There is a common misconception that man needs only four things to survive: air, water, shelter and food. However, this basic recipe for life is missing an integral ingredient without which humans cannot survive: health care. As scientific and technological knowledge increases, so do the number of methods that allow for even longer life expectancies. Unfortunately, access to these revolutionary, life-saving technologies is extremely expensive, and thus not an option for millions of Americans.The Obama administration is admirably trying to make health care more widely available to Americans in order to better provide for the general public's well-being. Countless articles have been written concerning the necessity for a reformed health care system and whether America will become a "socialist" country if health care is made more readily available. However, there has been little discussion about how doctors will be paid under a new system. At a university like Brandeis that has a rigorous premed process, and a substantial percent of the student body pursuing this track, it is important to know if all of this work will eventually be worth their time once they are doctors-will they be able to make a living?

Health care reform poses an interesting dilemma for liberal students planning on pursuing a career in clinical medicine: Will a possible decrease in the pay of doctors be enough of a reason to devote such an enormous amount of their time and money to their career? Phrased differently: Will their humanitarian interest and intellectual drive to be a doctor outweigh their decision to pursue a historically lucrative career that may not remain such?

Doctors and clinicians have always had extremely steady careers, even in times of economic unrest. Health care is a necessity, and those in need of health care (and who can afford it) are willing to pay what it costs to keep themselves healthy. But even before the government changes the health care field, there are factors that have been making medical careers much less efficient today. For example, insurance companies now have doctors in their pockets, forcing limits on a doctor's price for a given procedure. Doctors cannot escape this system because, for the most part, they run an insurance-driven business.

The methods of insurance companies may seem corrupt, but the government is notoriously inefficient, and judging from the network news channels' obsession with reporting on the nonnews aspects of health care reform, there are some pretty dramatic changes on the way. Will doctors essentially become government employees, paid with tax dollars? If so, will government be able to devise a system to sufficiently pay doctors what they will need to make such a demanding lifestyle worth their while? Perhaps the media should turn its attention from the political end of this issue to the practical end-exactly how will doctors make their living under this new system?

The premed track, from general chemistry in college to the end of residency, is a brutal one, requiring extreme dedication and commitment. It involves going deep into debt from the extremely costly and time-consuming education and often requires putting off starting a career and a family until one is completely out of school. As the baby-boomers age, our country faces a greater volume of patients as well as a shortage of doctors, and the last thing we need is a shadow cast over the future of the health care career discouraging potential doctors from committing their time to the field.

Say, for example, a student purely followed her interests to a career in pediatric neurosurgery-the perfect career that combines her love of children and her interest in neuroscience. This specialty would require her to be in school or residency until she is nearly 40 years old. However, with an uncertain future, she is left with little but her own ambition motivating her to pursue this career. It may even be a smarter career decision for them to consider a future in research. Not many students possess such a motiviation to go into debt for such a long span of their lives without a secure promise of an eventual escape.

Universal health care has the potential to do great things for a large percentage of our nation, but greater consideration needs to be given to the eventual repercussions on the doctor end of the system-otherwise, there may not be a doctor available to underpay.