Michael Moore’s Latest: Sicko

By: Brie Cadman (View Profile)

These might be isolated instances, but Moore assures us they are not by interviewing people within the health care industry. The intent of health insurance and pharmaceutical companies, they tell us, is to maximize profits. However, maximizing profits means denying sick people coverage, rebuking claims, and searching for examples of pre-existing conditions so they can throw out current bills. According to one insurance investigator, “You’re not slipping through the cracks; someone made that crack and is sweeping you towards it.”

Moore then travels abroad to juxtapose our current system with those countries with government-provided health insurance, also known as single-payer or socialized medicine. He shows Canadians who pay nothing at the doctor’s office, and wait less time than you would to see a doctor here in the States. He hunts down a cashier’s office in a hospital in the UK, determined to find out where people pay their bills. But in the UK, no one pays for their care; the cashier’s office is there to reimburse patients for parking and travel expenses. “This isn’t the U.S.,” laughs one beaming couple after delivering a bill-free baby.

Perhaps the hardest thing to stomach was realizing that other countries have it better in many ways, not just health care. In France, they have at least five weeks paid vacation, unlimited sick days, six months of paid maternity leave, free childcare, and sometimes, government-funded employees to help clean, cook, and do the laundry for new mothers.

It was here that I wished Moore had painted a more balanced picture because surely everything in Europe and Canada cannot be as hunky-dory as it seems (it most certainly is not in Cuba, where Moore takes three 9/11 volunteers to receive care that they could not afford in the U.S.). Although he successfully refutes the idea of having substandard medicine and long waiting times in countries with national health coverage, it is hard to get an accurate picture of how much they really pay in taxes, or if excellent care is uniform throughout their countries. Had we of seen some of the more realistic aspects, I think it would have been a more convincing argument as to why we should want publicly administered health care in our country (which we already do in a sense: Medicare and Medicaid). Instead, I was left feeling that the portrayal was a little too perfect to be completely true.

1 reader liked this story.
bookmarks
Comments
posted: 11.13.2007
Kristi Crocker
I was turned on to this movie shortly after my dad who was batteling cancer was in turmoil with his insurance company, Anthem. They wouldnt allow him to see the necessary physicians to treat his very rare cancer. They kept denying his appeals and before long, the cancer was in his brain and he became terminal. I have no doubt in my mind that my father would be here today if he had recieved the proper treatments he thought he was paying his health insurance provider for. I applaud Michael Moore for giving victims like my father a voice and shining a light on an issue greater than we even know. I too had blinders on thinking we had such a great health care system. But we dont....we are just dollar signs to health insurance and pharmecutical companies. They arent in business to help us get better, they are here to get rich. Can you imagine watching a loved one dye infront of you for the sake of someone getting richer? Let me tell you its infuriating!
posted: 08.22.2007
Emily Kronenberger
I am sometimes conflicted by specific elements within Michael Moore's portrayal of issues in this country. However, I am in general a huge fun simply for the fact that he is one of the only popular film makers that can get real mainstream dialogue going about things like racism, gun violence, government corruption, and now, the U.S. healthcare system. I saw "Sicko" during its debut weekend in an almost-empty theater in New Jersey, and I was impressed by the take home message which is that we as U.S. citizens are all vulnerable to health crisis, and financial crisis as a result. In addition, I think that a critical point needs to be made about "socialized" medicine. Usually, the criticism behind a government run healthcare system from politicians is that we will have no choices when it comes to making decisions about healthcare providers, etc. Yet, I marvel about how currently, managed care does not provide consumers with any more choices than a "socialized" system would afford us.
posted: 07.17.2007
Jordan Tiffany
When I stepped into the theatre to see this film, I was pretty skeptical... When I walked out, I had some mixed emotions. On one hand I was impressed with Moore himself, for the most part. What I have felt he's done wrong in the past is get in front of the camera too much... In this film I feel like he did a good job of telling the stories without having to stand there and tell them. I was saddened by his take on our current state. I'm going to be honest and say that I was completely ignorant about health insurance. As a 20 year old college student, my parents have total control over my insurance, and the only time I had anything to do with it, I was in the hospital for kidney stones(not a fun time). So he really opened my eyes. I highly recommend this movie!
posted: 07.16.2007
Stef Ordoveza
Although Michael Moore can be a bit biased, I do agree that without his work, much of what ails our society today would not receive the attention it so desperately needs. I think more people need to understand that by simply ignoring these problems, more and more institutions (not just health-related ones) are getting away with exploiting people for the sake of money. Moore's question is valid, "Who are we?" Who are we on both sides? Who are we to think we can take advantage of people for the sake of getting richer? And who are we to ignore what is happening and not do anything to change it? Thank you for your review!!
posted: 07.14.2007
Nancy Puckett
Wow! Michael Moore has really opened a can of worms (hours of discussion on CNN etc.) and he can't be faulted for that. It really worries me that it is recommended that when one retires 200,000 to 300,000 dollars should be in reserve for medical costs not covered by medicare or other insurance. This is impossible for most retirees and keeps old folks up at night.
It feels good to write.

Your stories, musings, and advice are welcome here. We know you've got something to share, so jump in—maybe get a little famous. And don't worry—you can save a draft!

most liked
Loader_buff
Other topics you might appreciate
Relationships Career & Money Neighborhood & World Parenting