Dr. Arnold Relman, Professor Emeritus at Harvard Medical School and former editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine brings together sixty years of experience in medicine in a book that holds the keys to a new structure for healthcare based on voluntary private contracts between individuals and not-for-profit, multi-specialty groups of physicians. Timely, provocative, and newly updated, A Second Opinion is a clarion call to action. If we heed Dr. Relman's plan, Americans could at last achieve a lasting, sensible solution to national healthcare.
We have a problem. We're not serious about fixing it. Congress and their minions have a great health plan. Too bad they're unwilling to share it with America. Getting harder and harder to actually believe we have a 'representative' government. You should read this book.
Although published in 2007 this esteemed physician rightly predicted many of the challenges we have today with medical practice and invited physicians to join the battle for universal healthcare.
Excellent book. Somewhat out of date by the time I read it. Unfortunately, I don’t expect a sober, fact based assessment of the US healthcare system will sway public opinion on healthcare policy.
I actually met the author and had dinner with him. He is a leader in the universal healthcare field and a pioneer in our country as far as lobbying goes. I think that we are still a long way away from what he envisions, but he makes some great points. I recommend this book if you would like a different perspective on today's healthcare system needs. It is pretty dry with lots of charst and graphs.
Reading for school; overall, informative and not a bad read. I agree with many of his premises, but I admit I'm not well versed enough in the particulars of healthcare administration to know if his plan is the best one or even a viable one. I found his financial rationale for universal healthcare to be intriguing, but for me, universal healthcare is a moral imperative and approaching it from any other angle seems to miss the point. Overall, reading for school could be much, much worse.
This is a somewhat dry, but very thought provoking work. My greatest disappointment with it is that he suggests a possible solution to the problem of universal coverage in the US, identifies the barriers to achieving that goal and then refuses to suggest some interim or transitory solutions. So, great for intellectual debate, but won;t really help us get anywhere.