Life and Death: What last nights "decision" could mean, for my family

[sowinskija]

Pretty much yes, as has been the case for a long time. Doctors have been dropping Medicare patients for years. Each time reimbursement is cut, doctors and other healthcare providers must evaluate whether or not they can afford to keep treating Medicare patients.

President Obama is not the first President to make tough choices about Medicare. See PolitiFact:Mitt Romney said Barack Obama robs Medicare of more than $700 billion to pay for Obamacare

"• President Ronald Reagan cut Medicare by reducing payments to hospitals, and he cut benefits by raising deductibles.

• President George H.W. Bush cut benefits by repealing a law that would have expanded coverage for drugs and catastrophic illness.

• President Bill Clinton cut Medicare by changing payments to doctors and other providers, which could be considered to have an indirect effect on beneficiaries."

I’ve had Medicare since 2006, so I understand the difficulties and challenges one faces when Medicare is your only healthcare coverage.

The Drug Formulary has actually improved for me, since 2006. It depends on the medications you take.

Anna

You are correct that medicare has been cut in several cases, but if you look to the long run, spending has actually increased.(Wall Street Journal)
Never, though, has the government empowered 15 unelected officials to make our health choices.

Though you wouldnt touch medicare advantage, about 1 in 10 seniors would. So the ACA not only bankrupts medicare advantage, but also medicare.

 

[SuperLuigi]

]Government health insurance programs are not the only ones to create criteria guidelines for healthcare.

No, but private insurance is governed by the free market forces. Government is not. In fact, government is the problem. Selling across state lines is restricted by government, not by insurance companies.

Also, a lot of the costs aren’t because insurance companies gouge customers, it’s because of the influence the trial lawyers have over the democratic party. A lot of what we pay in medical bills is to help doctors pay lawsuits, many of which are unnecessary, because the tort law is awful.

Then again, if we had reasonable tort law, there would be much less demand for trial lawyer and less contributions for the democrats to get into office.

For years, insurance companies have used all kinds of measures to dictate care, disrupting the doctor-patient relationship and demonstrating the blatant willingness to sacrificing the welfare of patients in the name of profit.

So, it’s only now that you are upset about third parties coming between patient and doctor, and healthcare rationing through criteria guidelines for healthcare?

Rationing means government decides who gets what. Rape victims, women and old people suffer greatly from this.

I hardly think that is the charity Catholic leadership has in mind.

Again, please cite the section(s) of the ACA that support your claim that the U.S. Government will come between you and your doctor on every decision; and the section which you believe demonstrates the creation of “death panels.”

It doesn’t have to be in the ACA for it to happen. Government involvement in health care screws it up and the price control is rationing. It’s happened already in the UK and in Canada.

Supply and demand forces are what cause the doctor shortage and limit the choices and it’s brought on by government interference in the marketplace.

If doctors have to jump through all the hoops in 2700 page bill to get paid only some of the time or six months from the date of seeing the patient, they can’t run a business!

Let’s see how well you’d do and how motivated you’d be to do a good job if you only got paid off and ix months after you turned in a timecard instead of 2 weeks.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Pope, church leaders call for guaranteed health care for all people By Sarah Delaney Catholic News Service

“VATICAN CITY (CNS) – Pope Benedict XVI and other church leaders said it was the moral responsibility of nations to guarantee access to health care for all of their citizens, regardless of social and economic status or their ability to pay.”

Anna

This was addressed in another post on here. The Pope is saying that nations should allow their citizens access to health care.

In this country, (at least before the AHA) we had a law passed in 1986 that said no one could be turned away from emergency room treatment who needed it, including illegals. Hospitals have gone bankrupt over that.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Bill,

It is rare to find such compassion. I pray God’s blessings upon you.

Anna

I’ll believe it when I see it.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I’ve had Medicare since 2006, so I understand the difficulties and challenges one faces when Medicare is your only healthcare coverage.

Obama is cutting Medicare by $716 billion dollars.

They will probably ration your care first because older people and people on Medicare are what they think is driving up the cost and besides, government usually does what is easiest.

 

[sowinskija]

The intention is good, Mr. Luigi

 

[sowinskija]

Bad For Seniors
According to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Office of the Actuaries, about half of all seniors with Medicare Advantage will lose their plans by 2017.

This is summed up nicely with the words of Thomas Jefferson:"A government big enough to give you everything you need, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have…

 

[sowinskija]

Obama is cutting Medicare by $716 billion dollars.

They will probably ration your care first because older people and people on Medicare are what they think is driving up the cost and besides, government usually does what is easiest.

Remember to cite your sources. I believe you are looking at the same Allan West article as me.

 

[sowinskija]

"Other countries have attempted to control costs by fiat before. Their experiences are not comforting.

The British National Health Service’s version of IPAB — known by the oh-so-inappropriate acronym NICE — denied access last month to a wide array of life-saving cancer drugs because it couldn’t “justify their cost.” Patients and their families, of course, may beg to differ."

forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2011/06/13/even-obamacares-supporters-dont-support-the-rationing-board/

 

[Linusthe2nd]

**Linusthe2nd,

Let’s look at these two assumptions, if the OP with allow this expansion of the thread topic.

(Emphasis with bold type and underline is mine throughout)**

John Carter says unaccountable board created by health care overhaul will have ability to come between “you and your doctor” in determining best treatment options ** PolitiFact gave this statement a “False” rating.**

Seniors and the disabled “will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care.” **PolitiFact gave the “death panel” claim a “Pants on Fire” rating.
**
**Government health insurance programs are not the only ones to create criteria guidelines for healthcare.

For years, insurance companies have used all kinds of measures to dictate care, disrupting the doctor-patient relationship and demonstrating the blatant willingness to sacrificing the welfare of patients in the name of profit.**

[Sacrificing Patients for Profits: Physicians Incentives to Limit Care and ERISA Fiduciary Duty](http://lawreview.wustl.edu/(name removed by moderator)rint/77-4/774-1323.pdf)

Look at the offenses, and the fines issued through 2009:
Report of Health Insurer Fines Issued by State Regulatory Agencies

**So, it’s only now that you are upset about third parties coming between patient and doctor, and healthcare rationing through criteria guidelines for healthcare?

Again, please cite the section(s) of the ACA that support your claim that the U.S. Government will come between you and your doctor on every decision; and the section which you believe demonstrates the creation of “death panels.”

Anna

P.S. I do have access to the ACA**. It is online for all to review.

As you say it is on line, read it for yourself. If you don’t believe me, you will shortly. It is not something I care to debate, since it is obvious that many have a financial interest in PPACA or have an ideological ax to grind.

 

[Anna_Scott]

As you say it is on line, read it for yourself. If you don’t believe me, you will shortly. It is not something I care to debate, since it is obvious that many have a financial interest in PPACA or have an ideological ax to grind.

Linusthe2nd,

So, basically, you’re saying you can’t support your claims by quoting the ACA. The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim.

Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

This was addressed in another post on here. The Pope is saying that nations should allow their citizens access to health care.

In this country, (at least before the AHA) we had a law passed in 1986 that said no one could be turned away from emergency room treatment who needed it, including illegals. Hospitals have gone bankrupt over that.

Did you read the article I posted?

 

[sowinskija]

Linusthe2nd,

So, basically, you’re saying you can’t support your claims by quoting the ACA. The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim.

Anna

The idea that a bill will state it’s own impacts is incorrect. A bill says “Congress is going to do this.” not “here are the problems with what Congress is doing.” The problems lie in the implementation, not just the legislation itself. See:
politico.com/news/stories/0810/40561.html

Finding the impacts of legislation is what the Congressional Research Service is for, and I have cited them in my speech. The burden of proof is yours to show that obamacare states it’s own impacts, as you have been saying for two pages.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Obama is cutting Medicare by $716 billion dollars.

They will probably ration your care first because older people and people on Medicare are what they think is driving up the cost and besides, government usually does what is easiest.

SuperLuigi,

Please cite your source.

Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

Page 1 of 2

. . . . .The burden of proof is yours to show that obamacare states it’s own impacts, as you have been saying for two pages.

**Actually, for the last 2 pages of discussion, I provided links for the OP to assist with an application for Medicaid and other resources to help with the care of her mother.

I have responded to the “means of implementation” of the ACA, as they relate to claims such as “death panels,” “the government empowered 15 unelected officials to make our health choices,” and “the U.S. Government will come between you and your doctor on every decision.”

I have also called your attention to insurance companies dictating care, disrupting the doctor-patient relationship and demonstrating the blatant willingness to sacrificing the welfare of patients in the name of profit–which must be understood in order to assess the current state of healthcare in our country.**

PTL. . . .What sections of the Affordable Care Act support the claim of “death panels”?

I’ve done some Internet searches and found some things that may be helpful, especially the first link regarding receiving payment as a caregiver. You could check and see if California participates in this program. Alzheimer’s disease is specifically mentioned.

Receive Payment as a Caregiver: Cash and Counseling Programs

Medicaid’s ‘Cash and Counseling’ Allows Pay for Family Caregivers

Other links that may be helpful:

10 Government Programs You Can Access for Your Elderly Parents

Links for Organizations that can help caregivers get paid

Medicaid Coverage

Supplemental Security Income (SSI)

The Affordable Care Act is Constitutional. Now What?. . .

MarieVeronica,

I would apply for Medicaid and see if you can get coverage. Obama’s Affordable Care Act actually expands Medicaid coverage.

See: Eligibility (Medicaid.gov)

TheRealJuliane & mary bobo,

Are you equally upset about the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid and removal of the million cap many insurance companies impose?

Marie,

This is the link to the healthcare section of barackobama.com: Healthcare- Increasing access and affordability

, which contains the tool:** Learn How Obama Care Benefits You **

It’s really easy to use. I did two test entries (one-person household & two-person household.) It looks like if you are a one-person household making under $15,000/year or part of a two-person household making under $20,000/year; it is now possible to get Medicaid. You will have to apply through your state and see how your unemployment/employment and assets factor into the income requirements, etc. I would apply and see what happens. I’m hoping you can get Medicaid coverage. See: Uninsured? Check out Medicaid & CHIP

Jala,

The same website provides a link to** PCIP.gov** which has tools that might help you get coverage despite pre-existing conditons:

Who’s Eligible for PCIP?
How Much Does PCIP Coverage Cost?
How Soon Can Coverage Start?
Explore All Your Options
Uninsured? Check out Medicaid & CHIP

I hope this is helpful.

TheRealJuliane & mary bobo,

So, basically, you don’t want Jala’s pre-existing condition to be covered. You don’t want money going toward the care needed to prevent suffering.

You don’t care if people suffer or die, because of the care-rationing that has been going on in the private sector for years.

The OP may actually be able to get Medicaid coverage through Obama’s Affordable Care Act. So, you must not want that either–because it might have some effect on you.

People may actually survive a catastrophic illness, now that the million dollar cap-a clear rationing of healthcare–will be removed. So, you must be against that too.

It sounds like, you want a certain standard of care for yourself, without regard for anyone else. Sounds very cold-hearted, especially coming from the mouths of Christians.

I hope your true intentions are not the way they sound in your posts. God help us all, if this is the true mindset of Christians in this country.

Continued–next page

 

[Anna_Scott]

Page 2 of 2

S Elizabeth,

I keep hearing about “death panels” in Obama’s Affordable Care Act. Would you or someone please cite the language from the actual Bill that supports the “death panel” claim? I haven’t been able to find it in H.R.3590 – Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Enrolled Bill [Final as Passed Both House and Senate] - ENR). See Library of Congress

Pope, church leaders call for guaranteed health care for all people By Sarah Delaney Catholic News Service

“VATICAN CITY (CNS) – Pope Benedict XVI and other church leaders said it was the moral responsibility of nations to guarantee access to health care for all of their citizens, regardless of social and economic status or their ability to pay.”

Linusthe2nd,

Would you cite the sections of the Bill that are a concern regarding how it will be implemented?

Also, would the “means of implementation” adversely affect the OP in her particular situation?

**Linusthe2nd,

Let’s look at these two assumptions, if the OP with allow this expansion of the thread topic.

(Emphasis with bold type and underline is mine throughout)**

. . . . How about putting the U.S. Government between you and your doctor on every decision?

. . . .How about leaving it in the hands of government appointed panels to determine the cost effectiveness of certain procedures, the use of certain medicines in certain cases ( these are the death panels).

John Carter says unaccountable board created by health care overhaul will have ability to come between “you and your doctor” in determining best treatment options ** PolitiFact gave this statement a “False” rating.**

Seniors and the disabled “will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care.” PolitiFact gave the “death panel” claim a “Pants on Fire” rating.

**Government health insurance programs are not the only ones to create criteria guidelines for healthcare.

For years, insurance companies have used all kinds of measures to dictate care, disrupting the doctor-patient relationship and demonstrating the blatant willingness to sacrificing the welfare of patients in the name of profit.**

Managed Care Utilization Review and Financial Risk Shifting:Compensating Patients for Health Care Cost Containment

Internal Medicine: Claims/Risk-Reduction Workshop
. . . . .

Hospice Patients Alliance “Lynching the Elderly and Disabled” Why We Need an Elder Justice Act. . . .

[Sacrificing Patients for Profits: Physicians Incentives to Limit Care and ERISA Fiduciary Duty](http://lawreview.wustl.edu/(name removed by moderator)rint/77-4/774-1323.pdf). . . .

Look at the offenses, and the fines issued through 2009:
Report of Health Insurer Fines Issued by State Regulatory Agencies. . . .

Linusthe2nd,

So, basically, you’re saying you can’t support your claims by quoting the ACA. The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim.

In the above post, I am referring to these two claims you made, for which you have provided no support from the ACA:

. . . . How about putting the U.S. Government between you and your doctor on every decision?

. . . .How about leaving it in the hands of government appointed panels to determine the cost effectiveness of certain procedures, the use of certain medicines in certain cases ( these are the death panels).

**How the ACA affects the economy and religious freedom are important, but separate issues from the focus of my posts. Though, they are a useful diversion to avoid answering my questions and addressing the issues I’ve raised, or the OP’s dilemma–a dilemma that may be replaced with healthcare for the OP under the ACA.

Anna**

 

[sowinskija]

Dear Anna,

Sorry for the late response. Here’s the bottom line. The Catholic Church is vehemently opposed to the Affordable Care Act because it is an assault to religious freedom. Please see my earlier Cardinal Dolan quote, the fact that over 40 Catholic institutions are suing the Obama Administration, or simply search the term “Obamacare” on Catholic.org. We may disagree on the ACA’s effects on the economy, our seniors, or our freedoms, but the fact remains-- the ACA is blatantly anti-Catholic and contrary to Church teaching.

 

[DarkLight]

Dear Anna,

Sorry for the late response. Here’s the bottom line. The Catholic Church is vehemently opposed to the Affordable Care Act because it is an assault to religious freedom. Please see my earlier Cardinal Dolan quote, the fact that over 40 Catholic institutions are suing the Obama Administration, or simply search the term “Obamacare” on Catholic.org. We may disagree on the ACA’s effects on the economy, our seniors, or our freedoms, but the fact remains-- the ACA is blatantly anti-Catholic and contrary to Church teaching.

Thing is, the abortion and contraception mandates are the only parts, so far as I am aware, that are contrary to Church teaching. I see no reason why a Catholic could not be in favor of the rest of the bill - or as I personally hope, that just those pieces get struck down and the rest goes into law.

What seems to be at issue here, however, is the requirement for everyone to have health insurance. That is a separate issue from the abortion and contraception discussions, and bringing them up here is rather a diversion. I see nothing inherently immoral in requiring everyone to have health insurance, so we are left with the other questions.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

TheRealJuliane & mary bobo,

So, basically, you don’t want Jala’s pre-existing condition to be covered. You don’t want money going toward the care needed to prevent suffering.

You don’t care if people suffer or die, because of the care-rationing that has been going on in the private sector for years.

The OP may actually be able to get Medicaid coverage through Obama’s Affordable Care Act. So, you must not want that either–because it might have some effect on you.

People may actually survive a catastrophic illness, now that the million dollar cap-a clear rationing of healthcare–will be removed. So, you must be against that too.

It sounds like, you want a certain standard of care for yourself, without regard for anyone else. Sounds very cold-hearted, especially coming from the mouths of Christians.

I hope your true intentions are not the way they sound in your posts. God help us all, if this is the true mindset of Christians in this country.

Anna

This was an extremely RUDE and uncharitable post. I said nothing of the sort and neither did the other poster. You are assigning viewpoints to me that I do not hold, not very Christian of you.

I would ask you not to make these kinds of ridiculous statements toward me again.

 

[Anna_Scott]

This was an extremely RUDE and uncharitable post. I said nothing of the sort and neither did the other poster. You are assigning viewpoints to me that I do not hold, not very Christian of you.

I would ask you not to make these kinds of ridiculous statements toward me again.

I just couldn’t believe you were arguing against covering preexisting conditions in response to Jala’s post describing his suffering from this lack of coverage.

I don’t understand any of it myself.

But I do know this: I have a good job with good health care insurance. Several years ago I had to have a relatively minor surgery, and it nearly bankrupted me. Even “good” insurance has deductibles, co-pays, and doesn’t cover everything. It literally took me years to pay it off–even with insurance.

Due to the diagnosis at that surgery, I now have a pre-existing condition that will require two MAJOR (and far more expensive) surgeries within the next few years, and months of physical therapy. There is no way I can afford it without some sort of healthcare reform. I don’t know how much Obama’s plan will help me, but I’m eager to find out.

Otherwise, I’ll just be crippled and in pain for the rest of my life.

Well, I can tell you for certain that it won’t help over time. The insurance companies are being forced to cover pre-existing conditions, which means they will lose money. If they lose money over time, they will go out of business. . . . .“Free health care” - you get what you pay for. Anyway, it’s not even free and it still won’t be half of what we have enjoyed to this point.

And in my opinion, that has been the plan all along. How dare anyone have a better plan than the next fellow. Obamacare is going to bring us all down to the lowest common denominator.

TheRealJuliane;9997762:

Well, I can tell you for certain that it won’t help over time. The insurance companies are being forced to cover pre-existing conditions, which means they will lose money. If they lose money over time, they will go out of business.

I am employed by a healthcare company. Trust me, they could “lose money” to the tune of 99% and still be far wealthier than you or I. It is truly mind-boggling how much money is in this business.

What do you suggest people who have pre-existing conditions do, if insurance won’t cover their treatments? As I stated in my previous post, I will be a cripple for the rest of my life without these surgeries. At least, praise Jah, it is only a “quality of life” issue and not life-threatening, but what about people who will die otherwise?

“Free health care” - you get what you pay for. Anyway, it’s not even free and it still won’t be half of what we have enjoyed to this point.

I have numerous Canadian friends (of varying ages) who are thrilled to pieces with their healthcare. One of the alleged “downsides” that other US citizens have voiced is “you have to wait months for surgery.” I had to wait 4 months for mine here in the US (which was “as soon as possible”), so I don’t see any difference there…

TheRealJuliane & mary bobo,

So, basically, you don’t want Jala’s pre-existing condition to be covered. You don’t want money going toward the care needed to prevent suffering.

You don’t care if people suffer or die, because of the care-rationing that has been going on in the private sector for years.

The OP may actually be able to get Medicaid coverage through Obama’s Affordable Care Act. So, you must not want that either–because it might have some effect on you.

People may actually survive a catastrophic illness, now that the million dollar cap-a clear rationing of healthcare–will be removed. So, you must be against that too.

It sounds like, you want a certain standard of care for yourself, without regard for anyone else. Sounds very cold-hearted, especially coming from the mouths of Christians.

I hope your true intentions are not the way they sound in your posts. God help us all, if this is the true mindset of Christians in this country.

Anna

I say this kind of stuff on here all the time, so I’m glad when someone else says it. Because the GOP is the “pro-life” party, it seems that many on this site automatically believe that all conservative ideals align with Christianity, when it simply isn’t the case. I read so many things on here that seem very un-Christian and selfish. I’m a med student, so I actually know quite a bit about Obamacare, and it honestly seems like one of the most Christian ideals of our time. Care for the poor, sick, and needy. Straight from the mouth of Jesus himself. I don’t have the time to even begin to comment on how much wrong information has been said about Obamacare in here, but apparently a lot of people, including the OP, would rather complain than actually learn about a mandate that could help them. And if it can’t help them personally, then I wish they would take into account all of the people who will be helped.

Et cetera,
Thanks for saying what I’ve been thinking. . . . .Doesn’t the Democratic principle of using government to help people more closely mirror Catholic teaching on our responsibility to the less fortunate in our society?

As I said, I hope your true intentions are not the way they sound in your posts.

So, do you still think Jala’s pre-existing conditions should not be covered?

Do agree with the removal of million dollar caps on lifetime coverage?

Do you agree with the expansion of Medicaid?