Podcasts & RSS Feeds
Most Active Stories
- Don't like the water shut-offs in Detroit? Now you can pay someone's overdue water bill
- Approaching construction on the highway? Experts say the "zipper merge" can help
- This ballot proposal is critical to Michigan's economy, but most people won't bother to vote on it
- These three female candidates could be some of the most interesting leaders in Michigan
- Re-thinking creativity's role in education
Tue February 4, 2014
Can we get the best medical treatment while controlling health care costs?
What's your reaction when the conversation turns to America's soaring health care costs – when you hear that by 2020, just six years from now, our health care spending will hit $4.5 trillion?
Maybe it's all too big, too "macro" for us to absorb on a personal level.
So try this: Should your 92-year-old grandmother undergo coronary artery bypass graft surgery –surgery that costs upwards of $20,000?
What about a girl who's 17 years old? Her leukemia treatments aren't working. Her liver is failing, other organs are failing, she is near death and her family is demanding a liver transplant, which the surgeon proposed, but the HMO refuses to authorize?
These are real-life dilemmas facing doctors, patients, and us.
We want everything modern medicine can offer, but as taxpayers we want health care costs controlled.
Can we achieve both goals?
Leonard Fleck, a professor of philosophy and a medical ethicist from Michigan State University, joined us today.
Listen to the full interview above.