The Real Villain in Healthcare is the System, Not Just the CEO

Photo by National Cancer Institute

The news of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson’s death sent shockwaves across the corporate and healthcare worlds. But what was even more disturbing was the public reaction—particularly the celebration of his death by some who viewed him as a symbol of greed and cruelty in the U.S. healthcare system.

George Kailas‘ piece, The Laziest Revolution is Dancing on Graves (Fast Company), cuts through the noise with a simple but uncomfortable truth: we are directing our anger at the wrong target. The rage should not be at Thompson as an individual but at the system that shaped him. And if we are serious about reform, we need to move beyond symbolic outrage and take meaningful action.

It’s easy to demonize Thompson for the 33% claim rejection rate UnitedHealthcare oversaw under his leadership. But the truth is, he was doing exactly what he was hired to do—maximize profits. This is not a case of one man’s moral failing; this is the system functioning as designed.

The U.S. healthcare industry isn’t built on ethics or a sense of duty to the sick; it is built on capitalism. Publicly traded healthcare companies answer to shareholders, not patients. The expectation is growth, cost-cutting, and increased profitability. CEOs are financially incentivized to deny claims and reduce expenses because their compensation is tied to stock performance. This is the framework we have allowed to take root through policy and legislative decisions made over decades.

If we are to be outraged, let it be at the system that turns healthcare into a profit-driven industry, rather than a basic human right. Let it be at the lawmakers who continue to allow it.

Kailas is right in pointing out the hypocrisy of those celebrating Thompson’s death while continuing to vote for leaders who refuse to take action on healthcare reform. Social media outrage is a poor substitute for policy change, yet time and time again, we see people engage in performative activism rather than substantive action.

The same people who criticize UnitedHealthcare’s rejection rates often fail to push for universal healthcare or greater regulations on insurance providers. They will take to Twitter to rage against a billionaire CEO but fail to show up at the polls or hold their representatives accountable.

If we truly care about making healthcare more accessible and equitable, our focus should be on pushing for policies that force transparency in medical billing, reduce the influence of insurance companies in care decisions, and ultimately move toward a system where profit does not come before patient welfare.

A major issue in modern discourse is our tendency to look for villains instead of understanding systemic failures. This happens in finance, politics, and now, healthcare. People need a face to blame because it makes complex issues feel simpler. But while focusing on one person provides temporary catharsis, it does little to address the underlying dysfunction.

The truth is, if Thompson had resigned, another CEO with the same incentive structure would have taken his place and continued denying claims to meet corporate profit goals. Killing the king does not change the monarchy—it simply crowns a new ruler.

There is a deeper conversation that needs to happen. One that moves beyond outrage and focuses on systemic solutions.

Kailas argues that real change requires effort, not just cynicism. He’s right. If we want to see a shift in healthcare, we have to demand it from those in power, vote for candidates who advocate for comprehensive reform, and be willing to tackle the uncomfortable reality that we, as a society, have enabled this system by tolerating its existence for decades.

Healthcare in America will not change through the death of one executive. It will change when we stop treating it as a marketplace and start treating it as a necessity. Until then, all the anger in the world won’t stop the next CEO from stepping in and continuing business as usual.