Health Care: liberal Canadian M.P. comes to USA for surgery

[melensdad]

I’m really confused about the whole issue of health care. On the one hand, here in the USA we have a great emergency health care system, nobody is denied treatment who walks into the emergency room of any hospital and if they can’t pay, they still get treatment. They may get treated, stabilized and then transfered to a different hospital, but they get what they need and, if necessary, the government picks up the tab. So I have no concern with emergency care in the US.

Then there is daily care. What SHOULD we expect and WHO should pay for it? I feel that I am obligated not to be a drag on society so I am obligated to pay my way, regardless of if it be health care, food, clothing, etc. I also understand that there are those who cannot pay their way due to unfortunate circumstances and I am willing to pay for them too.

But then there are folks who CHOOSE not to pay. Perhaps they COULD pay, but it would cost them a lifestyle choice. For example they might not be able to afford quite as nice a car, or they might have to live in a smaller apartment or or smaller home. So am I obligated to support them? It costs me dearly to pay my way, I could easily find other uses for that money!!! And it would be a lot more fun if I did use that money for a nicer car, bigger home, swimming pool payments, etc.

So with that in mind there is the newest proposal to have a government universal health care system. It is proposed now and is sponsored by Senator Clinton and will be debated in the US Senate soon.

Am I wrong in presuming that many who “choose” not to pay their way, but “could” pay for their own insurance look at this as a great thing?

Am I wrong to suggest it is immoral for those who can pay, but choose not to buy insurance, would simply be stealing from those who make better life choices?

Am I wrong to suggest that it is immoral for those who can pay, but would prefer to have the government transfer insurace from private to public, on the grounds they are simply being selfish and are trying to get others to pay for them?

And then I look at this article from Canada!

**Stronach went to U.S. for cancer treatment: report
**
Updated Fri. Sep. 14 2007 7:57 AM ET
CTV.ca News Staff

Liberal MP Belinda Stronach, who is battling breast cancer, travelled to California last June for an operation that was recommended as part of her treatment, says a report.

Stronach’s spokesman, Greg MacEachern, told the Toronto Star that the MP for Newmarket-Aurora had a “later-stage” operation in the U.S. after a Toronto doctor referred her.

“Belinda had one of her later-stage operations in California, after referral from her personal physicians in Toronto. Prior to this, Belinda had surgery and treatment in Toronto, and continues to receive follow-up treatment there,” said MacEachern.

He said speed was not the reason why she went to California.
Instead, MacEachern said the decision was made because the U.S. hospital was the best place to have it done due to the type of surgery required.

Stronach was diagnosed last spring with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The cancer is one of the more treatable forms but Stronach still required a mastectomy – which was done in Toronto – and breast reconstruction.
Stronach, who announced last April she would be leaving politics before the next election, paid for the surgery in the U.S., reports the Star.
“As we said back in June when we confirmed the surgery, this is a personal and private matter between Belinda, her family and her physicians. I think you’ll understand that because of respect for Belinda’s privacy, we refrained from offering specific details around her medical treatment,” said MacEachern.

While it is rare for MPs to seek treatment outside Canada, MacEachern said Stronach was not lacking confidence in the system.

“In fact, Belinda thinks very highly of the Canadian health-care system, and uses it when needed for herself and her children, as do all Canadians. As well, her family has clearly demonstrated that support,” MacEachern told the Star.

MacEachern did not offer any other details regarding what type of surgery Stronach had or what she paid for it.

So if US hospitals are the BEST PLACE to have surgeries, why would we want to adopt a system that clearly rations health care and prevents its resources from attaining world standard levels of quality?

 

[vern_humphrey]

You’d think the Canadian power strucrture would be doing their best to see the United States does not adopt “universal health care.” After all, if we adopt something on the Canadian model, where will the upscale Canadians go when their system fails them?

 

[Della]

You’re absolutely right, melensdad! The liberal left always pretends that human nature won’t find a way to misuse the system, but real people know better.

And I’m with you–I don’t want some government flunky telling me and mine what health care we can have and what we can’t. Does anybody in their right mind want that?

 

[melensdad]

You’d think the Canadian power strucrture would be doing their best to see the United States does not adopt “universal health care.” After all, if we adopt something on the Canadian model, where will the upscale Canadians go when their system fails them?

I dunno.

But I do have 1 Canadian friend who lives in Canada. He and I both suffer from Kidney Stones. Both of us had some large stones, both of us needed the same treatment. I spent 1 night in the hospital, was then scheduled for outpatient treatment called “lithotripsy” (sp?). Two days later I was “cured” and back to work.

Brian, my Canadian friend, waited 6 weeks. Was off work for that time. Did get good care, but spent a couple weeks in the hospital (not the whole 6 weeks). Drove to another hospital for his scheduled treatment and was admitted for a couple more days.

Not sure what his treatment cost, not sure what mine cost. But I didn’t lose 6 weeks of work, I lost 3 days. That is a cost that is rarely considered. We both had the exact same treatment. My care was excellent. From my mind, he endured WEEKS OF PAIN, was forced to take Morphine and Vicodin pain killers for an extended period of time for no reason whatsoever! The social cost of his proceedure must include the costs of 2 hospital visits and the financial costs of him missing work for 6 weeks. I don’t know about most of you, but my budget does not allow me to skip 6 paychecks in a row and still pay my bills Private insurance costs less than losing a month and a half’s pay.

You’re absolutely right, melensdad! The liberal left always pretends that human nature won’t find a way to misuse the system, but real people know better.

And I’m with you–I don’t want some government flunky telling me and mine what health care we can have and what we can’t. Does anybody in their right mind want that?

Take a look at the new proposal being considered.

If employers cannot afford to pay private health insurance then people will have to go onto the government system. Tell me please, if an employer can drop its insurance plan why wouldn’t it?

I believe the plan designers are expecting employers to drop private plans.

I believe they are using budget numbers assuming employers do NOT drop their private health plans.

So I believe we are (1) being lied to and (2) the costs will be WELL HIGHER than the projections, consequently the system will end up as a Canadian style 1 payer system and we will lose options, chioces and have our care “rationed” by the government.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I dunno.

But I do have 1 Canadian friend who lives in Canada. He and I both suffer from Kidney Stones. Both of us had some large stones, both of us needed the same treatment. I spent 1 night in the hospital, was then scheduled for outpatient treatment called “lithotripsy” (sp?). Two days later I was “cured” and back to work.

Brian, my Canadian friend, waited 6 weeks. Was off work for that time. Did get good care, but spent a couple weeks in the hospital (not the whole 6 weeks). Drove to another hospital for his scheduled treatment and was admitted for a couple more days.

Not sure what his treatment cost, not sure what mine cost. But I didn’t lose 6 weeks of work, I lost 3 days. That is a cost that is rarely considered. We both had the exact same treatment. My care was excellent. From my mind, he endured WEEKS OF PAIN, was forced to take Morphine and Vicodin pain killers for an extended period of time for no reason whatsoever! The social cost of his proceedure must include the costs of 2 hospital visits and the financial costs of him missing work for 6 weeks. I don’t know about most of you, but my budget does not allow me to skip 6 paychecks in a row and still pay my bills Private insurance costs less than losing a month and a half’s pay.

Take a look at the new proposal being considered.

If employers cannot afford to pay private health insurance then people will have to go onto the government system. Tell me please, if an employer can drop its insurance plan why wouldn’t it?

I believe the plan designers are expecting employers to drop private plans.

I believe they are using budget numbers assuming employers do NOT drop their private health plans.

So I believe we are (1) being lied to and (2) the costs will be WELL HIGHER than the projections, consequently the system will end up as a Canadian style 1 payer system and we will lose options, chioces and have our care “rationed” by the government.

You have just explained some of the many hidden costs of “universal health care.”

No one cares more than you do about you and your loved ones. It doesn’t make sense, then to turn the most important decisions about their welfare over to some bureaucrat.

 

[melensdad]

You have just explained some of the many hidden costs of “universal health care.”

No one cares more than you do about you and your loved ones. It doesn’t make sense, then to turn the most important decisions about their welfare over to some bureaucrat.

Vern, no argument that there are many hidden costs, and there are probably many hidden benefits.

And again, no argument that nobody cares more than a family member about the care given to another family member.

But what “moral right” is there to health care beyond basic services for the poor?

Does the middle class have a right to drop out of the paying system to get the so-called free universal care?

Is it morally right to require “means testing” before someone is allowed “free care” so that if someone making $70,000 per year would be require to pay, but someone making minimum wage would be given free care?