Healthcare in the good old U.S.A.

Remove all ads!

This time they are going too far. It's been bad enough that healthcare in this country has been in a crisis situation for over a decade now. High cost, have to have insurance through the corporation, politicians bought off by the providers and all that good stuff, has been upsetting some of us.

But now there is a new wrinkle, which I have discovered over the last month. We've just had a new baby girl and two things really annoyed me: First, the hospital no longer gives birth certificates. That's right, I could not get one once my daughter was realeased from the hospital. We now have to order one from the state of Texas. Cost: about 12.00. Why? When we had my other daughter just two years ago the hospital gave us a nice new certificate at no cost. Now the "new deal" passed by the fools in Austin is nothing but a new tax - on babies! And you know it's only 12.00 now, but give them a few years. It will soon be much higher. But wait this gets better.

The state also has a few tests that are required for all new born babies. And guess what? Insurance does not cover the new required tests. Right again. Whoever has a new baby will now have to pay for the tests out-of-pocket, because the insurance compainies think the tests are unnecessary. How bogus is that?

This is a really good board for a topic like this. I know that there are many SPers who hail from many different places with different healthcare systems and my question is two-fold:
Would you trade your current system for one like we have here in the USA? Do you see anything in our system that would make you want yours to be like this? Second, if you do live in the USA, what in the world do you find appealing about our bogus system? I would really appreciate any input, as I am preparing a rather lengthy letter to my useless US senator, US congressman, and State senator. And did I mention that they were all republicans? Yay!

I know there are scant few conservatives on this board, but if you feel like defending the current system, then do so. But why in the world are you oppossed to universal healthcare? I mean like almost every industrialized country has it. What's the "deal" here?

 

I don't defend the current system, and I am Conservative. I have found ways to get around the system, sometimes even fighting to maintain that freedom. It's not pretty, but to paint this as a liberal/conservative issue is short-sighted. True conservatives believe in leaving people alone to determine their own destiny (maybe that is now called Libertarian), Liberals want to enforce a system of lowest common denominator for the good of all.

Chandos, the current state of health care in America is a real issue, but to make it lib/con is a mistake. Just think for a minute about "It takes a village"...the strongest statement of big-brotherism.

EDIT: refuse those tests...when you push your right for medical self direction, the system will crumble before you. Stand up and let no one tell you what to do with your body, or that of anyone in your family. This is vital. If you have any questions, pm me.

[ November 06, 2003, 05:20: Message edited by: Hacken Slash ]

 

I agree, the ludicrous positions held by most political parties are an obvious sham. I support no health-care system that I no of. My advice: screw the tests, look into it a bit and take care of your own daughter, and above all else, avoid immunisations. I know this could spark a debate but I have had experiences with the negative effects of such, and there is enough research out there to prove that it is, like a lot of the medical world too, a sham. In my mind it is not worth the risk. There are some Homeopathic alternatives that do not involve the actual disease if you feel it is necesarry, and I believe they have been trialed and found the most successful in many European countries. Perhaps someone from Sweden or Switzerland (as I believe this is the area the tests were most researched) could verify this.

Hell I had chicken-pox about 4 times anyway, and my Grandfather had measles like 7 times, so anyone who tells you that you will always build an immunity to anything is lying or neive.

Back on topic (sorry about that) the only real way we can evoke change is to ignore the politicians like the fools they are. If no-one listens to them they no-longer have any power, and people can solve things in a more effective, and less exploitative, manner.

 

I like to steal:

The difficulty is, that there isn't a clear answer on what would be better. Socialized health care faces problems abroad, stealing again:

http://society.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4748287-106632,00.html

The quality of care problem in socialized health care nations isn't an uncommon cry. From personal experience I met an elderly couple from Germany a couple of years ago that saved and flew to the US so the wife could have her hip replaced; she was tired of the wait.

Stealing again:

First, why think when others wil do it for you; it's part of my new cut and paste campaign. In seriousness though, the quoted posts from another thread from folks in Europe and the US make it seem to me that there is a health care problem everywhere. In the US there is a problem of coverage. In other nations there is a problem of being 'too socialized' as one Dutch poster put it.

A problem with comparing the US to other nations though is that it isn't necessarily comparable. For example, in small and relatively rich Denmark changes can be made quickly and the concerns aren't as broad.

It looks to me that health care problems is a conundrum facing most if not all the western nations whatever their particular approach due in part to an aging population. While certainly the US', like all nations', system is deficient I'm not convinced that another nation's approach will be workable in the US just as I'm not sure that the US approach would be workable abroad (there is a strong push to privatize abroad, particularly the UK apparently).

 

I can't emphasize enough what Manus is saying. I know that it may be a little strange for a God smackin' conservative and a humanistic liberal to agree...but we do. Do not accept what they tell you is required for the health of your daughter. I remember a scene that was enacted when I was enrolling my second in public school (they are all now home-schooled, by the way). Some administrative snot said, "Sir, you can't place your son in a class unless we have a record of his immunizations." I leaned into the lackey and said "Let me get this straight, you're saying that my son can not be educated with tax-payer dollars unless I consent to a medical invasion of privacy that has been challenged by authentic authority...answer clearly so we can get your quote right for the evening news."

My son finished that grade as an honor student, whence I promptly yanked him out of public school. I know it may be off topic, but home-schooled kids are now attracting scholarships from the finest colleges.

Don't ever give in. Don't believe what "top men" tell you.

Manus, I now truly believe that you are my evil clone. (private joke). My kids have done great, It's just other aspects of my life that have failed

wow, laches has a huge post that I haven't read yet. This was written without any knowlege of what he had to say.

 

Yes, for every one you can cite, the reverse can be found. Just one example would be cancer patients going to other countries for alternative treatments that often work.

Also, as far as the wait is concerned, my wife had to wait six weeks to get an appointment with her doctor during her last pregnancy. Before that she had to have emegency treatment because she waited too long as a result of having to see the specialist which was mandated by her insurance company. Some choice!

And yes, I also have friend who was a Vet and was carted all over Houston for emergency treatment before a hospital would take him. Again we come down to whose statistics and experiences you wish to believe.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/983140.asp
http://www.msnbc.com/news/982680.asp
http://www.msnbc.com/news/977139.asp

[ November 06, 2003, 06:26: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

 

First I would like to say that homeopathic treatments rest on a very shaky ground indeed. There is no scientific base for it all, as far as science is concerned, homeopathic solutions are pure water, nothing more, nothing less. However in tests they have seemed to show some results, why that is so I dont know. (I recently saw a documentary about this so dont think I am an expert on the subject).

As has been said all health care systems have problems, some as people showing up for nothing and draining resources are shared, others are not. One thing I perhaps could see as good about the US system is that if you have the money you can get top of the line treatment right away while in for instance the Swedish system you get more than adequate treatment after some waiting whether your money.
My main peeve with the American system is something Laches touched upon, if you are really poor and desolate with no work no nothing you get medicaid and you can get treatment, those groups are actually a lot better taken care off in the US than I thought, I more or less believed the die in the street thing on that issue. But it is the group of people who have jobs, but not very well paying jobs that get caught in the middle. Not enough money to get their own insurance and not little enough to get medicaid. This is a huge group and these are the real victims of the current system. I know of people who have had to pay up front cash for emergency procedures with money they didnt really have just because they werent poor enough for medicaid and didnt have a good enough job to get insurance. I also know of women who cant afford to go on the pill because a simple visit to a doctor to write her some so she can buy them costs more than 200$ and that is nothing she is able to afford. Birth control is pretty basic, people are going to have sex no matter what smoe people think about it and if they dont have easy access to birth control more people will be forced to create a family before it was really planned and forego their education, not to mention teen pregancies and abortions.

I like it how it is here, even though we have problems too, where you if you are ill go to the hospital, pay 15$ and for that you have more or less covered mostly everything they can do to you. I also prefer to pay for health care on my tax bill instead of on my insurance as it is in the end adds up more or less the same sums and you dont have to struggle with reluctant insurance companies who never like to actually pay out insurance money to their clients.

 

I'm not sure that the msnbc links show what you purport they show and I'm sceptical of 'alternative treatments' as well but lets put that aside.

I think my point is that what is good for the goose isn't necessarily what is good for the gander (how does one spell gander by the way?). The US has a history and mindset and infrastructure and... such that adopting what is done abroad may not be feasible or desirable. After all, these other nations are having their own health care problems which, according to folks who live there, are pretty bad too.

By focusing on them, we may not see other possibilities that may be unique possibilities under this system. Here is one idea:

There are also Medical Saving Account ideas being tossed around. There are a lot of ideas that may not work in the UK or Canada but might work in the US. Likewise, there may be ways to improve their systems that wouldn't be beneficial to the US.

The grass is always greener on the other side the saying goes. I'm not sure that it always is or that focusing on the grass over there makes things in the front yard any better.

 

Two words that will help a bunch "TORTE REFORM"

I have a brother and sister who are both doctors. They are incredibly frustrated when their hands are tied by the system. For example, in Washington state the average Medicare patient costs the doctor's office between $25-40/visit (costs at base line off-set by Medicare reimbursement). Because of this, many doctor's offices are sending these patients, often single mothers, away. Many saying it would be cheaper to hand them $20 and send them away than to treat them at all.

Where do these costs come in?

1) Paper-work
2) Malpractice Insurance
3) High cost of drugs

On Paper-work ... it takes 2-3 full time staff people to fill out and file all the paper work for one doctor. Most of this is due to HIPPA regulations, but it is also complicated by insurance policies.

On malpractice, most every surgeon faces nuisance law-suits. My brother was sued by a gentleman who had no case, but was nice, elderly and lived a good life. His lawyer told him, "He's a nice guy so the jury will want to give him something ... just settle." While it only amounted to a $15K settlement or such, those sorts of things add up.

The two above can be considerably reduced by Torte Reform. As long as patients can sue doctors with little consequence, they will be filling out paper work and paying huge malpractice costs just to "cover their butts".

Just my $0.02

(Oh, and Chandos, do what we did. Have the baby at home, after the cleaning bills, it still ended up being cheaper!)

 

What is frightening is how many of your health care decisions are being made by people who have no vested interest in your welfare. Insurance companies, with the "managed healthcare" mentality are an obvious target, but there is another that's usually missed.

Pharmaceutical companies spend millions of dollars to develop a drug that is some how unique, therefore insuring that they will have exclusivity to it for a period of time. All too often, the drug is developed, potential profits are analyzed, and then a use is found for the drug . The pharmaceutical industry is one of the largest funders of medical research, and believe me, they have a heavy hand in what research is done. When the drug is finally ready to go public, they spend billions of dollars on advertising (how often do we see "ask your doctor if <insert name> is right for you"), and they spend billions more selling those drugs to doctors. The price may be a bit more obtuse than in cash, other means are found to win the doctors loyalty...maybe a vacation at a ski resort, new golf clubs or even that cool new Mercedes...could even be buying lunch for all of the staff in the doctor's office.

You can bet that the next time you go see your doctor to be treated for <insert malady>, and he/she says "There's a new drug just released for your condition, I'd like to try you on it", you can bet he/she had lunch with the pharm. rep the day before.

I'm not slamming all doctors, drup reps or pharmaceutical companies, but the current mentality of marketing drugs instead of administering them leaves the patient as sort a chemical proving ground.

As far as alternative medicine goes, bear in mind that the studies that slam alt.med. are done by the same researchers who are finding uses for these new drugs. Modern medicine is very territorial and probably should be the last entity to evaluate the effectiveness of alt. med., it rather should work to determine the effectiveness of itself.

 

To comment from personal experience always has its pitfalls just as using statistics. But alternative medicine for cancer saved one of my relative's life. The doctors wrote him off, and he sought out alternative treatment and is now doing well. He researched so much that he now believes the biggest problem with heatlhcare here in the US is the medical establishment and the AMA.

 

@ Hacken Slash

Have we an actual living, breathing pro-choice conservative in our midst? Stop the world, I wanna get off.

 

Laches- This is not a case of the "grass is greener." The company I work for just sent out a memo to all employees outlining its view of the current "healthcare crisis," and it is creating a forum for the issue. You may call this the "grass is greener" deabte, but it beats sitting around on your hands and sniffing happy gas, while the crisis continues.

 

Whoa, hold on Death Rabbit...stay on the world. No need to get off. Without saying too much, as it would not only be off topic but start a whole big bruhaha that I don't feel like dealing with...Yes, I am very "pro-choice", perhaps the most "pro-choice" person you will ever meet...I just don't happen to feel that abortion is an acceptable choice. Our choices extend over our own bodies, or to make responsible choices for our minor children. We can't, however, choose to end a life, which is what abortion is.

I bet this topic has been hammered to death on these boards, and don't really want to start it up again, just wanted to keep DR from doing anything drastic...maybe it would help if you considered me more of a Libertarian than a Conservative.

 

Just in time, HS. Still on the world.

 

I was in that group for a while. Lucky me, I experienced a damaged rotator cup (no medical attention) and experienced anaphylactic shock (emergency room treatment - instant thousands of dollars into debt). It was not fun.

 

Just to pick up on a few points here:

H&S:

Medical Self directions? Cobblers! If I want a wall built I get a brickie, if I want medical advice I go to the doctor. I'm not suggesting you shouldn't be informed, I am suggesting that throwing out the baby with the bathwater because someone who should know a whole lot better than you suggests what they percieve to be the best cause of action and you don't like anyone "telling" you what to do is very dangerous indeed.

Manus:

With all due respect, either you're a medical miracle, or you're talking rubbish. If you are suggesting not having immunisations, then consider smallpox, polio, TB as well as a whole host of less serious though nevertheless dangerous illnesses like measles.

To talk about side effects, sure, some syptoms some times for some people. Better than possible death if you don't.

Laches:
I'm not going to requote the Guardian report, but having read it it does fail to compare different hospitals and health autorities within the UK, and the mortallity rates do vary enormously between health authorities. The main reason being that some areas are more affluent thus have healthier people anyway with a greater chance of surviving major surgery. In other words you could get the same disparity within the UK as there was between the two specific hospitals compared.

Joacqin:
Your point about birth control is interesting for the following reason: In the UK birth control is effectively free, you can get condoms free from the family planning clics, and the pill costs about £6 for 6 months supply (available on prescription from your doctor), YET we have the highest teen pregnancy rate in Western Europe. It certainly does not appear to be a function of cost.

Finally (Thank God I hear)

Chandos,

I would urge you not to listen to the people here who suggest "going your own way" in terms of medical treatment for your child. Freedom of choice is a meaningless phrase if you do not know enough about the choices you are asked to make. I've seen scant evidence to suggest that anyone here has meaningful medical knowledge to contribute.

As far as the overall systems go, I have to agree with the sentiment that if a large proportion of the population (from the numbers quoted above, some 20% of the US population) fall into the position of not being able to afford insurance, yet do not qualify for free treatment, then the US system fails. There needs to be a way to make the system more inclusive. The tax breaks suggested above might be the way, or perhaps mandatory for employers. I do not know enough about the system to suggest how to fix it, but it needs fixing. Although the UK NHS system is not by any means perfect with long waits for operations and the like, at least anyone requiring the operation will be able to get it without falling into crippling debt when already on low incomes.

Just my pennies worth.

 

Pennies is what it is Viking- just because you are ignorant (and I mean this only that you simply are unaware of what you are talking about, I'm not calling you stupid) to your own bodies functioning, health, and the medical system, does not mean everyone else is, allthough I admit, unfortunately in this lazy age, most are.

I come from a family with a high level of medical knowledge, several members have been to medical school, and also have experience with the mindset of the medical "profession," many have been nurses, from medicinal, to psychiatrical, to geriatric, most have a very high level of knowledge of anatomy and body chemistry and processesss and fuctioning, many have devoted their own precious time to take some thought for their children and look into all of these things in great detail, such as immunisations, medically prescribed chemicals and drugs, surgery procedures, personal allegies, and many of the over-looked details that can affect our health in adverse manners, such as the fact that if a child swallows a tube of toothpaste, they will die. Little things like anatomy and psychology are easy to pick up from anywhere, you should understand how you work, that way you know what to do if something goes wrong.

Now this may be because my family has a track record of susceptibilty to disease and disorder, (hence the chicken pox 4 times, I had it, I think I would remember - and I had all my imunisations too by the way, which I sincerly regret knowing the problems I had in my later life, which all research shows was very likely caused by such), so it has been necesaary for many of us to actually care about these things. We also know a great deal about "alternative" treatments, which work a lot better than the modern ones, I can tell you that from personal experience- from manipulaing the bodies energy system - like accupuncture- to plain common sense, like homeopathics and chiropractics, and using herbal remedies instead of chemical ones, and assessing what the personal impact of things are upon different people, to more outlandish knowledge of forms of healing that I have personally gained from my own experiences and knowledge.

Yeah I'm taking this personally, it is personal. If you look into these things yourself you may realize how much the wool has been pulled over your eyes. I can assure you, I, or any member of my family (and many others too by the look of things), knows a damn sight more than most of those corrupt doctors about our own health, and even the body. As it is, I am one of the healthiest people I know, and considering the disadvantages I have had, and have over-come, this is a big deal.

Oh, and if I wanted a wall built, I would do that myself too. I have.

 

Sorry, first of all, Herbal Remedies ARE CHEMICAL ONES. Just becasue they have not isolated the active ingredant does not make it not a drug. And since we do not konw all the interactions some herbal remedies can be very dangerous. Thousands have died over the past decade due to St. Johns Wort due to its now know tendency to either intensify or almost eliminate the effects of many drugs. Also, the US has the single worst infant mortality rate of ALL industrilized nations. Why.... because of crappy or non-existant health care. I don't claim to know what the answer is but I don't believe it rests with the , screw everybody else, just get me treated department. Drug costs are out of control because we are being ripped off by the drug companies. And to reply to the original post... why if its just a simple fever that has dropped should you charge ANY PERSON ON THE PLANET $850???????????? I can understand a guy coming in is a gushing wound but you talk like it is nothing..... its not the government throwing away money, that mother is concerned about her child and probably does not have a doctor because she can't afford it or they are not open on the weekends. The Hospital is the one ripping the government off if they charge that much for nothing. 5 minutes to say don't worry Ma'am your baby will be fine should not cost 850 and thats robbery if I ever heard it.

 

Jschild, I agree totally with your post in everything you have said except your reference to herbal remedies. This is a simple misunderstanding. Often (and probably most of the time in the US) a 'herbal remedy' may simply be an expoloitative chemical invention, a commercial rip-off, but when I say the phrase I refer to herbs, straight out of a garden, or from the specialist, being boiled in a pot or similar. And St. John's Wort won't affect any commercial drugs if you're not taking them