Health Care reform from a Doctors perspective

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe from the Catholic perspective that then you’d be in Heaven. But given the choice right now to die or be underfed, I’d pick underfed.
 
Arwen037 said:
Going bankrupt isn’t dying. And it’s millions of leeches (your word), not one. 1/3 of the country is on government assistance. They may not have a comfy life, they may be in debt, but that’s still alive.
Click to expand...
I’m going to likely end up being disabled because of my lack of insurance. I cannot afford physical therapy. Right now I can barely walk and I don’t know how I’ll ever work again.
 
pathia said:
I’m going to likely end up being disabled because of my lack of insurance. I cannot afford physical therapy. Right now I can barely walk and I don’t know how I’ll ever work again.
Click to expand...
I know that you do not like government programs, but if we did not have insurance and government programs then the cost of health care would be much lower–we might not have as high a quality, but I do believe that the costs of similar things would be much lower.

It sounds like you *are *currently unable to work. It is no crime to accept what help is out there, even if you do disagree with the method of its transmission. Part of your problem is the result of the government’s intervening, and so you might as well accept that you are in a situation not of your own making and apply for the aid which has been set up to help those who actually are in your situation. It certainly sounds like you would qualify for SSS and your state health insurance.
 
St_Francis said:
I know that you do not like government programs, but if we did not have insurance and government programs then the cost of health care would be much lower–we might not have as high a quality, but I do believe that the costs of similar things would be much lower.

It sounds like you *are *currently unable to work. It is no crime to accept what help is out there, even if you do disagree with the method of its transmission. Part of your problem is the result of the government’s intervening, and so you might as well accept that you are in a situation not of your own making and apply for the aid which has been set up to help those who actually are in your situation. It certainly sounds like you would qualify for SSS and your state health insurance.
Click to expand...
The only reason I am in this situation is because I couldn’t afford preventive care. If I had insurance, none of this would have ever happened. The blood clots that have disabled me were completely preventable, but simply too expensive for me to afford.

The current medical policy in this country has disabled me, someone who was fully capable of working, until just a few weeks ago.

If it was ‘cheaper’ would be be ten times cheaper, twenty? That’s how much it would have to be for me to have been able to afford it. My bills eclipse what I would have earned in TWO DECADES of work.
 
pathia said:
If you work some, but not enough, you get screwed over like I do.
Click to expand...
You are right. When government gets involved they disrupt the balance. There should not be rewards for those who work less.
 
royal_archer said:
You are right. When government gets involved they disrupt the balance. There should not be rewards for those who work less.
Click to expand...
Without the government I would be dead. If doctors could refuse treating me, they would. I’ve waited in a ER for them to find a ‘gay friendly’ doctor, because no one else wanted to touch me, because they assumed I had HIV (I don’t).
 
aspawloski4th said:
The way I am in my personal life should have no effect on a job whatsoever. When applying for a job Im dressed up, soft spoken, and stick to the point( the job) Thats it. A job isn’t social hour, it is time to work and get things done. Anything else ie office politics, or personality cults serve no function in business and when those things hurt good workers are a sin. Basically when at work, I come to work with no mood good or bad and just do my job. . Its how you define leaches and the fact you harp on it that shows a nasty attitude, you are paranoid about it. You’d rather have millions die rather than one leach getting more than they deserve, which is a very unChristian attitude in the eyes of most. If this were 1970, I’d be hired in a job by now, but management even for typical general labor thinks outside the box even in industories that have nothing special about them. Jobs are not about getting thinks done anymore, they are about fitting in the clique.
Click to expand...
Do you think you are the only one who has to deal with this? Sometimes my day’s greatest accomplishment is not telling off someone who desparately deserves it. But we all have to deal with this. So, sorry but you aren’t going to get much sympathy from me on that aspect.
 
Di_bear said:
Wrong. Read my previous post.

It is not the American government’s responsibility to insure the American people, nor is it their responsibility to have an effect on any homeland laws. Those are to be left to the individual states. The states are supposed to be independent of the government. The purpose of the federal government IS foreign affairs. With that in mind, you can already see that the federal government has way too much power. They regulate where they were never intended to have power. A lot of our problems stem from federal policies, which often create inefficiency, which is exactly the influence they had on healthcare.

This little jewel is said of the Michigan state government, and it can definitely be applied to the feds: “The only time the Michigan legislature doesn’t screw up is when they are not in session.”
Click to expand...
I agree that the federal government has way too much power. States’ rights are a hot issue with me. I used to live in California and we were told that federal law mandated free medical emergency care to those in our country illegally. And yes, it should be that way because nobody should be denied emergency medical care. But the federal government decided that to mandate health coverage for illegals would take care of the problem. They didn’t provide the funds. So the State of California had a federal mandate and no federal funds. That is just plain wrong. If the federal government mandates anything the federal government should provide the funding.
 
pathia said:
Abundant charity? Like the ones that wouldn’t even let me into their shelters when I was homeless in the dead of winter? Give me a break. Just because it’s there doesn’t meant they want to give it to anyone/everyone that’s actually in need, especially if they’re part of some subgroup they despise. I was denied charity, just because they did not agree with my ‘lifestyle’.
Click to expand...
Pathia, I am very sorry that happened to you. If you had been where I lived it wouldn’t have happened. I live in a small town and because of that we are able to provide shelter and food for people who are caught in that awful trap. I am very saddened by your post. It shouldn’t happen. Some people are more concerned with stray dogs than with human beings. I am just so sorry.
 
pathia said:
Without the government I would be dead. If doctors could refuse treating me, they would. I’ve waited in a ER for them to find a ‘gay friendly’ doctor, because no one else wanted to touch me, because they assumed I had HIV (I don’t).
Click to expand...
The same government that allows millions of children to be murdered by their mothers?
 
pathia said:
Without the government I would be dead. If doctors could refuse treating me, they would. I’ve waited in a ER for them to find a ‘gay friendly’ doctor, because no one else wanted to touch me, because they assumed I had HIV (I don’t).
Click to expand...
Even if a person has HIV they should not be denied care for hours. There are precautions that need to be taken but ER personnel should be aware of those. And not every person with HIV is gay. A lot are what are considered to have a “normal” lifestyle. ER personnel should know that, too.

It’s not a reason to deny or delay care for anyone. I’m sure it happens, but it shouldn’t.
 
LittleSoldier said:
I agree that the federal government has way too much power. States’ rights are a hot issue with me. I used to live in California and we were told that federal law mandated free medical emergency care to those in our country illegally. And yes, it should be that way because nobody should be denied emergency medical care. But the federal government decided that to mandate health coverage for illegals would take care of the problem. They didn’t provide the funds. So the State of California had a federal mandate and no federal funds. That is just plain wrong. If the federal government mandates anything the federal government should provide the funding.
Click to expand...
In that case the country of origin should also be held accountable for the funding.
 
royal_archer said:
The same government that allows millions of children to be murdered by their mothers?
Click to expand...
Yes, the very same government. I am counting on getting Medicare from a government that believes taxpayers should pay for murdering children. Do you understand now why I am confused? Why I am angry? Why I get into the abortion debates here on CAF and I feel like a dog with a chew toy and I’m trying my best to hold onto that toy and on the other end is a government that doesn’t seem to understand why that toy is so important to me? I FIGHT for the rights of the unborn.

Am I being a hypocrite for asking for Medicare? If you say “yes” you are correct. I am a hypocrite. I am also ill and I can’t afford the $800 a month my employer expects me to pay for basic health coverage.

We need to change that. We CAN’T ALLOW THE GOVERNMENT TO PASS ANY SORT OF NATIONAL HEALTH PLAN WHICH COVERS ABORTION (except in cases where the mother’s life is at stake, per the Catechism of the Catholic Church).
 
royal_archer said:
The same government that allows millions of children to be murdered by their mothers?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately yes, while it has to do with insurance (Whether the government will pay for it or not) it’s moot. Insurance companies pay for it, more or less all of them. Likely you are insured by a private company that pays for abortions. It’s in their best interest, as abortion is cheaper than a birth. Money seems to be all you care about, so don’t you understand that? Abortion==cheaper.
 
ComputerGeek25 said:
I don’t think that’s entriely correct.
Click to expand...
I may not have worded that correctly. What I should have written is that the Catholic Church does not consider removal of an unborn child as an abortion when it is done in an effort to save the mother’s life. An example would be an ectopic pregnancy where both child and mother will die. The Church teaches that the death of the unborn child is a consequence of the saving of the mother’s life, not an ends in itself.

But, medically speaking, in many cases it is still an abortion.

I get frustrated with this because it doesn’t seem to matter how I put it. If I say abortion is wrong someone jumps on me about “what if the mother’s life is at stake?” If I say abortion is wrong except in cases where it is needed to save the mother’s life I am told that I am weakening the prolife cause and I shouldn’t say that.

So I’ll find the part in the Catechism where the Church makes it clear that in these cases it is acceptable and it isn’t considered to be an abortion. It was discussed on a previous thread but unfortunately the entire thread was removed by CAF (and it probably should have been). There is no copy.
 
St_Francis said:
I know that you do not like government programs, but if we did not have insurance and government programs then the cost of health care would be much lower–we might not have as high a quality, but I do believe that the costs of similar things would be much lower.

It sounds like you *are *currently unable to work. It is no crime to accept what help is out there, even if you do disagree with the method of its transmission. Part of your problem is the result of the government’s intervening, and so you might as well accept that you are in a situation not of your own making and apply for the aid which has been set up to help those who actually are in your situation. It certainly sounds like you would qualify for SSS and your state health insurance.
Click to expand...
If Pathia were in my situation he/she would find out that Social Security automatically denies most claims twice and forces the injured person to hire an attorney who takes his/her cut. I am in this position now. I have been trying to get Social Security for over fifteen years. I don’t care about the money. It’s the Medicare I want and need.

My state health insurance program is not accepting anyone unless they have a dependent. If Pathia does not have a dependent he/she will not be eligible. Period. End of story. Pathia can leave the state or die in the gutter. The State of Oregon will do nothing for Pathia except provide him/her with emergency care. If the state provided preventive care Pathia would not need emergency care. Emergency care here is extremely expensive and it will take every last cent Pathia has, even in a Catholic hospital. I owe a Catholic hospital $2,000 for five stitches in my hand. Next time I’ll just glue my hand back together. I’m not kidding.

If the government hired people that actually could think and took their suggestions seriously, the government would understand that providing people like Pathia with preventive care would be much less expensive than paying for emergency care. Pathia would be provided with the care he/she needs. The government would be spending less money for Pathia’s care. It’s a win-win situation. Why isn’t this happening?

Could it be that the federal government is a bloated bureaucracy with so much pork and so little ethics that it can’t be done? Is it because the people who make the decisions have never lived on the streets or have been removed from the way most people in this country live for such a long time that they have lost touch with those they represent? Is it going to be run like most government programs; i.e. losing money, taking bribes, immoral, unethical? I think so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top