Health care in crisis: a plea for less government

Health care in crisis: a plea for less government intervention

Today, 22 interest groups sounded the alarm again about the health of the Dutch: the government must intervene and limit the use of alcohol, tobacco, fossil fuels and processed foods. But what does this lead to?
The foundation of our society was once laid on the principle that we are responsible for each other's health. Back then, this was a noble idea, when people were still dying in the gutter. However, it has now led to a loss of individual responsibility for our health.
Without a brake on unhealthy lifestyles, healthcare costs are rising explosively. A prayer without end, and the consequences are clearly visible. Because “pleas” for more government intervention irrevocably lead to more costs.

Collective responsibility versus individual freedom

As a society, we cannot keep paying for the consequences of each other's lifestyles. This only drives up health care premiums and costs. The budget of the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport (VWS) is one of the largest in the Netherlands, with an amount of approximately €35.3 billion for 2024. To keep the necessary health care affordable, we need to limit these costs.
But how do you decide what is essential and what is not?

The government's tendency to control behavior by restricting individual freedoms is problematic. That throws the baby out with the bathwater. Freedom is our highest asset, which we should cherish at all costs. Only in freedom can a person fully express and realize himself. Isn't that the ultimate goal of every society? Limited societies have never led to much good. Freedom goes hand in hand with responsibility, and accidents are inevitable. This is the price of life. We must not shy away from this reality. Making mistakes — or worse, accidents — is the only way people learn and move forward. Fear of this is actually fear of living (and dying).

Fewer restrictions, more responsibility

In short, we are calling for fewer restrictive measures and more personal responsibility, especially when it comes to health. This may mean that people may die earlier than they do now, but that is a price we must accept.

Effectiveness as a measure

One possible approach is to determine the effectiveness of treatments. There are plenty of figures and statistics available. The more effective the treatment, the more you are entitled to it. Treatments for chronic diseases, often the result of a poor lifestyle, are expensive and often ineffective. That is why they should be reimbursed less.

One step further is to compare the effectiveness of treatments against costs. Cheap and effective treatments, such as bone fractures, are evident and always covered collectively. Expensive and ineffective is optional for those willing to pay for it. This encourages the health industry to develop affordable and effective treatments and places the responsibility for lifestyle back to the individual.