PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

J S Showalter

Publications and source records attributed to J S Showalter.

9 recordsLinked to original sources

Health politics and policy: survey of U.S. health administration courses.

In summary, the vast majority of graduate health administration programs in this country offer a course in health politics and policy. Most of these courses are conducted as a seminar involving class discussions, guest speakers, and student projects. Aside from these generalizations, there is little consensus regarding such matters as course content, objectives, textbooks, and readings. The findings of this survey indicate a crying need in health administration education for a basic textbook or collection of readings on health policy and politics. Such a text should cover the following: 1. Basic information on United States politics and government: our constitutional framework; the presidency; the legislative process; the role of the judiciary; state and local governments; etc. 2. Late 20th century United States political culture: why Americans hate politics and distrust politicians; government as "part of the problem"; the role of the media; the role of lobbyists; campaign financing; increased us of initiatives and referenda; etc. 3. Comparisons of the United States health care system to systems in other countries: Canada, Great Britain, Sweden, Germany, etc. 4. Case studies on traditional health policy issues: Hill-Burton, planning, cost versus access, risk segmentation, rationing, health ethics, etc. 5. Bibliography of suggested readings. A textbook or anthology of this type would provide a solid foundation for a health policy course. Instructors could then add discussion of current events, guest speakers' presentations, and selected readings on emerging issues such as health care reform. In this way the course could be grounded in sound political science theory while also meeting the students' needs for practical insights into health policy issues of the day and their own role as health care executives in influencing the outcome of those policy debates.

Curriculum↗

Malpractice bill stirs discussion, raises moral questions.

Catholic health care providers should raise a number of ethical considerations in the debate surrounding the Moore-Gephardt bill, which would establish an alternative malpractice liability system. The proposal encourages states to enact legislation under which providers and patients would reach settlements that compensate for economic losses resulting from negligent treatment. In states that do not enact such laws, HR 5400 would apply to federal program patients only. Under the proposal, if a health care provider who is potentially liable for malpractice offers to compensate for the patient's actual economic loss, the patient would be forever barred from bringing a malpractice suit against the provider. The recovery would be limited to the individual's net economic loss. Though the bill's sponsors have performed a considerable service in identifying a major problem and generating public discussion, the bill raises several important moral questions. How much "defensive medicine," for example, is actually prudent practice that is in patients' best interests? Will thorough and holistic care be sacrificed in the proposal's attempt to save money? If states do not enact an alternative liability system for all patients and the proposal affects only federal program patients, will the result be disproportionate treatment among categories of patients? And is it fair to deny persons recovery for their emotional distress, physical impairment, pain and suffering, and similar kinds of damages? These are but a few of the issues that Catholic providers should raise in the debate, which otherwise might well be oriented toward fiscal concerns only.

Catholicism↗