Universal Health Insurance (2)

[pathia]

You’ve mentioned “begging” a number of times, so I think it is worth noting that in all my years working for and with privately funded social services agencies, I never once saw anyone crawl on their knees or beg to receive services. For that matter, I don’t ever remember even thinking about having someone do that. -

When did I ever mention charities? Don’t put words in my mouth. You’ve done this several times before and I didn’t fuss about it, but I will this time.

I make too much to apply to any of those. Most require that you be under 300% of the poverty level, which I am not, or at least I wasn’t until I had to leave my job due to my health issues.

This means I have to resort to getting money from family, friends and associates, because I am ‘too well off’ to have any organized charity’s work apply to me.

 

[SFTor]

You’ve mentioned “begging” a number of times, so I think it is worth noting that in all my years working for and with privately funded social services agencies, I never once saw anyone crawl on their knees or beg to receive services. For that matter, I don’t ever remember even thinking about having someone do that.

When can we finally put this “private charity” business to rest? It does not begin to address the issue.

It is nothing but a smoke screen for people who do not want to address a social issue of a far greater magnitude than private charity could ever handle.

Respectfully,

Tor

 

[stevegravy]

One of the big oversights in all these debates about public vs private healthcare is the assumption that private healthcare is somehow customer-run and value-neutral. It is not.

Why are some people so scared of trusting their government (whether Federal or State) who they elected, and who are accountable to the electorate, but quite happy to trust private companies who are only accountable to their share-holders for the profits they make!

If the choice were between health-insurance co-operatives run at local level where people agreed to share their wealth with one another as any had need, and government healthcare, sure, there would be an argument against getting government bureaucracy involved. This isn’t about that, it’s about huge companies with expensive bureaucracies, who exist not to help people get healthcare but to help their shareholders to get rich.

This is where I think the rub starts. We the folks that have to live under the system don’t trust the folks who are going to design the systems policies.

By way of an example.

I have just come from a long term survivor conference arranged by the Cincinnati Childrens Hospital 5+ clinic. The children who have suffered childhood cancers and survived for five years and off treatment for two are followed by this clinic’s docs for the rest of their lives, if they chose. Please be aware that the progress in medical technology in treating children with cancers has made this type a clinic a real need. Yet the clinic would not be half what it is without the ATP Tennis Tournament, which every year for the last ten or more years generated $250,000 for the clinic also there is the copious number of grants from NIH and all the other charities that provide funds for cancer research. But coming to the clinic still isn’t free; they charge a fee for services and testing and for those who thrive with cancer that means a lot of testing. Because, even if these kids beat their primary cancer half may end up with a secondary cancer that will show up 5-15 years after treatment sometimes as a result of their treatment. For others their treatments will induce cardio-pulmonary disease, nerve damage, and neuropathy a whole laundry list of side affects.

Here is the rub once when these kids turn 18 or 25 years of age if they stay in school to attend college, they are dropped from their parents medical insurance and have to contract their own. That isn’t going to happen because it is a preexisting condition. If my son wasn’t receiving SSI for which we had to get a lawyer to appeal an original denial to an administrative judge he wouldn’t be receiving medicaid. His deficits are many and profound and we would have been impoverished without his getting on medicaid which the government wants to kick him off of every other year. So, every other year it is a repeat of the same hassle to keep him qualified.

Why worry about universal health insurance or care if there isn’t a means test like the currently existing one for Medicaid and SSI. There is a thread on these forums somewhere how in Oregon medicaid denied someone an additional round of an expensive chemotherapy because of the likelihood of its failure and offered the guy assisted suicide instead. (That has me concerned.) But, from the parents story this weekend it seems private care can be as shoddy as public care. Oscarthecat gives a great example of someone who showed due diligence in taking care of his medical needs. But, some of the folks at the conference were not so lucky. In one case a mom and dad had to use an HMO where the doctors seemed to be rewarded for not running expensive test. So, they said their son went several years with symptoms of a childhood brain tumor. Finally after years of complaining and getting nowhere with the HMO doctors they went outside the HMO and got a proper testing work up and a diagnosis was made and treatment begun. (I didn’t ask if they sued the HMo for malpractice.) But, there wqere several parents with similar stories to tell.

If this country were to go to a universal health insurance or care, I say it has to be clearly spelled out that no policy or treatment option would be made available to a member of congress that would not be available to the general public. Unless congress makes the rules apply to them the same that we have to live under we are going to be ruined.

 

[Oscarthecat]

When can we finally put this Universal Health Care business to rest? It does not begin to address the issue.

It is nothing but a smoke screen for people who do not want to address a social issue of a far greater magnitude than the government could ever handle.

 

[cynic]

The issue is a certain of people wanting healthcare when they obviously don’t deserve it.

 

[goofyjim]

For those who don’t believe the government should be involved, why did the president just sign a bill to give relief to homeowners. It’s obvious that help goes to a select few. Maybe the housing crisis should have just been allowed to keep going with no bailout from the government. If we can provide relif for homeowners we can get healthcare for those who need it.

 

[jman507]

For those who don’t believe the government should be involved, why did the president just sign a bill to give relief to homeowners. It’s obvious that help goes to a select few. Maybe the housing crisis should have just been allowed to keep going with no bailout from the government. If we can provide relif for homeowners we can get healthcare for those who need it.

Who says, a person will think that is proper either. That could go down under a two wrongs don’t make a right. Also another could make an argument that the situation is different from the health care situation; possibly a one-time bail-out program is different from an additional entitlement program. Who knows, everyone will have a slightly different philosophy as they approach the question.

 

[DL82]

One thing that could be done (at a minumum) in the US, would be to extend the provisions of the ADA to cover health insurance, so that people with long-term pre-existing conditions cannot be refused healthcare on those grounds.

I can understand there are problems if someone signs up for healthcare insurance the day after they’re diagnosed with cancer, and cancels their insurance the day they go into remission, that’s abusing the system.

All the same, people with long-term conditions, like stevegravy, or people with disabilities, shouldn’t be turned down for healthcare, and shouldn’t have to pay more for it either.

Of course, if the insurance companies had to charge those people the same as everybody else, you’d end up with a system where everyone was paying the same, and if that happened, it wouldn’t really matter whether people were paying private companies or the state, because you would have something approaching a universally available healthcare system.

 

[goofyjim]

One thing that could be done (at a minumum) in the US, would be to extend the provisions of the ADA to cover health insurance, so that people with long-term pre-existing conditions cannot be refused healthcare on those grounds.

I can understand there are problems if someone signs up for healthcare insurance the day after they’re diagnosed with cancer, and cancels their insurance the day they go into remission, that’s abusing the system.

All the same, people with long-term conditions, like stevegravy, or people with disabilities, shouldn’t be turned down for healthcare, and shouldn’t have to pay more for it either.

Of course, if the insurance companies had to charge those people the same as everybody else, you’d end up with a system where everyone was paying the same, and if that happened, it wouldn’t really matter whether people were paying private companies or the state, because you would have something approaching a universally available healthcare system.

Hey I prefer to have it done through private insurers but the key thing is that It should be universally available. So your idea is what I have been trying to get around to for some time. Require insurers to cover preexisting conditions without charging the insured more than anyone else.

 

[Oscarthecat]

Ask the folks in Katrina Land what happens when you trust the govt.

It was Wal Mart and its vast, efficently run network supply and distribution that rushed aid into the area, weeks ahead of the govt.

I trust myself and my BCBS insurance to take care of my health needs, ahead of *any *govt agency. But I’m talking to a person that trusts the people that run Social Security to run his healthcare, so I dunno if I can get through or not.

also, walmart doen’t have the authority to put me In jail or use deadly force if I choose not to take advantage of their everyday low prices.

 

[goofyjim]

From some stories I have heard I don’t trust BCBS anymore than the government. Private insurers have made mistakes in healthcare that costs lives as often percentage wise as the government.

 

[Oscarthecat]

From some stories I have heard I don’t trust BCBS anymore than the government. Private insurers have made mistakes in healthcare that costs lives as often percentage wise as the government.

Government and the juggernaut insurers do take lives by refusing expensive services - but that is not a mistake- it is by design.

That’s why both need to get out of our healthcare.

 

[soma]

I lived in Sweden and England and was impressed with their health care. The citizens there are very lucky.

 

[pathia]

Government and the juggernaut insurers do take lives by refusing expensive services - but that is not a mistake- it is by design.

That’s why both need to get out of our healthcare.

No matter how cheap it gets, there’s no way I could have afforded it. Even if the prices were 5% of what they were now I’d still have to declare bankruptcy at least once.

 

[goofyjim]

Government and the juggernaut insurers do take lives by refusing expensive services - but that is not a mistake- it is by design.

That’s why both need to get out of our healthcare.

And do what? Go without the expensive healthcare that might be necessary sometime? The price for healthcare will simply not come down just because you take insurance out of the equation.