Home » News » “Perhaps there is better to do than do away with complementary health insurance”

“Perhaps there is better to do than do away with complementary health insurance”

Tribune. With the pandemic, health policies have occupied the daily lives of the French for almost two years. They have entered our lives, and not just those of those who are sick or directly affected, as is usually the case. However, health issues are struggling to find their way into presidential debates. The “great Secu”, that is to say the integration of complementary health insurance into Social Security, is today proposed by a report commissioned by the Minister of Health, Olivier Véran, to the High Council on Future of Medicare (HCAAM). Beyond technical quibbles and conflicts of interest, what balances are at stake for our health system?

Read also Article reserved for our subscribers “Grande Sécu”: decryption of a divisive project

Let us first note that an expansion of social security is part of a fundamental trend. Contrary to the analyzes which predicted the erosion of public health financing in favor of private coverage, the reverse trend prevailed. Even if a share of routine care remains the responsibility of users, the share of expenses reimbursed by Social Security has increased, reaching 78.2% of medical consumption. The “100% health” reform, introduced in 2019, for optics, dental care and hearing aids reflects the same trend, which is neither new nor specific to France. The health risk is also the subject of increased socialization on the very liberal lands of Obamacare or through the principle of universal health coverage promoted by the United Nations.

Inflationary effect

What can we expect, therefore, from a “great Safety”? By increasing the share of health expenditure covered by Medicare, the reform could cause the disappearance of complementary health insurance – which the French call “mutual”, but which are also insurance companies or institutions. foresight. It would put an end to a dual system which seems less and less sustainable today. Supplementary health insurance is in fact drawn into the spiral of competition and capital mergers under the effect of European prudential rules (known as “Solvency II”). They offer unequal services and protections, proportional to household income or to the capacities of businesses. They leave some of our fellow citizens who are far from the labor market poorly covered, especially among retirees.

Read also Article reserved for our subscribers Will it finally be easier to choose your complementary health?

But there is more. By improving the solvency of care poorly covered by the Social Security, they exert an inflationary effect on the prices of these services, from which the most modest may therefore be excluded. By creating a “great Sécu”, we eliminate a source of inequalities in terms of insurance and care. The French passion for equality is found there. But, once the supplements are removed, patients risk having to continue to pay excess fees and unreimbursed costs, which are high enough to persist a request for supplementary insurance. Above all, the reform would hardly affect the structural determinants of health inequalities, which relate more to lifestyles and public health than to care or complementary insurance.

You have 44.49% of this article left to read. The rest is for subscribers only.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.