Sorum, M.D.
Schenectady, N.Y.
And…
Dear FRONTLINE,
Let me add my voice to the others who wish that this program had discussed the option of a single-payer system. Can America afford the continued existence of the private health insurance industry?
Oak Park, Ill.
And…
Dear FRONTLINE,
Your “Sick Around America” show was excellent in all respects except one. Once again you held to the media standard of maintaining absolute blackout regarding the option of a “Single Payer” system. Most advanced countries provide superior care, far more efficiently, with less cost without the burden of insurance. Your coverage never included that possibility as proposed by HR 676. And, you stated that President Obama’s meeting included all the stakeholders without mentioning that Single Payer advocates were deliberately excluded. Such coverage withholds critical information from the public.
Jerry Reed
Grants Pass, Ore.
