History and health policy in the United States: putting the past back in

Abstract

This rich array of essays shows how the lens of history can clarify contemporary health-policy dilemmas and enable the reader to see ahead more clearly. --Harvey V. Fineberg, President, Institute of Medicine refreshing antidote for those finding it difficult to envision a better future for health care in America...This excellent book helps us all to better understand the subtle relationship among values, institutions, economics, and medicine that shapes our health system. --Stuart M. Butler, Vice President for Domestic Policy, The Heritage Foundation An important book for those wrestling with the appropriate role of markets in U.S. health policy. --Karen Davis, President, The Commonwealth Fund In this book, seventeen leading scholars make the case for the usefulness of history in evaluating and formulating health policy today. In looking at issues as varied as the consumer economy and the plight of the uninsured, the contributors uncover the ways we think about technology, the role of government, and contemporary medicine. They show how historical perspectives can help policy makers avoid the pitfalls of partisan, outdated, or merely fashionable approaches, as well as how knowledge of previous systems can offer alternatives when policy directions seem unclear. Rosemary A. Stevens is DeWitt Wallace Distinguished Scholar in social medicine and public policy at Weill Cornell Medical College and professor emerita of the history and sociology of science at the University of Pennsylvania. Charles E. Rosenberg is a professor of the history of science and Ernest E. Monrad Professor in the social sciences at Harvard University. Lawton R. Burns is the James Joo-Jin Kim Professor of Health Care Systems at the University of Pennsylvania. A volume in the Critical Issues in Health and Medicine series, edited by Rima D. Apple and Janet Golden

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 85 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.