All posts by Mike Schadone

Conversations in the Back of the Ambulance

MS: So, we have about a half-hour ride to the other hospital. Would you be willing to help me out with a project for my anthropology class?

AP: Sure, we’ve been having quite a conversation so far.

MS: Okay, for the record and because of medical privacy concerns I will acknowledge your participation with the initials AP for Anonymous Participant. Also, I have to make sure that I note the generational differences between us.

AP: Well, that shouldn’t be too hard to do.

MS: No, certainly not. For documentation sake, let us say that you are in your 70’s, and we can leave it at that.

AP: I’m closer to eighty, though?!

MS: Wow, can’t even do a guy a favor!

AP: HA! So, what are these questions? I imagine it’s how to pick up the ladies, right?

MS: Yeah, sure, let’s start there! Actually, I wanted to ask more about your views growing up. Politics, religion, et cetera.

AP: Well, let’s start with religion. I think that will be the easiest.

MS: Okay, religion.

AP: Well, let’s see… I grew up in a fairly Protestant family. I mean, we went to church every Sunday and all, but we were never overly religious.

MS: Would you say that you were tolerant of other religions, or did you view your religion as the true religion of your god?

AP: Oh, no! We were very tolerant. We would never look down on anyone else because of their beliefs, especially their religious ties. The only problems that I have ever had with people were, well, the neighborly scuff – whose fence is on whose property – and, of course, mechanics. $1000 to install a $25 part… highway robbery for sure! And, I am sure I won’t like you too much after I get your bill!

MS: Obama will take of that, though, right? Actually, I do want to talk about your political views here in a minute, but let’s keep on religion for now. Do you think your views of religion have changed much over the years?

AP: Well, that’s tough to say. I’m pretty old, and I know that I’m gonna die pretty soon. It makes you think, you know? I mean, I know I want to make sure that I get a chance to tell the kids and the grandkids how proud I am of them, and I pray to God every day that I will get that chance. They all live in different States, so it’s tough to get them all together, lately. But, I find myself talking to God a lot more these days, but I am not sure if I believe in Him any more than I used to, as an adult, I mean. As a kid, he’s like Santa Claus or the Tooth-fairy; you believe in Him for no other reason than you were told to.

MS: Yeah, that’s kinda where I’ve been. I can understand that there might be a consciousness that is ultimately responsible for our creation, but I am not sure if I believe he knows what exactly he has created. Accidental or otherwise, we do exist, and it would only make sense that something put this in motion. Maybe I’m a theist, but mostly I don’t think about it. I’m usually agnostic or atheistic. Perhaps, I’m an agnostic theist?!

AP: Well, when you get as old as me, you want to make sure you are on the good-boy list.

MS: That’s Santa?!

AP: Close enough.

MS: Alright, let’s talk politics. I’ll keep it simple at first. George Washington, good or bad?

AP: Good, no great! He was a great man, Washington.

MS: Tyler?

AP: Who?

MS: Abraham Lincoln?

AP: Great!

MS: Wilson?

AP: What? Woodrow Wilson? Ungh… That was an evil man. Let me tell you about Wilson. Wilson is why this country is the way it is. I imagine that others before him wanted to do some of the things that he did, but sheesh, Wilson was the one that got it done. And, done, indeed, it is.

MS: What was so bad about Wilson?

AP: Have you ever heard of the Great Depression? That was Wilson’s work, there. Yeah, it happened a few years after he died, but the framework was his alone. Who were those other two guys? They came after Wilson…. I can’t think.

MS: Harding and Coolidge?

AP: That’s them. I remember my father telling me that if it weren’t for those two, Hoover wouldn’t have had a chance. Hoover was actually in office during the start of it, the depression. Lucky for me, I don’t remember it. In fact, don’t remember him. I think the first President that I can remember was F.D.R. He was the war President. As far as I recall, though, I think Hoover just ran with the Wilson plan, killing everything Harding and Coolidge did to fix the problems.

MS: So, I’m guessing you are a Conservative? A Republican, perhaps?

AP: I remember waving the flag for Roosevelt, so I guess I was a Democrat, then, you know, at twelve years old, or however old I was then… probably more like nine or ten. But, as I got older, especially from the time the war ended, I started paying attention to politics. I’ll tell you, it makes not one lick of difference if the guy is black, brown, yellow or white; if he’s a politician, he’s both a liar and a thief! We have had very few politicians that were honorable men, very few. And, these Progressives, well, they are the worst of them. This Obama is one of them.

MS: Yes, I believe Obama is a self-proclaimed Progressive.

AP: And, it shows. Wilson was a Progressive. Too many of them are. And, they don’t tell you! That’s the worst of them. They tell you what you want to hear, you elect them, then they do this about-face and spend, spend, spend us into oblivion. Looking back, this is certainly not my father’s country anymore. Ford was good, though. He never gets any recognition.

MS: So, Ford, good; Wilson, bad. Is that right?

AP: Yup!

MS: Interesting. I’m going to have to read up on Ford a bit more. You mentioned something about race a minute ago: “Brown, black, yellow, white”, something. What are your views on race relations in the United States?

AP: Oh, no… You aren’t gonna like me much after this conversation, but I’ll be honest. I always try to be honest.

MS: Okay, Ben Franklin, let me have it.

AP: Ha! Well, I can honestly… heh, honest… say that I have no problem doing business or maintaining friendships with anyone of any race, nationality, or creed. The problem that I have is the laziness and the sense of entitlement that many people have today. Fifty years ago, you didn’t see that, not like today, anyway. It’s just unfortunate that the minorities tend to have this attitude, this air of you’re not better than me, so give me money so I don’t have to work.

MS: Ahh, so the Progressives rear their ugly heads once again!

AP: Exactly! And, that’s what I was talking about. It’s this idea that if we give them money, they will use it to rise up and overcome poverty or something. Almost magical thoughts of levitation, if you will. One day, they will learn that if you keep giving people stuff, there will come a time when they forget how to earn it. Same with me. I’m sure that if the government sent me a check every week for not working, at some point, I would become complacent and not work. I doubt it, but it is possible I guess.

MS: Is it the government’s place to give out all of these entitlements?

AP: Again, I’m old, but I’ve made a pretty decent living for myself over the years. Medicare is a horrible system, but between that and my other insurance, at least you’ll get paid!

MS: Well, I’m not too worried about that. You sign my form, and that’s all I care about for payment. We have people!

AP: Yeah, tough guys always have people. But, community… community and family is what we need to get back to. That used to be enough. Granted, there were times that were really tough, especially for my family when I was born and right before. We had tough times, but we got through them. We were smart about it. We trusted that it couldn’t last too long, and it never did.

MS: Well, one thing that I’ve noticed is the propensity of my generation to move away from family. I think we rely on the internet for communication and planes, trains, and automobiles to visit from time to time.

AP: Well, we had a farm. When the family has a farm, you help run it. Actually, I think it was the farm that kept our heads above water all those years.

MS: I always wanted a farm. Is it still in the family?

AP: Nah. None of the kids wanted to keep it up. It is hard work running that farm, but we sold it off, paid our debts, and invested the rest. Pretty much been living on that after we retired.

MS: So, what was life like on the farm? I mean, family life specifically.

AP: Well, our farm was a part-time venture, so to speak. I would wake up, do some chores, have breakfast, go to work, come home, do some chores, eat dinner, do some chores, go to bed, and repeat. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed the hell out of it. The kids helped out when they were old enough, but the wife kept the whole ship running smooth. If it weren’t for her… well, let’s just say I wouldn’t still be here.

MS: Television and movies about years ago seemed to marginalize women. The wives cooked, cleaned, did the laundry, had babies… you’re laughing?

AP: My wife cooked, cleaned, did the laundry, had babies, sure, but I cooked, I cleaned, I did laundry, and I was very involved in the raising of our children. Don’t let those programs fool you. Family was family. We did it all. In fact, we both left for work at about the same time, though she would get home sooner than me. She only worked around the corner.

MS: You are describing a very concerted effort at keeping house and home.

AP: If you find a young woman to love, you take good care of her, and she will take good care of you. I remember a few guys that would mistreat their ladies, but back then, well, back then, we took care of things like that. Times get tough, but don’t mistreat your lady.

MS: Speaking of your wife, she said that she would meet us up here. So, I should give her all the respect in the world?

AP: Anything less, and I’ll smack you one!

MS: It seems chivalry ain’t dead!

AP: Not as long as I’m around, and I ain’t going anywhere, yet!

MS: No, it seems that you will be around to cause her grief for a little while longer, at least, but not with me. It seems like we’ve arrived. It was absolutely great hearing your story. I am honored. Is there anything that you would like to add?

AP: Yeah, tell the driver not to hit so many bumps next time!

MS: He’ll be opening the doors here in a minute. You can tell him yourself. Thank you again.

AP: Anytime, but next time, come by the house. I don’t need another ambulance bill!

MS: Understood.


As a paramedic, I enjoy many benefits. The single best benefit is certainly the ability to meet new people and talk to them. For this assignment, I felt it best to rely on the random nature of my job to gain the perspective of someone I have never met before. There are limitations, though, to this method of choosing a potential informant for this interview. Paramedics are bound by confidentiality, and though the informant granted express permission to use his words and his story, I could not ask him to waive his rights under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (1996). I felt that the limitation was not an undue hardship, and the benefits of gaining such a random perspective far outweighed the benefits of identification of the informant.

The informant that I interviewed was a 70-something year-old gentleman who was more than eager to share his story with someone so interested in listening. The most important discovery of the entire interview was that we all have interesting life lessons to share. If only more people would stop to listen, important lessons could be taught.

It is very important to note that this interview was conducted during a time when the informants mortality was in question. I feel that this opportunity is unique in the honesty and conviction of the responses to my questions. We started the interview by talking about religion.

The informant and I feel that we have quite the same religious background and beliefs (personal communication, June 2010). When I approached the topic of religious tolerance, he seemed to be more cognizant of character and overall morals separate from specific religious practices. This thought reinforced some of my core beliefs about the human condition, about how we are moral creatures.

Discussing politics gave me some real insight into how earlier Americans might have viewed the progressive versus conservative debate originally (Anonymous, personal communication, June 2010). I am sure that the informant is not an exemplar of all twentieth century American political thought, but he was able to draw some parallels with the current political environment. Tough times arise and people tend to get nervous about economic survival. It is easy to conceive that an incomplete understanding of politics and economics fuels the debate on both sides of the issues.

From politics, we moved on to discuss his view of race relations in the United States. Interestingly, it seems as though my informant might have been resigned to accept that he might have some racist tendencies until I asked him his thoughts and understanding of race (personal communication, June 2010). It turns out that he was slightly mistaken. My informant realized, during our conversation, that it was not racial differences that he was upset about but a general lack of motivation seen in many people over the years. It is just an unfortunate twist that he associated this laziness with racial stereotypes. Though we changed the subject quite abruptly, I could sense a rebuilding of his understanding of racial differences. It was good to see such a thing take place.

Family was strong throughout my informants life (personal communication, June 2010). Whether we were speaking of being raised by post-depression era parents or farm life with his own family, there was always cooperation to make the family structure work. I took exceptional notice during this portion of the interview. In the contemporary United States, I have noticed a disintegration of family and community. In childhood, I recognized the meaningfulness of family bonds and community spirit. I wonder how this changed. My informant describes a time that was not particularly easy on him or his wife, but they remained loyal to each other and to the family, specifically. Today, it outwardly appears to makes more sense for some to seek a better alternative at the first hint of difficulty or trouble. This is not what family means to either of us, and I am glad to see an example of how things work out pleasantly in the end.

Our interview ended with a particularly entertaining joke about him protecting his wife from any irresponsible comments that I might make (Anonymous, personal communication, June 2010). I am sure that he did not feel that he had to actually protect her from me, but I think he felt that he needed to make me understand how much he cared for his wife. Man to man, an idle threat seems to convey a universal understanding between men, whether serious or joking. I am glad to have witnessed this show of strength. I am sure that he is contemplating the fact that he will not be around much longer. I hope that he understands that he would leave his wife with good people in the world. I believe that this discussion was the impetus for my patient to realize that the world outside of [his neighborhood] is not a hostile or unfriendly world. I also think he realized that he will not be here forever, and his wife will be taken care of by the community that he supported for so long. I am glad to be a part of that community.

References

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-191, §1177, 110 Stat. 2029 (1996).

Creation (Revelations of Genesis)

Beginning the week anew, I still search for the meaning of indigenous identity and how it might apply to me. This week allows me to search, not only my ancestry, but my cultural beliefs in the Creation. If only I believed in the Creation as taught to me in my childhood, the biblical teachings, I could describe the wondrous event that first saw mankind on Earth. Alas, I have grown an independent and scientific mind, and I not only question the existence of a god, but with boldness I question my own existence. This is a very philosophical question for me, and while it is not so important to the comparison of cultural beliefs, per se, that I describe my unwillingness to believe the story that I was told as a child, it is important to me that this distinction be made.

As a child, I was taught a simplistic variation of the Book of Genesis from the King James version of the Christian Bible. The allegory tells of a god, personified, who creates a man, Adam, from dust and a woman, Eve, from Adam’s rib. Unfortunately, after being told this story, I spent a great amount of time and energy convincing my fellow disciples that, in deed, men and women have the same number of ribs. Further reading reveals the story describes a human ascent into an age of agriculture where respect of and responsibility to the land are of great import (Dalley, 1998; Langdon, 1915). I fear that the oversimplification of such a beautiful tale of our coming of age led to its diminished significance.

The Jewish faithful, who share the Genesis story with Christians, celebrate Rosh Hashanah, a feast to celebrate the creation of Adam and his female companion on the sixth day (Leviticus 23:24). Christians, on the other hand, celebrate Easter at about the same time; some with the fervor of the pagan civilizations that celebrated Easter originally before the indoctrination of the Catholic Church. Many of the same traditions and rituals used to celebrate fertility are done during the vernal equinox. This is seen widely during the Spring season. Pardoe (2006) tells of the origins of one of the most peculiar traditions of a Christian celebration: the Easter bunny. Carried to the United States by the German and Dutch immigrants involved a bunny delivering eggs to boys and girls. The story tells of the goddess granting the easter bunny the ability to lay eggs once a year because the bunny was upset after being transformed from a bird. The Easter bunny particularly missed laying eggs and flying, so during the vernal celebrations of the creation of life, The Easter bunny laid colored eggs and hid them in nests designed by children. The Easter bunny was also granted flight as the constellation Lepus through Autumn and Winter.

However, as my family is a fair-minded and clever clan, the biblical description of our origins was juxtaposed with the tellings of science. It is this scientific belief that I will present in comparison to the religious tale.

The theory of evolution and natural selection as researched and published by Darwin (1859) was presented to me at a very early age. Darwin’s theory, in conjunction with many others before and during his time, believed that we as humans exist in the contemporary manner solely on the basis of a series of changes and adaptations that promoted our growth and dominance of our environment. Arguably, no one can say with any certainty how life came to exist from non-life, but Darwin’s research offers a path from just beyond that singularity to the present explaining all life on Earth.

The biblical story of the Creation seems to disagree with science if read without understanding. A closer look, though, tells of man entering into an era when he can use intelligence above cunning and strength over force. Darwin (1859) tells of a process of biological adaptation while the biblical Genesis story imparts the importance of using the mind and body to promote mankind while considering our place on the Earth. Science, however, is not celebrated with grand ritual in the likes of religion. As I was brought up with both stories, I am impartial to neither. Both stories, I feel, are valuable contributions to contemporary life (in the grander scheme of our existence).

References

Dalley, S. (1998). Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the flood, Gilgamesh, and others. New York, NY: Oxford.

Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species (Sixth ed.) [Adobe Portable Document Format version]. Retrieved from http://www.netlibrary.com/Reader/

Langdon, S. (1915). Sumerian epic of paradise, the flood and the fall of man. Philadelphia, PA: The University of Philadelphia Museum.

Pardoe, E. (2006, April 11). A look at Easter symbolism and the holiday’s pagan roots. Retrieved from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/27142/a_look_at_easter_symbolism_ and_the.html?cat=74

Making the Strange Familiar – A Cultural Identity

Scouring the literature in an attempt to define indigenous identity as it relates to me has been futile. Weaver (2001) describes the difficulty of obtaining a consensus on the definition of indigenous identity and how to apply the term. She continues to outline her frustration and finally gives in to using less exact terms. Corntassel (2003) shows how a multitude of definitions has arisen that are both incomplete and politicized. Neither Weaver nor Corntassel nor any of the other scholars that I have read in the past two weeks would agree, based on their writings, that I would have some indigenous identity. It seems that this would otherwise offend them. It is obvious, however, that I have a cultural identity as do all people, but I fail to see myself as indigenous, so I will concentrate on this cultural identity using the fieldwork methods outlined by Omohundro (2008).

My cultural identity is, in part, related to my ancestry, or genealogy. As far as I can tell, my ancestry is a combination of Italian, French, English, German, Irish, Scottish, and Portuguese, though living New England, specifically around Boston, Providence, and New York, I have more of an affinity to my Irish and Italian heritage. However, it does appear that I share my English heritage with nobility of Queen Catherine’s privy court, Sir John Alexander Webb, and William Shakespeare.

Developing as a child in my household, I have learned a few ideals that have more import and others: loyalty, character, and resolution. Honesty, temperance, and justice I have learned on my own, or more evidently from my environment growing up. Much of this wisdom of our forefathers is still evident in and around Rhode Island, thankfully. Understanding why my ancestors migrated as they did certainly underscores the importance of freedom, liberty, and tolerance.

The ethnosemantics of Rhode Islanders can be quite intriguing to outsiders. I am not sure that I have ever met anyone who enjoyed the dandle as much as my cousins and I. Others, though, would have used a see-saw or teeter-totter. Likewise, I remember looking forward to enjoying a cabinet on a hot summer day with my grinder. Others might have enjoyed a milkshake with their submarine sandwich, hoagie, or hero. It seems that we stole the terms bubbler and soda from Wisconsinites as they moved to the area as my ancestors did. A bubbler being a water fountain and soda refers to any carbonated beverage.

Even more interesting than our vocabulary, though, is our pronunciation. Traveling around the country, I have noticed that when residents of other States hear an accent, they usually just comment on it. For the typical Rhode Islander, we are made to repeat ourselves often. Sometimes people truly do not understand our vernacular, but mostly it is for the novelty of it all. Rhode Islanders seem to remove the letter ‘r’ from words and place them in words that do not have any. Additionally, we run many words together unnecessarily. For example, “A Rhod’aylindah would flip a breakah if the lights’n out an’ say suntin’ like ‘I’ve an idear… let’s getindacah’n go fe’ bananar splits wit vanillar ice cream,’” or my favorite, “Immunna gessin gaggahs, djeetjet?” This question would usually be replied with, “No, joo?” More obvious, the first set of statements refers to resetting a circuit breaker after losing power then taking a ride in the car to get a banana split. The second, more cryptic, phrasing simply translates, “I am going to get some gaggers (or, hot weiners; see also http://www.olneyvillenewyorksystem.com), did you eat yet?” The reply being, “No, did you?” We tend to ask even if we know the answer.

As our strange vocabulary and pronunciation are very colloquial, I think I might understand how it has developed. Rhode Island has always been known for tolerance, both religious and political; therefore, the heritage has always been a rich mixture of various cultures attempting to flee from various types of oppression. My assumption is that much of the dialect and vocabulary is simply based on misunderstanding and ethnosemantic distortions of the multiple cultures residing at any given time in Rhode Island, a pidgin. I may be mistaken, but the thesis seems viable.

Understanding my cultural identity allows me to view the world and other cultures with temperance and acceptance. My heritage is rich with both culture and despotism. Likely, many other people have a similar story. Most important in understanding cultural identity is the ability to benchmark one’s self against society. Doing so allows me the ability to focus on the moral strengths that I have learned while attempting to temper the weaknesses. With a more complete understanding, I am able to justify the life lessons that I might pass on to others.

References

Corntassel, J. J. (2003). Who is indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and ethnonationalist approaches to rearticulating indigenous identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 9(1), 75-100. doi:10.1080/13537110412331301365

Omohundro, J. T. (2008). Thinking like an anthropologist: A practical introduction to cultural anthropology. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Weaver, H. N. (2001). Indigenous identity: What is it and who really has it? The American Indian Quarterly, 25(2), 240-255. doi:10.1353/aiq.2001.0030

Indigenous People

In order to define a term, such as “indigenous peoples”, one must examine the words that make up the phrase. “Peoples” are collections of societies, and “indigenous” implies nativity or autochthony. I have always considered “indigenous peoples” to be those societies that have an intrinsic relationship to the land inhabited. Ergo, when a society is provided for by the land, the act of habitation changes the land, and that land changes the society in a fundamental way. Whenever this is true and can be applied to a society, then it is a society of indigenous people.

The largest difficulty in defining or categorizing human beings is the resultant scale upon which they are measured as a group. I do not hold such inclinations as to group and sort people based on ethnicity, societal values, economics, or any other humanly devised subjective measures. The United Nations (2008) requires a society to be impoverished or suffer some other gross inequality in order to claim indigeny. I feel that this approach only serves to feed ideologic notions by marginalization and deprives the society from a rightful claim. By attempting to create a system to help indigenous peoples from inequality, the United Nations has sought to identify these peoples and have instead cast a definition upon them. Certainly, this is a problem.

References

Secretariat of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Division for Social Policy and Development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2008). Resource kit on indigenous peoples’ issues. New York, NY: United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/resource_kit_indigenous_2008.pdf

Reducing Philanthropy to Political Commentary

In searching the typical news outlets for stories related to health care reform, be it local or national, I cannot help but notice that health care reform is the news. The factions are split, and the bias is evident. As the news outlets lean more to the left of the political spectrum than ever before, it is almost impossible to research the real issues at hand. Wading through the political views to glimpse a meaningful patient-focused agenda is quite difficult lately.

An article written by Randall Beach (2009) of the New Haven Register focuses on a group of doctors that rely on charity to provide health care to a select adult population who do not qualify for Medicaid and make less than $20,000 per year. Unfortunately, this article, like so many others, reduces philanthropy to political commentary.

Our current health care system is fragmented, and many people believe health care reform is needed (“54% Say Major Changes Needed”, 2009). As Dr. Peter Ellis is quoted, “Our motto is: ‘Health care reform starts at home'” (Beach, 2009, p. 3). It does not make sense, however, to provide Universal Health Care at the cost of our failing economy. Dr. Ellis’ group, Project Access, has secured funding from private sources, including the Hospital of St. Raphael and Yale-New Haven Hospital staff, the Aetna Group, the Community Foundation for Greater New Haven, and the New Haven County Medical Association Foundation. Additionally, 350 local care providers are associated with the project. This is a grassroots effort at helping to care for our neighbors, and as far as I have read, it seems to be a reasonable and responsible attempt to mend some of the local disparities to health care access.

Though I commend Mr. Beach for covering such a newsworthy story, it serves no one to inflame the current health care debates with political posturing by the media. I believe that the recent passing of health care reform will do nothing but create more clutter and complication for us to untangle when we finally have the financial stability to address the issue responsibly and realistically. In the meantime, I, like Project Access, will continue to volunteer my time and medical services to my community.

References

Beach, R. (2009, December 28). Doctors giving health care reform a head start. New Haven Register. Retrieved from http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2009/12/28/news/new_haven/a1_mon_nedoctors_art.prt

54% Say Major Changes Needed in Health Care System, 45% Disagree. (2009, October 2). Rasmussen Reports. Retrieved from http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/october_2009/54_say_major_changes_needed_in_health_care_system_45_disagree

Health Care Reform

In beginning this endeavor, I found it initially difficult to find anything related to health care legislation that I would be inclined to support or oppose in a letter to my Congressman. I tend to rely on the elections in order to convey my political positions. After studying some of the recent legislation, I found that the only premise that interested me was the adoption of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 and the related Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Unfortunately, attempting to find credible dialogue on the internet regarding these laws is both impractical and near impossible. The special interest groups are leaning to their respective extremes. With commentary not proving trustworthy for factual insight, I relied on the Congressional Budget Office and the full text of the laws to cement my position. Using the aforementioned information in conjunction with Senator Lieberman’s contact information from the U. S. Senate website (http://www.senate.gov), I formulated a letter to him outlining my economic concerns (see Appendix).

I understand the grandeur of the idea of universal health care. I applaud the debates of how best to offer affordable or free health care to ever citizen of the United States. Unfortunately, as a nation, we are not fit in our financial means to proffer such an expensive entitlement. As Goodson (2010) reports, many of the initiatives outlined within the law are not guaranteed to be successful. This at an increased cost of $390 billion over the first 10 years (Elmendorf, 2010).

To ensure that my points were valid, I researched the approval ratings of these laws. According to WashingtonWatch.com (2010), approximately 80% of respondants do not favor the passing of these laws. More scientifically, however, a consistent range of 54 – 58% of Americans favor repeal of the laws, while 63% of senior citizens agree (Rasmussen Reports, 2010).

References

Elmendorf, D. W. (2010, March 20). Manager’s amendment to reconciliation proposal [Letter to the Honorable Nancy Pelosi]. U. S. Congress, Washington, D. C. Retrieved from the Congressional Budget Office website: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379/ Manager%27sAmendmenttoReconciliationProposal.pdf

Goodson, J. D. (2010). Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Promise and peril for primary care. Annals of Internal Medicine. Advance online publication. Retrieved from http://www.annals.org/content/early/2010/04/15/0003-4819-152-11-201006010-00249.full

Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-152 (2010).

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-148 (2010).

Rasmussen Reports. (2010, May 17). Health care law: 56% Still Want to Repeal Health Care Law, Political Class Disagrees. Retrieved on May 22, 2010, from http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/health_care_law

WashingtonWatch.com. (2010). P.L. 111-148, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Retrieved on May, 22, 2010 from http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_PL_111-148.html

Appendix

Michael F. Schadone
[REDACTED] Woodstock, CT 06282

The Honorable Joseph I. Lieberman
706 Hart Office Building
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

May 22, 2010

Re: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010

 Dear Senator:

 My name is Michael Schadone and I am a nationally registered critical care paramedic working in Northeast Connecticut. I am writing you today because I do not support the recent legislation referred to as The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. I urge you and your colleagues in Congress to repeal this law. I believe that our efforts aimed at improving the economy will, in itself, dramatically reduce the disparities in access to health care.

Under the auspices of a progressive government, our country has seen many times of woe. Bigger government and higher rates of spending have driven our economy into the ground. It was only the idea of smaller government and trust in the American entrepreneur that ever caused unemployment rates to drop to less than five percent. More people gainfully employed means more people with access to affordable health care. Is this not our goal? In Europe, economic systems are collapsing. Many of the countries with universal health care have tax rates approaching 70 percent (including ‘value-added tax’). It is commonly held that suppressing the spending power of the citizenry will surely lead to a collapse of the free market, the basis of our economy. I certainly do not want the United States of America to resemble Greece, Portugal, Spain, or Cuba. We are the Great Experiment, and so far, it is working. I fear, though, not for much longer.

I favor universal health care just as I favor universal education and other entitlements but not at the expense of our country. Improvements to the economy will put us in a position to gain strength and enable us to afford such a sweeping paradigm shift in health care. More importantly, a better economy will allow us to do it properly. I urge you to focus on the economy and repeal this dangerous law.

 Sincerely,

Michael F. Schadone

Flawed Conclusions in Literature Review

For this week’s discussion, I have chosen to analyze an article (Sakr et al., 2006) that attempts to outline the efficacy and potential dangers of certain drugs used to treat shock. As a critical care paramedic, the discussion surrounding this article can provide insight to choosing alternative therapies when caring for my patients, but it is important for me to understand the potential biases and limitations of such a study that could lead to flawed conclusions (Gluud, 2006).

Sakr et al. (2006) collected data on ICU admissions over a two week period to further understand how dopamine effects mortality and morbidity when administered in response to hemodynamic compromise. Also, other administered vasoactive drugs were included in the analysis whether administered concomitantly with dopamine or instead of dopamine. The researchers did not distinguish between etiologies except to delineate between septic shock and non-septic shock. Patients who presented with shock or suffered a shock state within the first 24 hours of admission were included in the analysis. Patients admitted to the ICU mainly for 24 hour surgical observation where not included.

Shock is defined as “a state of inadequate cellular sustenance associated with inadequate or inappropriate tissue perfusion resulting in abnormal cellular metabolism” (Hillman & Bishop, 2004, p. 121). There are many etiologies of shock, including sepsis, anaphylactic, neurogenic, hypovolemic, cardiogenic, and others, which respond differently to various therapies. This confounder creates an information bias, as this variable is not identified in the data collection and cannot be scrutinized. Simply identifying the etiology of each shock state would limit this bias. The researchers, however, acknowledge this limitation and others.

Another confounding variables is the time constraint of the data. In regards to septic shock, this variable becomes evident. Many pathogens spread predictively during certain times of the year. The concomitant treatment of these infections could predispose patients to suffer a prolonged state of shock (in cases where the pathogen might not be immediately recognized) or provide for an ideal treatment pathway when the pathogen and the antibiotic regimen are fully understood and effective. This selection bias could be controlled by choosing patients who present throughout the year.

As Gluud (2006) points out:

When intervention effects are moderate or small, the human processing of data, unsystematic data collection, and the human capacity to overcome illnesses spontaneously limit the value of uncontrolled observations. Experimental models are essential for estimation of toxicity and pathophysiology.
(p. 494)

References

Gluud, L. L. (2006). Bias in Clinical Intervention Research. American Journal of Epidemiology, 163(6), 493–501. doi:10.1093/aje/kwj069

Hillman, K. & Bishop, G. (2004). Clinical Intensive Care and Acute Medicine. West Nyack, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.

Sakr, Y., Reinhart, K., Vincent, J., Sprung, C. L., Moreno, R., Ranieri, V. M., De Backer, D., & Payen, D. (2006). Does Dopamine Administration in Shock Influence Outcome? Results of the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) Study. Critical Care Medicine, 34(3), 589-597. doi:10.1097/01.CCM.0000201896.45809.E3

Patient Safety Considerations for EMS

 In the out-of-hospital emergency care setting, patient safety is paramount. Initially, victims of trauma or illness are already suffering in an uncontrolled environment. It is this same environment where first responders, emergency medical technicians, and paramedics must operate to stabilize and transport the victim to the hospital, a more controlled environment. Unfortunately, there is little research in the area of patient safety in this setting (Meisel, Hargarten, & Vernick, 2008; Paris & O’Conner, 2008).

Importance

Focusing on patient safety and developing processes to ensure optimal safety would allow the study of inherently dangerous, yet potentially beneficial therapies, such as rapid sequence intubation where the clinician uses a series of medications to rapidly sedate and paralyze a critical patient for ease of inserting a breathing tube. Focusing on safety, an EMS department in Maryland successfully instituted such a program (Sullivan, King, Rosenbaum, & Smith, 2010).

With more research in this area, the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) can improve the care they seek to deliver to their patients.

Challenges

There are many challenges facing EMS as they seek to deliver safe and effective care to their patients. Motor vehicle accidents (including air transportation accidents), dropped patients, medication and dosage errors, other inappropriate care, and assessment errors all contribute to the number of adverse events in the EMS out-of-hospital care setting (Meisel et al., 2008). Unfortunately, it has proved difficult to identify both the existence and the cause of each event (Meisel et al., 2008; Paris et al., 2008). Additionally, there are adverse events that are impossible to track, such as the iatrogenic exposure to a pathogen. It would be very difficult to distinguish how and when a patient was first exposed to the infecting pathogen without considering community-acquired infections and hospital-acquired infections, which are both equally difficult to ascertain (Taigman, 2007).

Strategies for improvement

As EMS seeks to increase the professionalism among its ranks, the stakeholders must acknowledge responsibility for providing evidence-based processes to ensure patient safety.

References

Meisel, Z. F., Hargarten, S., & Vernick, J. (2008, October). Addressing prehospital patient safety using the science of injury prevention and control.Prehospital Emergency Care, 12(4), 4-14.

Paris, P. M. & O’Connor, R. E. (2008, January). A national center for EMS provider and patient safety: helping EMS providers help us. Prehospital Emergency Care, 12(1), 92-94.

Sullivan, R. J., King, B. D., Rosenbaum, R. A., & Shiuh, T. (2010, January). RSI: the first two years. One agency’s experience implementing an RSI protocol. EMS Magazine, 39(1), 34-51.

Taigman, M. (2007, July). We don’t mean to hurt patients. EMS Magazine, 52(4), 36-42.

Freedom vs. Health Care Reform

In the United States, we believe in individual rights, some of which are enumerated in the U. S. Constitution. The right to health care is not one of these. As our country prospers or declines, we may amend our Constitution to ensure more rights or take them away. The question, now, is can we afford health care for all? At this moment, I believe we cannot. Other countries have attempted to provide health care for all of its citizens but are facing economic troubles in spite of 70% tax rates (Clark & Dilnot, 2002). I believe that high tax rates are dangerous to the economy because the people and the government compete in mobilizing the economy; whereas with lower tax rates, the small businesses can drive the economy (U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy, 2006).

It is my experience that those who overutilize health care are those who are under-insured (e.g. Medicare and Medicaid) and uneducated about the health care system. Further, it seems that the underpayment of costs by the Medicare and Medicaid programs are driving up the recoverable costs to other payors (Brennan & Mello, 2009). This is why I believe that our health care system is as expensive and inefficient as it is. “The U.S. health care system also spends more on administrative or overhead costs related to health care,” says Garber and Skinner (2008, p. 32), but they attribute this to administrative waste where I conclude that the over-administration is needed to meet the demands of an over-regulated and inefficient payment system.

In conclusion, our health care system is linked to our economy, and improving the economy is the only way to ensure that our health care system improves. By adding entitlements, we are forcing the American people to minimize their financial growth and, thereby, their financial freedom to choose affordable health care.

References

Brennan, T. A. & Mello, M. M. (2009). Incremental health care reform. Journal of the American Medical Association, 301(17), 1814-1816. doi:10.1001/jama.2009.610

Clark, T. & Dilnot, A. (2002). Long-term trends in British taxation and spending (IFS Briefing Note No. 25). London, UK: The Institute for Fiscal Studies. Retrieved from http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn25.pdf

Garber, A. M. & Skinner, J. (2008). Is American health care uniquely inefficient? Journal of Economic Perspective, 22(4), 27–50. doi:10.1257/jep.22.4.27.

U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy. (2006, September 28). Small business drives the U.S. economy — represent 99.7 percent of all businesses, employ 57.4 million (SBA No. 06-17 ADVO). Retrieved from http://www.sba.gov/advo/press/06-17.html

Pay-for-performance in EMS?

There has been much discussion regarding reimbursement models for health services, and two main themes have emerged, the historical fee-for-service model and a quality-driven pay-for-performance model (Institute of Medicine, Committee on Redesigning Health Insurance Performance Measures, Payments and Performance Improvements Staff, 2007). While many providers argue that the reimbursement level is currently too low to sustain operations (Institute of Medicine, Committee on Redesigning Health Insurance Performance Measures, Payments and Performance Improvements Staff, 2007), patient advocates cite an overwhelming number of medical mistakes allowing providers to benefit from poorer outcomes leading to increased needs of critical care services which lengthen hospital stays dramatically (Committee on Quality of Health Care in America & Institute of Medicine Staff, 2001; Institute of Medicine, Committee on Redesigning Health Insurance Performance Measures, Payments and Performance Improvements Staff, 2007). While considering more effective designs within our health care system, treatment efficacy, reimbursement paradigms, and patient safety could possibly be used as a foundation upon which to rebuild our health care infrastructure. The Committee on Quality of Health Care in American and the Institute of Medicine Staff (2001) offer “six aims [safe, effective, patient-centered, timely, efficient, and equitable] for improvement that can raise the quality of care to unprecedented levels” (p. 5).

Fee-for-service models, the traditional norm in health care reimbursement, seek to itemize care expenditures based on particular procedures or services rendered to the patient. Though fee-for-service models reward providers for timely, and possibly effective and efficient, delivery of care, it does little to address safe, patient-centered, and equitable considerations.

Financial barriers embodied in current payment methods can create significant obstacles to higher-quality health care. Even among health professionals motivated to provide the best care possible, the structure of payment incentives may not facilitate the actions needed to systematically improve the quality of care, and may even prevent such actions.
(Committee on Quality of Health Care in America et al., 2001, p. 181)

As a paramedic, I am bound to a Medicare reimbursement model that focuses solely on the transportation of the patient and not on the care rendered. For a patient experiencing cardiac chest pain, merely placing them on a continuous ECG monitor and providing transportation to the hospital allows my employer to be paid the same as if I initiated an intravenous line, administered oxygen, aspirin, nitroglycerin, and morphine, and performed serial diagnostic 15-lead ECG readings during the transport. In any case, though, payment is withheld if the patient is not transported. I have to assume that this inequitable reimbursement scheme is replicated across the health care spectrum.

Pay-for-performance models, however, seek to reward the provider for improving the quality of care delivered and “represents an attempt to align incentives in the payment system so that rewards are given to providers who foster the six quality aims set forth in the Quality Chasm report” (Institute of Medicine, Committee on Redesigning Health Insurance Performance Measures, Payments and Performance Improvements Staff, 2007, p. 36; Committee on Quality of Health Care in America et al., 2001). Some detractors of pay-for-performance worry that providers serving poor and ethnic communities that have typically poor health and preventative compliance will not benefit from such performance measures. The worry is that the numbers of providers will be lacking in these communities, worsening the communities health outcomes (Nafziger, 2010). Though, “pay for performance is not simply a mechanism to reward those who perform well; rather, its purpose is to encourage redesign and transformation of the health care system to ensure high-quality care for all” (Institute of Medicine, Committee on Redesigning Health Insurance Performance Measures, Payments and Performance Improvements Staff, 2007, p. 44). Pay-for-performance focuses on safety, and a search of the literature does not reveal any complicating risk to patients under a pay-for-performance system so long as the system is patient-centric, taking into account the patient population serviced by each provider.

For instance, regarding a certain type of heart attack called a “STEMI”, or ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, it is beneficial for the paramedic ambulance to bypass the local community hospital and transport the patient to a primary coronary intervention (PCI) facility for a cardiac catheterization. In this instance, the local community hospital is losing potential revenue. Perhaps if the reimbursement model reflected this evidence-based and patient-centered decision and provided a small monetary reward to the local community hospital for allowing the directed care at the PCI center, then mortality and morbidity from STEMI in the community would be reduced and the local hospital would be rewarded for their involvement in the process even if they did not provide any direct care. This is just one instance in the realm of emergency care where pay-for-performance can help to ensure safe, effective, patient-centered, timely, efficient, and equitable delivery of care to the patient.

As both a health care provider and consumer, I would prefer the pay-for-performance model of reimbursement. As a provider, I am a patient advocate, and as a patient, I will, of course, advocate for myself. Pay-for-performance enables provider growth, evidence-based practice, better patient safety mechanisms, and an overall efficient and a more complete and holistic delivery of care.

References

Committee on Quality of Health Care in America (Author), & Institute of Medicine Staff (Author). (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Institute of Medicine, Committee on Redesigning Health Insurance Performance Measures, Payments and Performance Improvements Staff (Author). (2007). Rewarding provider performance: Aligning incentives in Medicare. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Nafziger, B. (2010, May 6). Pay for performance could hurt docs who serve poor, blacks and hispanics. DOTMed News. Retrieved from http://www.dotmed.com/fr/news/story/12570/