Economics and Preventive Health

Preventive health is a big factor in the health care discussion. President Barack Obama claims that preventive care saves money, and provision for preventive care is included in the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). The data, however, does not support the money-saving claim, as the New England Journal of Medicine discussed. The data didn't support it when Dr. Terrell wrote about it earlier in his career, and it still doesn't support it. Furthermore, as Dr. Terrell wrote, preventive care ought not to be justified merely on an economic basis.

A U.S. Senator from Florida wrote one of his constituents to state that if “seniors” would allow themselves to be diagnosed earlier, then “the chance of successful treatment” would be greater and the treatment would be less costly. Even if that were so, which it by and large is not for those near the end of life, it would not save money. What would happen is that the elderly person would live to require other services of dependency and to acquire yet another chronic disease which is likely to be more costly to treat, simply because he will be older and more frail.

In crass economic terms, it is cheaper to die young and expensive to die old. Preventive medical care for the elderly should be defended on the grounds of compassion and what is best for God's kingdom, not societal economics. Socialist arguments grounded in “what the country can afford” are hollow and will echo back awful things in the near future. Pro-life people should avoid them! Economics must be taken into account but by the proper authorities (individual, family and church). We do not hold our bodies in stewardship before the state. The state will not consider the Bible as authoritative in making decisions about health expenditures. Having sold us the economic argument for health maintenance, the state will turn around to plead the same argument when it first permits, then mandates euthanasia.

Excerpt from "How Would God Have Us Practice Preventive Medicine?"