MMA Viewpoint
In Praise of Civility
To make reforms that truly improve our system, we will need active, civil discourse.
As I end my year as president of the Minnesota Medical Association, I reflect with pride on the progress Minnesota has made in health care reform and the significant role the MMA has played in the process. We have supported an incremental approach to reform and have been working to make sure that any changes are in line with the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s triple aim of simultaneously improving the health of the general population and the experience of our patients, and making health care more affordable.
The MMA has not taken a formal position on the various drafts of federal health care reform legislation, which contain many elements that strongly align with the MMA’s positions on state health care reform policy as well as some that do not. As we monitor the federal legislation, we will be especially wary of changes that have the potential to make things worse for Minnesota’s health care system and its reform efforts.
Health care delivery is exceedingly complex in all developed nations. We know that significant change is needed to improve health care quality across our nation and to “bend the cost curve.” If we fail, more Americans will lose health insurance and many more will have less coverage than they need. To make reforms that truly improve our system, we will need active, civil discourse. It will be very hard work.
The epidemic of “town brawl” meetings, whether they are populated by the political left or the right, is antithetical to the democratic process. The effect of these events is not to further the process but rather to shut down discussion. Comments are personal and directed at lawmakers to overwhelm them, not to engage them. These shouting matches discourage “average Joes” from attending meetings with their representatives. And they make lawmakers suspicious of their audiences. It seems that a large segment of our population has lost the ability or the desire to thoughtfully reflect on opinions that are different from their own. Many people have lost sight of our being flawed beings who are quite capable of supporting actions whose end results are personal and societal disasters.
What we need as we approach this highly complex topic is civility, a commodity in short supply these days. We need each other and each other’s ideas. I am particularly proud of how health care reform was addressed in Minnesota. Sustained, civil conversations between people who had and continue to hold significantly different positions about what is best for patients and the profession brought us to where we are and will guide us in the future.
In so many ways, Minnesota is a model for the nation when it comes to health care reform. Our civility is another characteristic that the nation might emulate as it continues its discussion.