About PSP
Contact Us
eNewsletter Sign Up

Editor's Message

Article Tools
Email This Article
Reprint This Article
Write the Editor

SiCKO and Aesthetic Medicine

by Michael J. Block

On the Fourth of July (of all days), my wife, Karen, and I went to see the Michael Moore film SiCKO. As the movie progressed, I couldn't help but wonder what my friends in aesthetic medicine would make of it. After all, quite a few of you have told me that you strongly prefer to run a strictly cash practice and want nothing at all to do with health insurance companies.

To be sure, the film had nothing to say about elective medicine—it concentrated on the plight of Americans who don't have—and more to the point, who do have—health insurance, and contrasted our system with the universal coverage that prevails in other Western countries. I doubt that even Moore would advocate that all citizens are entitled to government-paid, tax-supported facelifts and tummy tucks.

But, of course, there are cases—many of them—in which aesthetic surgery and other procedures are medically indicated. Otoplasty for teenagers with "Dumbo ears," abdominoplasty for bariatric surgery patients, and breast reduction for both males and females are only a few. Should society address the psychological and physical needs of these patients, just as Moore says it should for "conventional" conditions such as heart disease or cancer?

SiCKO and other sources have indicated that France has one of the best nationalized health care systems in the world. Friends of mine who live in France also strongly praise that country's system, but they add that its major weakness is that too many patients overuse the system and this may potentially lead to some restrictions in access to care. I asked them whether the French system would cover these types of aesthetic procedures, and they replied that they likely wouldn't be covered completely, if at all—but that they would cost much less in France than the United States, with no drop in the quality of care.

One can certainly imagine the difficulties of incorporating aesthetic treatments into nationalized health care—especially procedures that are performed for psychological reasons. It would be awfully tough to come up with widely accepted standards to determine which patients are eligible and which are not.

So once again I'm asking for your reactions. Do you favor a national health care system, and if so, should it cover medically indicated aesthetic procedures? Florida plastic surgeon Eugene J. Strasser, MD, JD, FACS, responded to last month's message in this month's "In Review" article—let's hear from you this time.

Michael J. Block

Related Articles - Editor's Message

What Patients Want? - July 2007

Once in a While - June 2007

Web, Web, Everywhere - May 2007

Meeting the Challenges - April 2007

Lasermania - March 2007

Displaying 5 of 28 related articles. View all related articles.

Article Tools
Email This Article
Reprint This Article
Write the Editor
Media Kit
Editorial Advisory Board
Advertiser Index
News | Current Issue | Buyer's Guide | Archives | Calendar | Resources
About PSP | Contact Us | Subscribe | eNewsletter Sign Up
Media Kit | Editorial Advisory Board | Advertiser Index | Reprints
Allied Healthcare
24X7 |  Chiropractic Products Magazine |  Clinical Lab Products (CLP) |  Orthodontic Products |  The Hearing Review |  Hearing Products Report (HPR)
HME Today |  Orthopedic Technology Review |  Rehab Management |  Physical Therapy Products |  Plastic Surgery Products
Imaging Economics  |  Medical Imaging |  RT |  Sleep Review
The American Journal of Managed Care |  Cardiology Review |  Family Practice Recertification |  Internal Medicine World Report |  Pharmacy Times
Physician's Money Digest |  Resident & Staff |  Surgical Rounds
Compendium |  Contemporary Dental Assisting |  Contemporary Esthetics |  Contemporary Oral Hygiene
Practice Growth
Practice Builders
Copyright © 2007 Ascend Media LLC | PLASTIC SURGERY PRODUCTS | All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service