Health Care: Peace of Mind vs. Bottom Line

I was incensed by Robin Abcarian’s “What’s the Price Tag on Peace of Mind?” (Sept. 22). No, cost will not be the last word, but necessity will. Since experts have determined that routine ultrasounds don’t improve the outcome of low-risk pregnancies, medical insurance should not cover them.

Many people want ultrasound merely to determine their babies’ sex, and their doctors fabricate medical reasons for the tests so insurance will pay for them. This is just one example of flagrant waste (not to mention fraud) within the current health care system.

We’re trying to control costs, remember?

KELLY OBERLIN

Santa Ana

*

Robin Abcarian asks, “What is the price tag on piece of mind?”

She goes on to describe the cost of an ultrasound as being $200 per patient, suggesting that this is a small price to pay for the psychic benefit received by expectant parents upon seeing their healthy developing fetus. I would like to point out that this type of thinking is extremely misleading.

The issue should be whether the $200 spent on an ultrasound would be better spent on something else. For example, how would Abcarian feel knowing that all the children in the U. S. were being vaccinated against preventable disease?

With the coming debate on national health care policy, questions like the one Abcarian asks will not be rhetorical, and we had better be careful how we decide what things are worth.

DAN ROSENFELD

Los Angeles

*

“What’s the Price Tag on Peace of Mind?” provides one example of why health care costs are astronomical.

Robin Abcarian describes the recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine that demonstrated no benefit from prenatal ultrasound in low-risk patients, yet she remembers “the fears it allayed” in her case.

If resources were infinite, yes, pay for the ultrasound. But dollars are limited. Society at large should not pay for procedures of no demonstrated medical benefit.

DR. TIMOTHY A. DENTON

Los Angeles