Ethical Analysis Essay

Today, the national health care system faces a profound crisis caused by the skyrocketing health care costs, economic crisis, and the lack of financial resources to fund health care programs from the part of the state. In such a situation, scandals involving executives of health care organizations are particularly noteworthy because they reveal the full extent to which the modern health care system is ineffective and vulnerable to the corruption. At this point, it is possible to refer to the case of David F. Rosen and Senator Carl Kruger, which were accused of being involved in bribery and illegal schemes related to provision of essential health care services to the poor and state funding of these services. This scandal has revealed numerous problems of the modern health care system, among which the problem of the ineffectiveness of the state funding of health care services is one of the most important issues because it undermines the effectiveness of health care services, provokes corruption, and raises costs of health care services, instead of reducing them.
First of all, it is important to dwell upon the essence of the case. As the matter of fact, the scandal has broken out when the public learned that the going rate in 2008 to park a dying person in a hospital bed in Brooklyn was $772.80. That fee was enough to cover hospice care and, if the charges are true, a payoff to a state senator from Brooklyn (Dwyer, 2011). Obviously, the fee was too high, it was unreasonably high and, therefore, it was unfair. At this point, it is important to place emphasis on the fact that the high fee was paid in the poverty-stricken neighborhood, where people could not afford covering health care costs and the state support of health care costs was essential. As a result, the high fee led to the ineffective use of the public funds, because hospice care could be covered with the fee paid for parking dying persons in a hospital bad in Brooklyn.
When the scandal has just started a number of other issues arose. For instance, the public naturally raised the question – Why it is necessary to pay between $1.5 million and $2 million annually in salary to Mr. Rosen, and proportionally robust salaries to his top assistants? (Dwyer, 2011). The salary of David F. Rosen was too high, taking into consideration that the head of the city hospital system is paid about $300,000. In this regard, it should be said that Rosen holds a responsible position, for he is the chief executive of Jamaica Hospital, Flushing Hospital, Brookdale Hospital, and of MediSys, a management company that oversees hospitals. In such a way, he is the executive of several hospitals and, simultaneously, he is the executive of the company that oversees hospitals. Obviously, this scheme opens large opportunities for corruption and manipulation with state funds. In this respect, it is important to place emphasis on the fact that the hospitals headed by Rosen are private, but supported heavily or entirely by public financing. In actuality, this means that Rosen heads private health care organizations, which are heavily funded by the state. Therefore, the state funds were used ineffectively and Rosen profited from using state funds receiving excessively high salary and raising unreasonably and unjustly fees for basic health care services. At this point, it is worth mentioning the fact that the scheme used by Rosen could hardly be successful, if he did not have the support of politicians, among which Senator Kruger was mentioned, although he was plead not guilty in the case (Dwyer, 2011). Nevertheless, it is clear that Rosen, as a top executive of private health care organizations, could not use state funds, if he did not have the support of politicians, who take decisions and who are responsible for funding health care organizations from the state or federal budget.
In such a context, larger question arises and the question is about corporate governance, the fiduciary responsibility of not-for-profit boards, and the steps individuals will take to block transparency in an effort to protect their self-interest. What is meant here is the fact that the state funding of health care organizations and health care system at large raises a number of ethical issues. In fact, the main problem is that the state funding of health care organizations and health care system raises the problem of the corruption and ineffective use of public funds. The funding of health care organizations is often not transparent. Therefore, it is unclear how state funds are used and how money of taxpayers are spent by health care organizations, which may be privately owned but use public funds. The role of politicians and statesmen is also very significant in this regard because the organization of corruptive schemes is impossible without their involvement. At the same time, the skyrocketing health care costs make public funding of health care organizations very attractive for both private health care organizations and politicians because they allow increasing profits from illegal schemes and misusing of public funds.
In such a situation, the problem of the ethical responsibility of executives of health care organizations and policy makers becomes the primary concern of the public. It proves beyond a doubt that the scandal involving Rosen and misuse of the public funds in Brooklyn could hardly start, if Rosen and other executives, which could have been involved in the scheme, were responsible and conducted correct business practices. Obviously, the ethical responsibility of top executives of health care organizations and policy makes is very significant.
On the other hand, the responsibility of health care executives and policy makers alone is not enough to stop corruption and misusing public funds in the national health care system. Instead, a large scale reform is needed, which could have made the national health care system more effective and the state funding of health care system more transparent. In this regard, policy makers should pay a particular attention to the problem of transparency of accounting systems of health care organizations and tracking how public funds are used. In this regard, the involvement of public, independent organizations is essential.
Thus, taking into account all above mentioned, it is important to place emphasis on the fact that the recent scandal involving Rosen, a top executive of several health care organizations in Brooklyn, and Senator Kruger, reveals the full extent to which the modern health care system and public funding of health care organizations are vulnerable to corruption. This case proves the importance of changes, which can improve the situation in the national health care system.