Sad story. And one that is repeated time and again across the country and the world.
But the reality is that it is not economically feasible to pay top-dollar for top-quality medical care for each and every individual -- regardless of how altruistically desireable it might be.
The young man in the story had already racked-up more than $2 million in healthcare costs -- or 54 years worth of his mothers' $37,000/year salary. Only the largest of company's with a big insured employee pool might be able to cost-effectively afford such care. So every time a company makes a hire they are also making a bet that the candidates' value (ROI) exceeds their cost.
A national healthcare system might help. But I wouldn't bet on it. Its only chance of success is to implement serious tort reform, pharmaceutical management, administrative cost controls, and creating vastly larger insured pools among fewer insurance companies to spread the costs. All of which will be fought tooth and nail by the firms involved -- who have very deep pockets and thousands of lobbyists.
In the end it is more likely you'll end up with a two-tier system -- one for the wealthy who'll pay for superior private care; and one for everyone else who'll get what the get in Canada or the U.K. (adequate but not so good).