The right to abortion is based on a right to privacy. If, however, there is a single-payer health system in the United States, then the government will control all the medical access of its citizens. The government will decide what healthcare you can and cannot have. Since they will be paying, the government will have all your medical records and your complete medical history. Now further supposing this to be a mandatory system with no opt-out, people will no longer have much in the way of privacy regarding their own bodies.

President Obama has said publicly that he favors a single-payer system, and that certainly seems to be the endgame of healthcare reform. But if people do have a right to privacy, how is it possible that a single-payer health system could pass constitutional scrutiny?

I am an American living in Canada and we have a single payer system here. The government does not keep my medical records, my physician does. With rare exceptions the government has no idea what is happening medically to its citizens. I am willing to bet your insurance company knows more about your medical situation than the Canadian government does about mine. I don't get Medicare but I understand that no one enrolled in it wants it cancelled so what is the difference between government on that level and on another level knowing something about your medical condition. And if you pay taxes, I am 100% positive the government knows a lot more about you than you think. If you don't like it, don't pay your taxes and when you are in jail the government will know everything about you.

You obviously know much more about the Canadian system than I do, so perhaps you could explain how the government pays your medical bills and yet has no idea what your medical condition is. Are bills not submitted under actual patient names? Does the government simply give block grants to physicians without having any knowledge of what they are doing?

We all have health card numbers and the charges are made to the card number by the physician. It is no different than having a Social Security number in the US. The government can legally find out just about anything they want to know about anyone without resorting to health card information. Personally, I can appreciate the desire of some people for privacy but I believe that worrying about privacy is just a red herring for those who are against health insurance. As for rationing care, yes the government does it the same as every health insurance company. I am 79 years old and I have back trouble. I suppose the government could fix the jelly like discs if I pushed hard enough but I suspect they would prefer to spend the money on someone 39 ... which makes sense to me. The difference here is that if the government denies you coverage you have options including going to the press and publicizing it. Try that with your US insurance company if you want to keep your insurance. And the government here cannot deny you coverage of pre-existing conditions as US insurance companies all do unless it is part of a company plan and then they still might. As for privacy, I guarantee you that for about $2,500 I can find out everything I need to know about you ... including your Slate name and password ... should I really want it.

>>We all have health card numbers and the charges are made to the card number by the physician.<<

If the government has your card number and your card number is billed, the government has your medical records. You're right, the government knows lots of things about everyone, which unfortunately takes away a lot of our freedom. One thing that bothers me is that there are now video cameras everywhere. Cell phones contain GPS chips that can report where the phone is, and presumably also the phone owner. How long until the government requires phone companies to provide them that data?

There is a bumper sticker in the US which says, "One nation, under surveillance". Yes, we are under surveillance, and we have given away most of our privacy and a lot of our freedoms. Now we are giving away control of health care to the government, and how long will it be until health care delivery is used as a form of social engineering through deciding what to pay for and what not to pay for? I guess the question is, is there any place we can stop our loss of freedom? Is there any point at which we say it is enough?

That's a very disturbing post. I would never want to be this paranoid.

I also, frankly, don't think any large bureaucracy can exhibit the sort of single-minded focus you suggest -- even the Nazis missed folks they hunted over a period of years. The danger in Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, etc, wasn't the bureaucracy, was informers. As you may recall, that's how Anne Frank was turned in, after hiding for -- what was it, four years? Are you planning to inform on women who get abortions?

Science fiction routinely assumes this sort of Big Brother oversight, but it is fiction.

jajaja:

I am an American living in Canada and we have a single payer system here. The government does not keep my medical records, my physician does. With rare exceptions the government has no idea what is happening medically to its citizens. I am willing to bet your insurance company knows more about your medical situation than the Canadian government does about mine. I don't get Medicare but I understand that no one enrolled in it wants it cancelled so what is the difference between government on that level and on another level knowing something about your medical condition. And if you pay taxes, I am 100% positive the government knows a lot more about you than you think. If you don't like it, don't pay your taxes and when you are in jail the government will know everything about you.

Nice Post!

KevClark64:

You obviously know much more about the Canadian system than I do, so perhaps you could explain how the government pays your medical bills and yet has no idea what your medical condition is. Are bills not submitted under actual patient names? Does the government simply give block grants to physicians without having any knowledge of what they are doing?

How much privacy do you have from your current insurance company? I am willing to bet that your "private" insurance company has a much more vested interest in knowing as much about you as they can - they must, to keep their bottom line happy. The government insurance option (which, by the way, is a choice, not mandated) doesn't have a profit motive - and will have less interest in your private health issues.

I am just not that concerned about one more part of me being under surveillance. I used the $2500 example for a reason. I know a guy who is an expert on this subject and he said for about $2500 he could find out just about anything he waned to know about anyone. Since he was an ex-Mountie in the investigations unit I suspect he know precisely what he talks about.

As an ex-newspaper reporter I have a pretty good idea of how things can be researched ... in surprising ways that are basically pretty simple. Just type in any phone number (area code and number separated by dashes) on Google search and you will immediately find out who that phone is registered to ... including cell phones. This gets you started and where you go from there depends on your interest and financial situation.

What I am concerned about more than surveillance is the "creation" of information that may or not be correct but can be misused by individuals, groups or corporations. And I am not sure there is any way to stop that because providing more confidentiality of information will not alter "creations" of information.

As for social engineering, I am for it as a principle. I think Social Security was a huge step forward as is unemployment insurance (which I have never received by the way), Medicare, and next a national health program for the US. We have it in Canada and it works. Yes, it has its flaws but its flaws pale in comparison to being sick without any health insurance anywhere in the US.