Co-Payments Should Be Capped

Rising health care costs are making it harder than ever for Harvard's workers to make ends meet. Under the current health care benefits package that the University offers to members of the Harvard Union of Clerical and Technical Workers (HUCTW), each worker is required to pay a $10 co-payment each time he or she or a family member visits the doctor. A proposal under consideration by the Joint Committee on Benefits (JCB), a committee consisting of faculty members, University administrators, and members of HUCTW, would cap the co-payments at $100 per family each year.

The idea of co-payments is an important one in the health care system. Co-payments expand individual responsibility and make people realize that the health care they receive does not come without costs. By making each person pay $10 each time he or she visits the doctor's office, patients are more likely to value the advice and treatment they receive. In addition, the $10 co-payment acts as a check on frivolous visits that can clog up doctor's offices and lead to medical inflation.

However, there is a flip side to co-payments that the Joint Committee on Benefits needs to consider. For individuals with chronic illness or for families, the seemingly minuscule $10 payment can become a serious burden. For a family with three small children, the accumulated co-payment costs from ear infections, sore throats and shots can add up to hundreds of dollars. A serious illness can require multiple medical visits each week, and these amassed co-payments can also be a severe strain on already tight paychecks. For many Harvard workers, these co-payments can eat up more and more of their families' budgets.

Even aside from the human consideration of the University for its workers, the co-payment cap is just smart business sense for Harvard. We should do everything we can to encourage people to visit their doctors instead of forcing them to jump through a series of expensive hoops just to stay healthy. While many economists claim that Americans overuse the medical system, concern for Harvard employees should outweigh the possible moral hazard.

By making it possible for Harvard's workers to decide when they think they need to see a doctor without an additional burden on their family finances, Harvard would have a much healthier group of workers. It would also save money for the health plan in the long run as illnesses are caught early or even prevented before they have the chance to develop into something much costlier and more dangerous. Having a system that discourages people from getting the health care they need is the wrong direction to go.

According to Candace Corvey, associate vice president for human resources, the Joint Committee on Benefits has yet to receive the proposal to cap the co-payments. We urge the JCB to act expeditiously and send the proposal to Provost Albert Carnesale so that he can approve the plan. Harvard's workers deserve the freedom from the fear of rising medical costs that imperil their families and the health of us all.