Another spot-on direct care blog post is making the rounds online. This one from The American Association Of Retired Persons (AARP). It tells the same story of doctors flocking from the broken system and taking refuge in our model. They also mention three reasons drawing doctors into the field.
For one, the money is better. The traditional system requires more staff to handle billing and burns through 60% of revenue on overhead. This means doctors have to see more patients. Meanwhile, insurance is doling out substantially less payouts.
Two, there’s freedom in direct care. To get reimbursed, doctors might have treatment dictated by insurance. Imagine someone who’s never driven a car calling your mechanic and telling him whether you need an oil change. That’s what’s happening here. It’s absurd.
Last, direct care is better for patients. No insurance mandates means doctors treat patients as they need to be treated. Patients who opt in to the subscription model pay less in the long run and lack the disincentive to see a doctor if a problem arises. (Dr. Josh cites this in an upcoming interview with The Objective Standard; if patients have to pay to see the doctor, they’re more likely to talk themselves out of a visit.) Because of the steady income, doctors can see fewer patients, meaning when they see a patient, it’s not the harried diagnosis, oh, here’s your directive to a specialist routine. Instead, doctors can communicate with the person sitting on the gurney, and make more reliable diagnoses.
Check out the complete AARP post here. It’s worth a share.Tweet