Is German Long-Term Care Insurance a Model for the United States?

Abstract

German long-term care insurance, implemented in 1995, significantly extends the coverage of care-related risks. Given the similarities of German and U.S. institutional features, the German social insurance approach has been put forward as a possible model for long-term care in the United States. Using a political economy framework, the authors conducted a policy analysis that compares the main shortfalls of long-term care (LTC) provision in the United States and Germany, examines the responses provided by LTC insurance in Germany, and relates them to broader trends and proposals for change in welfare policy in both countries. German LTC insurance includes a high degree of consumer direction and compensation and protection for informal caregivers; it supports the extension of community-based services. Its shortfalls include the continued split between health and LTC insurance. In both countries, decentralization and institutional and financial fragmentation are some of the characteristics responsible for the failure to promote egalitarian social policy and substantially expand social protection to family- and care-related risks. The German LTC program is a good model for the United States. With a social insurance approach to LTC, costs are spread across the largest possible risk pool. Major goals that can be reached with such a program include establishment of universal entitlements to LTC benefits, consumer choice, and equitability and uniformity.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

U.S. Bureau of the Census. International Data Base. Washington, D.C., 1999.

United Nations. United Nations Demographic Indicators, 1950–2050, 1998 Revision. Geneva, 1998.

Estes

C. L.

The aging enterprise revisited. Gerontologist 33(3): 292–298, 1993.

Garms-Homolova

Comprehensive health care for the aged and initiatives for an insurance for care in Germany. Z. Gesundheitswissenschaften 2(1): 26–38, 1994.

Dieck

Reforming against the grain: Long-term care in Germany. In Social Policy Review 6, edited by Page

and Baldock

. University of Kent, Social Policy Association, England, 1994.

Bundesministerium für Gesundheit. Themen: Pflegeversicherung. Stand, October 1999. Available from: http://www.bmgesundheit.de/themen/pflege/zahlen.htm

Schneider

Germany's social long-term care insurance: Design, implementation and evaluation. Int. Soc. Sec. Rev. 52(2): 31–74, 1999.

Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Sozialordnung. Bericht über die Entwicklung der Pflegeversicherung. Bonn, 1998.

Schunk

The social insurance model of care for older people in Germany. In Rights and Realities—Comparing New Developments in Long-Term Care for Older People, edited by Glendinning

. Policy Press, Bristol, 1998.

10.

Blinkert

, and Klie

Pflege im sozialen Wandel. Freiburger Institut für angewandte Sozialwissenschaft e.V., Freiburg, 1997.

11.

Evers

Geld oder Dienste?

WSI Mitteilungen 7: 510–518, 1997.

12.

Evers

The new long term care insurance in Germany: Characteristics, consequences and perspectives. In Options for Long Term Care: Economic, Social and Ethical Choices, edited by Harding

Meredith

, and Wistow

. HMSO, London, 1996.

13.

Evans-Cuellar

, and Wiener

Structuring a universal long-term-care program: The experience in Germany. Generations 23(2): 45–50, 1999.

14.

Landenberger

Pflegeversicherung—Modell für sozialstaatlichen Wandel. Gegenwartskunde 1: 19–31, 1995.

15.

Scheiwe

Equal opportunity policies and the management of care in Germany. In Gendered Policies in Europe: Reconciling Employment and Family Life, edited by Hantrais

and Campling

. Macmillan, London, 1999.

16.

Krug

, and Reh

Pflegebedürftige in Heimen. Schriftenreihe, Bundesministerium für Familie und Senioren, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, 1992.

17.

Schneekloth

, and Müller

Hilfe und Pflegebedürftigkeit in Heimen. Infratest Sozialforschung, Munich, 1995.

18.

Harrington

Nursing Facilities, Staffing, Residents, and Facility Deficiencies, 1991–1997. University of California, San Francisco, 1999.

19.

Rothgang

, and Vogler

Die Auswirkungen der 2. Stufe der Pflegeversicherung auf die Hilfe zur Pflege in Einrichtungen. Transfer Verlag, Regensburg, 1998.

20.

Newcomer

Harrington

, and Friedlob

Social health maintenance organizations: Assessing their initial experience. Health Serv. Res. 25(3): 425–454, 1990.

21.

Kane

R. L.

SHMOs, the second generation: Building on the experience of the first social health maintenance organization demonstrations. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 45(1): 101–107, 1997.

22.

Kondratowitz

H.-J.

Concepts of Chronical Disease and the New Insurance for Care in Germany. Unpublished paper, 1998.

23.

Geiser

Alterssozialpolitik. In Dortmunder Beiträge zur angewandten Gerontologie, Vol. 5: Alterssozialpolitik. Vincentz Verlag, Cologne, 1996.

24.

Bager

The third sector concept and empirical studies. In Delivering Welfare, edited by Vidal

. CIES, Barcelona, 1994.

25.

Alber

A framework for the comparative study of social services. J. Eur. Soc. Policy 5(2): 131–149, 1995.

26.

Hansen

Qualitätsaspekte Sozialer Dienstleistungen zwischen Professionalisierung und Konsumentenorientierung: Qualitätsdiskurse in Grossbritannien und Deutschland. Z. Sozialreform 43(1): 1–28, 1997.

27.

Estes

C. L.

, and Bodenheimer

Paying for long-term-care: Private insurance or social insurance. West. J. Med. 160(1): 64–69, 1994.

28.

Harrington

A national long-term care program for the United States: A caring vision. In Health Policy and Nursing: Crisis and Reform in the U.S. Health Care Delivery System, edited by Harrington

and Estes

C. L.

. Jones and Bartlett, Boston, 1994.

29.

Alber

The debate about long-term care reform in Germany. In Caring for Frail Elderly People, edited by OECD . OECD, Paris, 1996.

30.

Hinrichs

The impact of German health insurance reforms on redistribution and the culture of solidarity. J. Health Polit. Policy Law 20(3): 653–687, 1995.