front cover of Unaffordable
Unaffordable
American Healthcare from Johnson to Trump
Jonathan Engel
University of Wisconsin Press, 2018
Written for nonexperts, this is a brisk, engaging history of American healthcare from the advent of Medicare and Medicaid in the 1960s to the impact of the Affordable Care Act in the 2010s. Step by step, Jonathan Engel shows how we arrived at our present convoluted situation, where generic drugs prices can jump 1,000 percent in a day and primary care physicians can lose 20 percent of their income at the stroke of a Congressional pen.

Unaffordable covers, in a conversational style punctuated by apt examples, topics ranging from health insurance, pharmaceutical pricing, and physician training to health maintenance organizations and hospital networks. Along the way, Engel introduces approaches that other nations have taken in organizing and paying for healthcare and offers insights on ethical quandaries around end-of-life decisions, neonatal care, life-sustaining treatments, and the limits of our ability to define death. While describing the political origins of many of the federal and state laws that govern our healthcare system today, he never loses sight of the impact that healthcare delivery has on our wallets and on the balance sheets of hospitals, doctors' offices, government agencies, and private companies.
[more]

logo for Georgetown University Press
United States Welfare Policy
A Catholic Response
Thomas J. Massaro, SJ
Georgetown University Press, 2007

The Welfare Reform Act of 1996 drastically changed the delivery of social services in the United States for the first time in sixty years. More than a decade later, according to Catholic social ethicist Thomas Massaro, a disturbing gap exists between the laws we have enacted as a nation and the moral concerns we profess as a people.

Massaro contends that ethicists too often focus on strictly theoretical concerns rather than engaging concrete social and political issues, while public policy experts are uncomfortable drawing ethical judgments about legislation. United States Welfare Policy takes a fresh approach to the topic by using Catholic social teaching as a lens through which to view contemporary American welfare policies, citing the tradition's emphasis on serving the needy—including a preferential option for the poor—and the common good.

Massaro maintains that the most important outcome of welfare policy is not the cost-effectiveness of programs, but the well-being of individual families. The concluding analysis of this thoughtful study applies Catholic ethical concerns to specific aspects of welfare reform, including the funding mechanisms for the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program, work participation requirements affecting the bond between mothers and children, eligibility rules, the intrusion of family caps into reproductive decisions, and the imposition of disproportionate burdens upon particular demographic groups.

Massaro offers possible alternatives in each case and, as the fight over reauthorization of the welfare act continues, he calls on Catholic churches and clergy and laity to take action and advocate publicly for a more ethical approach to welfare reform.

[more]

front cover of The U.S. Experiment in Social Medicine
The U.S. Experiment in Social Medicine
The Community Health Center Program, 1965-1986
Alice Sardell
University of Pittsburgh Press, 1989
This book represents the first political history of the federal government's only experiment in social medicine. Alice Sardell examines the Neighborhood, or Community Health Center Program (NHC/CHC) from its origins in 1965 as part of Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty campaign up until 1986. The program embodied concepts of social medicine, community development, and consumer involvement in health policy decision-making. Sardell views the NHC experiment in the context of a series of political struggles, beginning in the 1890s, over the boundaries of public and private medicine, and demonstrates that these health centers so challenged mainstream medicine that they could only be funded as a program limited to the poor.
[more]


Send via email Share on Facebook Share on Twitter