s/o Why is your universal healthcare a love?

[Joker]

The wait times people in the US are listing are shocking to me. I am able to easily get same day appointments when we are sick. I just went in last week. I called at 9am and was seen at 4pm. For a routine appointment (gyn, check-ups, etc), I usually only have to schedule one to two weeks out. Sometimes the specialist appointments are 2-3 months, but I call weekly and am usually able to catch a cancelled appointment quickly. Once they've been seen once by the specialist I rarely have long waits if it's important. The rest of the appointments are usually on a regular schedule so I have no problem.

[ktgrok]

This is my biggest fear about UHC in the US. The US is a very litigious society, not just in health care. I just don't see how UHC would solve this. I mean, right now most people who have health insurance in the US get it through their employers, so it's not even like they're paying for it outright and feel like it's their money. YKWIM?

 

well, I'm on insurance through my husband's employer and we still pay 1,200 a month for our insurance, so I do feel like we are paying for it, for sure. Oh, and then there is the 4,000 deductable per person.

 

As for lawsuits, studies show that the best way to avoid being sued is to have a good relationship with the patient. People don't sue doctors that they like. Which is why often people want to sue the specialist they barely know rather than their family doctor, even when the family doctor's negligence is what led to the problem. There was some guy trained in communication and he was shown video, with no audio, of patients and doctors interacting. He could tell which ones were most likely to be sued just from watching a few minutes of how they interact with their patients.

[Frances]

Until recently with all the changes being rammed down - er - implemented, 90% of Americans had insurance, and most of the rest were in groups who hardly ever need expensive care (such as young, single adults) - and that is usually a temporary situation per individual. So no, it isn't the same as half of the people paying for the other half, and the ones paying the most having to pay still more since their own care isn't included in the deal.

 

It simply isn't true that 90% of Americans had coverage previously. I'm an economist that works with lots of health and medical related data and that is not the reality. My training is in statistics and as we all know, you can always find statistics somewhere to support your claims.

 

Also, simply because you have insurance in the US does not mean that you can afford to use or access the care you need or that pre-existing conditions will be covered when you need it. Here's an example from my own life. Good friends of ours spent three years in Australia and when they returned to the US, the husband immediately starting working for his old company and signed up and started paying for the group health insurance offered by his employer. One month later he was diagnosed with liver cancer and immediately started treatment. Unfortunately, he died three months later, leaving a wife and three young children. The insurance company did not pay a dime. Why? Because they said it was a pre-existing condition, and he had not been insured for the one year required to cover that particular pre-existing condition. Even though he didn't know he had liver cancer when he started his job, they determined it must have existed prior to his diagnosis given the advanced stage of the disease.

 

Someone mentioned they don't trust the government running the health insurance program and believe in free markets. But insurance companies have every incentive to insure healthy people and not insurance sick people in order to keep profits up. What happens when you lose your job (and insurance) when pregnant with a child who turns out to have multiple medical needs. Now try buying health insurance in the open market. Why would any insurance company sell it to you for a reasonable price? Your only hope is to find another job with health insurance that will at some point cover your child's pre-existing conditions. Or if you start running through all of your savings and assets, eventually you will probably be poor enough to qualify for government insurance.

 

All of us with insurance and paying for both that and cop-pays and non-covered care are already paying for those that don't have insurance and that is one of the reasons the cost is so high. My husband works in a hospital and EVERY SINGLE DAY treats uninsured patients. Someone has to pay, the hospital can only absorb so many lost $$$. So they pass the costs on to those with insurance and the insured all pay more. And when people don't have access to free or affordable primary care, the consequences of long neglected conditions costs a lot more than good preventive care.

 

Also, part of our health care expense comes from the insurance companies. Removing them from the equations removes part of the cost. Finally, if we had true universal health care, the costs would go down because just like for medicaid and medicare, reimbursement rates would be set by the government. The profit incentive in medicine would be removed. Health care workers would still be paid reasonable salaries to compensate for their training and work, but they wouldn't be compensated for doing things like ordering unnecessary procedures to improve their bottom line or ordering numerous diagnostic tests because they are afraid of being sued.

 

Health care costs less in countries with universal health care and that is why the government can afford to pay for it while still charging less in taxes. I wish we had universal health care instead of the new system, but the democrats had to compromise or we would have been where we ended up when Clinton tried to reform healthcare - right where we started.

[Guest]

Apparently Medicare seems to work quite well... I have not heard from seniors who rally to have their socialist, government-facilitated health care abolished. They seem quite comfortable with it

 

But clearly, we pay for it. I see all the deductions that we're already paying on every paycheck. It does rank as cause for concern.

[Joker]

well, I'm on insurance through my husband's employer and we still pay 1,200 a month for our insurance, so I do feel like we are paying for it, for sure. Oh, and then there is the 4,000 deductable per person.

 

 

 

This is also shocking to me. You pay $800 more a month than we do and your deductible is $2500 more per person than ours. Yet, I have zero problem getting into a doctor while it is difficult for you. Do you mind if I ask who your provider is? We're in FL and use BC/BS and I the experiences in this thread are so very different from mine.

 

ETA: I checked a pay stub just to be sure and actually our part for medical insurance is less than $300/month. I thought it was more. So, It's even crazier than I thought.

Edited July 16, 2012 by Horton

[Frances]

But some day when you are old and retired you will benefit from it. Would you rather not pay now and risk not having any affordable coverage later when you might need it?

[Dealea86]

well, I'm on insurance through my husband's employer and we still pay 1,200 a month for our insurance, so I do feel like we are paying for it, for sure. Oh, and then there is the 4,000 deductable per person.

 

As for lawsuits, studies show that the best way to avoid being sued is to have a good relationship with the patient. People don't sue doctors that they like. Which is why often people want to sue the specialist they barely know rather than their family doctor, even when the family doctor's negligence is what led to the problem. There was some guy trained in communication and he was shown video, with no audio, of patients and doctors interacting. He could tell which ones were most likely to be sued just from watching a few minutes of how they interact with their patients.

 

That's sounds like a really interesting study! And that really does make sense.

 

I have absolutely no idea what we pay for insurance. It's automatically taken out of DH's paycheck every week. It's probably a ton of money, but I really don't have any sense of how much it is.... He does work for a very large company (like 100,000+ employees), and the insurance options are very good.

 

We are not rich (I feel like I should emphasize that :tongue_smilie:) but we're very lucky that our health care and insurance have been very good.

[Dory]

I've got a few questions about how UHC deals with system abusers.

 

Many people are on medicaid in America, and use it responsibly. But there are a few who abuse it. They don't care how much they're costing the government because they don't pay for it. They are the diabetics who make no effort to take care of themselves and go to the ER on a regular basis. Or the folks who don't have anything really wrong with them but like the attention and free food they get from the hospital. There are thousands of ways to abuse free health care.

 

Again - the vast majority of folks on medicaid don't do this - but those who do really rack up the bill. They don't take any responsibility because there is no cost to them. How does UHC handle this sort of situation? This is one argument I've heard against UHC, and I'm curious how it is solved.

 

Also - one of many things driving up the cost of health care is litigation. Doctors run all sorts of unnecessary tests because they're afraid of being sued. Is there some way countries with UHC deal with this?

 

(Because tone is hard to interpret on the internet - I am genuinely curious, and in no way trying to argue.)

 

I'm not completely sure as to how this is handled everywhere, but I know here, when you go to Emerg. you just drop your paper off and they call people in in whatever order they want. I do know that for a couple of the doctors, if there is someone there that has been coming in for every little thing when there is no reason to, they will often push that person to the end of the line and make them wait for hours. I have even seen them leave the person (the person just had a common cold at that point) sitting in the waiting room for the day while they went on to work in the office. If the person really wants attention for no real reason, than that person is going to have to earn it in some way.

 

I have no idea if that's what they do other places though

[ktgrok]

This is also shocking to me. You pay $800 more a month than we do and your deductible is $2500 more per person than ours. Yet, I have zero problem getting into a doctor while it is difficult for you. Do you mind if I ask who your provider is? We're in FL and use BC/BS and I the experiences in this thread are so very different from mine.

 

We are in Fl as well, and it will be with United (starts on the 1st). Our cost was half that at my husband's last job, when he worked for a large company that could get a better deal. But this company is much smaller, so higher premiums. We looked into private insurance but couldn't get it because I'm pregnant. No one would sell me a policy.

[Julie Smith]

See, now I know a bunch of Canadian ladies, and they are always complaining about how hard it is to get in to see any doctor (several weeks waiting list, and referrals are a nightmare - might take months), and how there are no more PCPs accepting new patients in their area, so they have to go to the public clinic where the wait is hours and hours. It just sounds awful to me.

 

However, they all will say they love their universal health care despite this. So it must not be as bad as it sounds to me. :)

 

I am Canadian, and have complained here about the trouble getting a family doctor. Our town has a shortage of doctors. I could have kept my old one, but that would have been a 90 minute drive - something I wasn't willing to do.

 

So I got stuck going to a walk in clinic for 16 month. If I needed to I would go to the clinic with no appointment (can't make appointments) and have to wait sometime 90 minutes to see a doctor.

 

I now have a family doctor. :) And have no problems with appointments. If it's a non-emergency (ie. wanting a yearly checkup) the wait time can be 2 months. But if it is a emergency. (ie. Son had a cough) then you can get in the same day as your call.

 

Completely depends on where they live.

 

My area, currently, has no openings w/a GP. No walk in clinics either.

 

Has nothing to do w/UHC, everything to do w/being in a small town.

The only issue I've ever had w/referrals was to do w/WCB, not our actual health care system. Many specialists do NOT want to deal w/WCB. It's a major hassle for them. That being said, I was in to a neurologist w/in a wk. It was the orthopedic specialist that was forever and a day to get into, and by that time, I'd been dx'd w/RSD, so it wasn't needed. And, I wasn't an emergency, and that was when WCB was a factor...there was something like 2 orthos in the province that would accept WCB patients.

 

The very spread out population in Canada is a complication the US doesn't have to deal with for the most part.

[Audrey]

In my home country, there is universal health care, too.

People do not go bankrupt because they have an expensive illness.

People do not delay treatment because they can not afford a doctor and as a result only go to the ER when the condition has advanced to a level that the doctors can not do anything.

People do not have to choose between paying for food and paying for medical care.

Everybody pregnant woman has access to preventive care.

 

 

 

 

 

Bottom line:

nobody dies because because he was poor.

 

:iagree: I've lived in th US and Canada and I would never go back to the US. I lie awake some nights thinking of Joanne and Adrian and I am so sickened by the completely unnecessary disaster that their situation has been. I remember what my parents went through -- and they had "good insurance " -- with my mom's cancer.

 

Every time I read a "should I take my child to the doctor" thread, I always know it is an American mom asking. The natural answer to any mom in a UHC country is "of course! If they're ill, why wouldn't you take them?" Those threads are sad to me. So unnecessarily sad.

[Frances]

I've got a few questions about how UHC deals with system abusers.

 

Many people are on medicaid in America, and use it responsibly. But there are a few who abuse it. They don't care how much they're costing the government because they don't pay for it. They are the diabetics who make no effort to take care of themselves and go to the ER on a regular basis. Or the folks who don't have anything really wrong with them but like the attention and free food they get from the hospital. There are thousands of ways to abuse free health care.

 

Again - the vast majority of folks on medicaid don't do this - but those who do really rack up the bill. They don't take any responsibility because there is no cost to them. How does UHC handle this sort of situation? This is one argument I've heard against UHC, and I'm curious how it is solved.

 

Also - one of many things driving up the cost of health care is litigation. Doctors run all sorts of unnecessary tests because they're afraid of being sued. Is there some way countries with UHC deal with this?

 

(Because tone is hard to interpret on the internet - I am genuinely curious, and in no way trying to argue.)

 

I know that in at least one country with UHC (Japan) they deal with this at least in part by not paying for some things. For example, I had a co-worker here in the US that got very drunk on his birthday and climbed a high chain link fence and fell off of it, resulting in extensive head, neck, and dental injuries. It was all covered by our employer-provided health insurance, although he did have some co-pay costs. According to my sister who was living in Japan at the time, this would have not been covered at all by the government insurance. He would have been treated at the hospital, but billed for the costs because the accident was due to his inebriated state.

[Guest]

This is also shocking to me. You pay $800 more a month than we do and your deductible is $2500 more per person than ours. Yet, I have zero problem getting into a doctor while it is difficult for you. Do you mind if I ask who your provider is? We're in FL and use BC/BS and I the experiences in this thread are so very different from mine.

 

ETA: I checked a pay stub just to be sure and actually our part for medical insurance is less than $300/month. I thought it was more. So, It's even crazier than I thought.

 

My dh is self-employed and our family coverage is $1200/month and our deductible is $5000. We are "pending" on a plan that will lower it by a few hundred dollars a month, but it hasn't gone through yet. I feel this pain more than some may because we are the employer. It's not some nameless company that has to pay it, we pay it ourselves, though we pay it through the company.

 

But some day when you are old and retired you will benefit from it. Would you rather not pay now and risk not having any affordable coverage later when you might need it?

 

That was the same theory that founded Social Security - someday you will be old and unable to work, wouldn't you rather pay now and be guaranteed SS payments later? But now that system is going bankrupt and people of my generation are already viewing SS as a benefit we may not receive.

[Frances]

 

 

 

That was the same theory that founded Social Security - someday you will be old and unable to work, wouldn't you rather pay now and be guaranteed SS payments later? But now that system is going bankrupt and people of my generation are already viewing SS as a benefit we may not receive.

 

And you're right that the same thing will likely happen to medicaid if we can't bring the costs of health care down in this country. But there is no incentive in the current system to do so. Too many people are profiting from it. In countries with UHC, the greed portion of the equation has been removed and health care costs are lower for everyone.

[catz]

:iagree: I've lived in th US and Canada and I would never go back to the US. I lie awake some nights thinking of Joanne and Adrian and I am so sickened by the completely unnecessary disaster that their situation has been. I remember what my parents went through -- and they had "good insurance " -- with my mom's cancer.

 

Every time I read a "should I take my child to the doctor" thread, I always know it is an American mom asking. The natural answer to any mom in a UHC country is "of course! If they're ill, why wouldn't you take them?" Those threads are sad to me. So unnecessarily sad.

 

:iagree: What Audrey said.

 

I know a 30 year old with stage 4 melanoma who sat and watched a mole and then lymph nodes grow for a year while he was looking for a job with decent insurance. At the time, he didn't dream he had cancer. It'll likely cost him his life. He has ok insurance now, but is quite dependent on the generosity of others to make ends meet.

[Impish]

:iagree: I've lived in th US and Canada and I would never go back to the US. I lie awake some nights thinking of Joanne and Adrian and I am so sickened by the completely unnecessary disaster that their situation has been. I remember what my parents went through -- and they had "good insurance " -- with my mom's cancer.

 

Every time I read a "should I take my child to the doctor" thread, I always know it is an American mom asking. The natural answer to any mom in a UHC country is "of course! If they're ill, why wouldn't you take them?" Those threads are sad to me. So unnecessarily sad.

:iagree:What gets me is that so many ppl have to wait, b/c of financial reasons, that it can end up costing far more. ie someone goes to see the Dr w/a cold, it's actually broncitis. They get meds, get well.

 

Someone else, financially tight, puts off going the Dr. By the time they finally get seen, they've got pneumonia.

 

The other thing that boggles my brain is, it seems like so much info seems to be coming from those w/a vested interest in the current US system...ie insurnace cos, or those associated w/them. How can you possibly trust that info? I've seen threads here, time and again, making claims about UHC in Canada that are nowhere near the truth...but where are these stories coming from? By ppl who have a vested, economic profit in things staying exactly how they are.

 

I mean...if *Canada* can figure a way out to afford UHC, I genuinely don't see why the US cannot, when you guys are spending more $$ than we do right now!

[JessieC]

I am American and my child has an expensive chronic illness. We have insurance, but if she was ever without coverage in early adulthood, she would be locked out of insurance (priced out) because of her pre-existing condition. She would have to choose between bankruptcy or death. It's just wrong. I am so grateful for the recent Supreme Court ruling for the new healthcare mandate. This way she can be covered by our insurance until age 26 if necessary and then can't be denied coverage even if she goes through a period of time in which she is not insured, which is so common for people in their twenties.

 

I really can't get why people are against ALL Americans getting access to healthcare. Sorry, but to me it seems like you are on the side of evil.

[Guest]

It simply isn't true that 90% of Americans had coverage previously. I'm an economist that works with lots of health and medical related data and that is not the reality. My training is in statistics and as we all know, you can always find statistics somewhere to support your claims.

 

Also, simply because you have insurance in the US does not mean that you can afford to use or access the care you need or that pre-existing conditions will be covered when you need it. Here's an example from my own life. Good friends of ours spent three years in Australia and when they returned to the US, the husband immediately starting working for his old company and signed up and started paying for the group health insurance offered by his employer. One month later he was diagnosed with liver cancer and immediately started treatment. Unfortunately, he died three months later, leaving a wife and three young children. The insurance company did not pay a dime. Why? Because they said it was a pre-existing condition, and he had not been insured for the one year required to cover that particular pre-existing condition. Even though he didn't know he had liver cancer when he started his job, they determined it must have existed prior to his diagnosis given the advanced stage of the disease.

 

Someone mentioned they don't trust the government running the health insurance program and believe in free markets. But insurance companies have every incentive to insure healthy people and not insurance sick people in order to keep profits up. What happens when you lose your job (and insurance) when pregnant with a child who turns out to have multiple medical needs. Now try buying health insurance in the open market. Why would any insurance company sell it to you for a reasonable price? Your only hope is to find another job with health insurance that will at some point cover your child's pre-existing conditions. Or if you start running through all of your savings and assets, eventually you will probably be poor enough to qualify for government insurance.

 

Yeah, that was me; I said that. I do see your point about insurance companies not insuring sick people. I have also experienced repercussions of that bias, so I get it. But quality control is one concern I have when the care is government-paid. There is no motive to be a better doctor than the doctor down the street. It is the same theory as public school - no competition, no incentive to be a successful school.

 

All of us with insurance and paying for both that and cop-pays and non-covered care are already paying for those that don't have insurance and that is one of the reasons the cost is so high. My husband works in a hospital and EVERY SINGLE DAY treats uninsured patients. Someone has to pay, the hospital can only absorb so many lost $$$. So they pass the costs on to those with insurance and the insured all pay more. And when people don't have access to free or affordable primary care, the consequences of long neglected conditions costs a lot more than good preventive care.

 

Well, that is a good point.

 

Also, part of our health care expense comes from the insurance companies. Removing them from the equations removes part of the cost. Finally, if we had true universal health care, the costs would go down because just like for medicaid and medicare, reimbursement rates would be set by the government. The profit incentive in medicine would be removed. Health care workers would still be paid reasonable salaries to compensate for their training and work, but they wouldn't be compensated for doing things like ordering unnecessary procedures to improve their bottom line or ordering numerous diagnostic tests because they are afraid of being sued.

 

Yes, but insurance companies can't be just shut down overnight without devastating thousands upon thousands of families who are in that business. I don't see how the US can transition to UHC without this result and now is a really bad time in our history to add to unemployed workers and closed businesses.

 

Health care costs less in countries with universal health care and that is why the government can afford to pay for it while still charging less in taxes. I wish we had universal health care instead of the new system, but the democrats had to compromise or we would have been where we ended up when Clinton tried to reform healthcare - right where we started.

 

I am ever-skeptical of any notion that taxes would be reduced, no matter what they do.

[Mommyfaithe]

My dh is self-employed and our family coverage is $1200/month and our deductible is $5000. We are "pending" on a plan that will lower it by a few hundred dollars a month, but it hasn't gone through yet. I feel this pain more than some may because we are the employer. It's not some nameless company that has to pay it, we pay it ourselves, though we pay it through the company.

 

 

 

That was the same theory that founded Social Security - someday you will be old and unable to work, wouldn't you rather pay now and be guaranteed SS payments later? But now that system is going bankrupt and people of my generation are already viewing SS as a benefit we may not receive.

 

Yup......sigh....

[Halcyon]

This is my biggest fear about UHC in the US. The US is a very litigious society, not just in health care. I just don't see how UHC would solve this. I mean, right now most people who have health insurance in the US get it through their employers, so it's not even like they're paying for it outright and feel like it's their money. YKWIM?

 

I know that this is probably true, but please dont forget about us self-employed peoplewho must pay for insurance out of pocket. We pay 1200 a month in insurance here in florida (which is about 40 percent less that we were paying in nyc) and it is awful. I was hospitalized last year for stomach issues and paid $3000 oop. Them i had a colonoscopy and paid 1500. Insurance paid nothing because we hadnt hit our minimum yet. Ridiculous. We are STRETCHED trying to pay our insurance, but we are above the threshold for state coverage. My friend, a homeschool mom, would like to get a job part time to help pay bills but cant because then they would lose their state insurance. How does that benefit anybody??

Edited July 16, 2012 by Halcyon

[Halcyon]

I really can't get why people are against ALL Americans getting access to healthcare. Sorry, but to me it seems like you are on the side of evil.

 

:iagree::iagree:I really don't understand the violent antipathy.

[Mommyfaithe]

I know that this is probably true, but please dont forget about us self-employed peoplewho must pay fo insurance out of pocket. We pay 1200 a month in insurance here s florida (which is about 40 percent less that we were paying in nyc) and it is awful. I was hospitalized last year for stomach issues and paid $3000 oop. Them i had a colonoscopy and paid 1500. Insurance paid nothing because we hadnt hit our minimum yet. Ridiculous. We are STRETCHED trying to pay our insurance, but we ae above the threshold for state coverage. My friend, a homeschool mom, would like to get a job part time to help pay bills but cant because then they would lose their state insurance. How does that benefit anybody??

 

:iagree:

We pay through the nose....yet can't afford some basic healthcare that we need. It stinks!

[Halcyon]

We are in Fl as well, and it will be with United (starts on the 1st). Our cost was half that at my husband's last job, when he worked for a large company that could get a better deal. But this company is much smaller, so higher premiums. We looked into private insurance but couldn't get it because I'm pregnant. No one would sell me a policy.

 

We are in Florida too, and dh and i are both self-employed. We pay 1200 a month for insurance through bcbs. 5000 deductible. It is more than our mortgage, by far, and i absolutely hate that we have very little savings but are basically paying 1200 a mo th to this "black hole"... And really, i have zero faith that if we got sick, really sick, we would be covered. I am sure they'd find a way to weasel out of paying. I am tempted to try a health sharig plan, but dh is very skeptical.

[ktgrok]

For Quill I think it was, who said there was no incentive to be a better doctor in a universal system that isn't exactly true. In many countries the doctors are still paid per patient/appointment...but by the government rather than the patient. So there is still incentive to do a good job, so you get more patients than the doctor down the street.

[JessieC]

We are in Florida too, and dh and i are both self-employed. We pay 1200 a month for insurance through bcbs. 5000 deductible. It is more than our mortgage, by far, and i absolutely hate that we have very little savings but are basically paying 1200 a mo th to this "black hole"... And really, i have zero faith that if we got sick, really sick, we would be covered. I am sure they'd find a way to weasel out of paying. I am tempted to try a health sharig plan, but dh is very skeptical.

 

That is terrible! Do you know how things will change for your family under the new health care laws? I assume you will have to pay much less and have a reasonable deductible?

[Halcyon]

:iagree:

We pay through the nose....yet can't afford some basic healthcare that we need. It stinks!

 

Yep. And forget about putting any money into retirement savings. It is all going for health insurance and medical costs. I put off going to the doctor ALL THE TIME because of the costs. What if i had something really wrong with me, and waited and waited because i was afraid of what the bill would be??

[MistyMountain]

I'm not sure how having UHC will stop doctors from trying to be a good doctor. Teachers don't just say we are paid by the government lets do a crappy job. Some might but that isn't the majority. Other countries score really well in math, science and reading and they have public schools. Every other industrialized nation has UHC and public schools and they don't all have crappy schools and medical care.

 

We went without insurance not by choice because my husband worked for a small company that did not offer it. The costs for private were too high and they all had super high deductibles that we could not pay. He is now working for a slightly larger company now that offers health insurance but we can still end up with pretty high OOP costs plus we pay a high monthly amount that really hurts since we already live in a high cost of living area. Canadians are not paying a little bit more in taxes because of health insurance. Health insurance is not a big factor in the taxes. We pay a lot a lot more for health care than in the countries with UHC. A lot of my friends if they do have happen to have insurance and don't work for a big company pay a really high percentage of the income for health care.

 

When we moved to Alaska from California we traveled through Canada. My husband talked to every Canadian he came across and asked them if they liked their system and if they liked the health care and out of the hundreds he talked to they all liked it except this one guy in a gift store in the middle of nowhere in the Yukon. They all were thankful they had good coverage and did not have to worry about the what ifs. They had good experiences when they had to use it. I spent months in panic when my kids no longer qualified for state coverage but the private options were not affordable. My husband and I went without insurance for 2 years not by choice but I was terrified of something happening to my babies. A lot of people are in that situation and most of them are working adults.

[Halcyon]

That is terrible! Do you know how things will change for your family under the new health care laws? I assume you will have to pay much less and have a reasonable deductible?

 

I truly hope so. Am unclear about how things will change for the self employed. We make more than the "minimum" but i think insurance will be a pro-rated cost. Of course, gov rick scott has refused to begin implementing the online database for providers as mandated by the law (iassume he hopes romney will win and overturn the law) so i really dont know how florida will play out. I pray our costs will go down. My relatives down here have no insurance at all, or pay huge amounts out of pocket (what can i say? We are a family of self-starting entrpreneurs, just what America likes, right? Oh, wait, maybe not....)

[Dealea86]

I know that this is probably true, but please dont forget about us self-employed peoplewho must pay for insurance out of pocket. We pay 1200 a month in insurance here in florida (which is about 40 percent less that we were paying in nyc) and it is awful. I was hospitalized last year for stomach issues and paid $3000 oop. Them i had a colonoscopy and paid 1500. Insurance paid nothing because we hadnt hit our minimum yet. Ridiculous. We are STRETCHED trying to pay our insurance, but we are above the threshold for state coverage. My friend, a homeschool mom, would like to get a job part time to help pay bills but cant because then they would lose their state insurance. How does that benefit anybody??

 

Oh, I know. Many people are in horrible situations, and our family is very blessed not to have to worry about that right now. Please don't take me for a cold-hearted person who doesn't want anything to change, even if it means people are dying because they can't pay for their insurance and health care.

 

I'm just saying I don't see the cost of health care going down if we go to a single-payer system. And I don't see how we as a country are going to pay for health care for everyone as it costs now without going broke. And I just can't see how it would be a good thing for the government to start defaulting on payments because it has to pay for health care. That won't help anyone be healthy in the long term. :(

[Dory]

I'm not sure how having UHC will stop doctors from trying to be a good doctor. Teachers don't just say we are paid by the government lets do a crappy job. Some might but that isn't the majority. Other countries score really well in math, science and reading and they have public schools. Every other industrialized nation has UHC and public schools and they don't all have crappy schools and medical care.

 

 

:iagree:All the best doctors are the ones that are full to overflowing. It pays to be good in your field. Whether they are paid by the person or by the government, they still are paid more if they have more patients. No patient is going to want to go see the crappy doctor.

[WishboneDawn]

:iagree: I've lived in th US and Canada and I would never go back to the US. I lie awake some nights thinking of Joanne and Adrian and I am so sickened by the completely unnecessary disaster that their situation has been. I remember what my parents went through -- and they had "good insurance " -- with my mom's cancer.

 

Every time I read a "should I take my child to the doctor" thread, I always know it is an American mom asking. The natural answer to any mom in a UHC country is "of course! If they're ill, why wouldn't you take them?" Those threads are sad to me. So unnecessarily sad.

 

Ah! Those threads drive me crazy. Of course you take your kid, right?

 

I hadn't thought about the cost involved.:(

[Guest]

I am American and my child has an expensive chronic illness. We have insurance, but if she was ever without coverage in early adulthood, she would be locked out of insurance (priced out) because of her pre-existing condition. She would have to choose between bankruptcy or death. It's just wrong. I am so grateful for the recent Supreme Court ruling for the new healthcare mandate. This way she can be covered by our insurance until age 26 if necessary and then can't be denied coverage even if she goes through a period of time in which she is not insured, which is so common for people in their twenties.

 

I really can't get why people are against ALL Americans getting access to healthcare. Sorry, but to me it seems like you are on the side of evil.

 

Ouch. I am not against all Americans having access to healthcare. If I were then, yeah, that would be evil. Every government-provided service or program costs money. This country is 15 trillion dollars in debt. When you pay for more things for more people, that costs more money. This is the concern for me and others who have their doubts about - or are totally opposed to - UHC.

[chepyl]

Are there really people in the US who truly get to choose their own doctors?

 

I have a "cadillac" plan and we still have doctors who are in the network. We get reimbursed for non network at less favorable rate. At one point we were going to have to switch doctors -- I couldn't find a pediatric practice that would take new patience with the exception of newborns and possibly siblings of newborns.

 

dh company looked at switching plans. If they did that we'd have to switch doctors and try to find a practice that accepted the new plan and was accepting new patients.

 

The only advantage I see for our current insurance is I do not need to referral to go to a specialist. The premiums we pay through dh's company are incredibly high though. If we could cut those premiums, I'd be willing to go with referrals. Several jobs ago we had HMO insurance with Kaiser Permanente and we had great care. Honestly, some of the care was better because they had this great efficiency with getting you to the lab when you needed to be tested for stuff like strep.

 

It appears to me that in the US we have far more health care rationing than in places with UHC.

 

ETA: even though I have a "cadillac" plan and don't need a referal appointments to some specialist can take months to get. My youngest just went to an appointment I scheduled in Jan.

 

We get to pick our doctors. We have a lower end plan. We needed a referal for my sone amd haf an appointment in two weeks. I can get into any of the doctors we need within a matter of hours if needed. I would not see my OB, but I would see a partner. Now, we have no majotlr medical problems. We do not see specialists on a regular basis, we would have a harder time with that.

[Halcyon]

. My husband and I went without insurance for 2 years not by choice but I was terrified of something happening to my babies. A lot of people are in that situation and most of them are working adults.

 

i know many, many people who use their states child health plans but go without coverage for themselves. Our state plan in nyc (for the kids) was wonderful. No problems seeing doctors, we had a great pediatrician in a ritzy part of town and we were so happy for their coverage. We paid a pro-rated amount above the minmum because we didnt qualify for free care becUse of our income (although i admit i was tempted to tell dh to earn less just so we could qualify) but i think it was something like 100 bucks a month. we had to pay for our own coverage, but as self employed we joind something called Freelancers Union which pooled applicants who were self employed for better rates. Of course we still paid 2200 a month for just the two of us. How we wished that there was something like Child Health Plus (the state plan) for adults! Perhaps Adult Health Matters Too?

[Joker]

Ah! Those threads drive me crazy. Of course you take your kid, right?

 

I hadn't thought about the cost involved.:(

 

I've always seen those threads more about posters wondering if they're over reacting, or if there is something they could do on their own without having to get their child out. It also seems that when most say to take the child in that there isn't a long wait. They usually post back that their child was seen, which probably plays into me finding it surprising so many have to wait weeks.

 

That doesn't mean I don't understand many wait because of money, but I've read those threads differently, I guess.

[Mergath]

Ouch. I am not against all Americans having access to healthcare. If I were then, yeah, that would be evil. Every government-provided service or program costs money. This country is 15 trillion dollars in debt. When you pay for more things for more people, that costs more money. This is the concern for me and others who have their doubts about - or are totally opposed to - UHC.

 

The other poster might be reacting to the argument that if everyone has healthcare, it will take longer to see a doctor, so it's necessary for some to not have access to healthcare to keep wait times down for the rest of us. Can't have all those poor folk taking their kids to the doctor because that'll inconvenience those of us that really deserve our healthcare. :glare: I've heard people make this argument, both online and irl, more times than I care to think about, and when I see someone vehemently against UHC in the US, I tend to subconsciously peg them as having this attitude.

[Slartibartfast]

Ouch. I am not against all Americans having access to healthcare. If I were then, yeah, that would be evil. Every government-provided service or program costs money. This country is 15 trillion dollars in debt. When you pay for more things for more people, that costs more money. This is the concern for me and others who have their doubts about - or are totally opposed to - UHC.

 

We are already paying for people who cannot pay. We pay MORE for each procedure and service than any other industrialized nation. It will save me money not to have to pay increased costs due to all the people who cannot pay.

 

We have insurance and our medical bills are insanely high. :(

Edited July 16, 2012 by Sis

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Until recently with all the changes being rammed down - er - implemented, 90% of Americans had insurance, and most of the rest were in groups who hardly ever need expensive care (such as young, single adults) - and that is usually a temporary situation per individual. So no, it isn't the same as half of the people paying for the other half, and the ones paying the most having to pay still more since their own care isn't included in the deal.

 

Umm...My parents did not have health insurance for 3 years prior to their being eligible for medicare (which was a godsend).

[Trez]

Another Canadian here and very happy with our health system. When my children were younger and very sick, I had access to one of the best children's hospitals (CHEO) and doctors without worrying about the cost.

 

I also feel really bad when I read about some of the families who are struggling with the stress of illness at the same time as worrying about the money.

 

Although it is not always easy to find a new doctor. Many doctors will not take patients who already have a doctor and some are full. There is however a website set up which will take your information and help you find one here in Ontario. We have a great clinic down the road with multiple doctors for off-hours and our regular physician will get us in within a few days if required. The emergency rooms are also always available if we are in need.

 

I don't mind using my taxes to help pay for access to healthcare for everyone in the same way as I don't mind paying taxes for police, ambulance, schools etc. I see it as another essential service that everyone should be able to access rich or poor.

[Frances]

 

I'm just saying I don't see the cost of health care going down if we go to a single-payer system. :(

 

UHC would lower costs because the costs of the insurance companies would be removed, profit-incentives would be removed (reimbursement rates would be fixed), and everyone would have access to preventive care, instead of the current system we have where the insured pay higher costs to compensate for the uninsured accessing care. It's a fact that in countries with UHC, health care costs are significantly lower, and in the long run the same thing would happen in the US.

 

Of course the economic transition would not be easy and the costs would probably be higher up-front and many insurance company employees would lose their jobs, as someone mentioned. But under the current system, healthcare costs continue to spiral out of control and many people can't move, change jobs, or even start their own business because they are chained to their current health coverage and can't risk losing it.

[fraidycat]

I've lived in Canada and the U.S.

 

In Canada if you need to see the doc, you go see the doc. You might have to wait, but you get to see the doc.

 

I'm in the U.S., with good insurance. It's more of a hassle b/c if you need to see the doc, you have to find out from the insurance company who you can see, then go see the doc. Yet, I'm still VERY grateful for the little bit of hassle that it is.

 

We have not been to see a doctor in probably two years (no need), but I can't imagine not having insurance and not being able to go if we did need to. In fact, we will most likely take DD in this week *just to be sure* because she feel on her arm yesterday and injured it. I don't think it's broken and she is regaining use of it/receding pain more and more, but I'd rather be safe than sorry and have her end up needing surgery down the line.

 

I feel so bad for those who don't have access to adequate healthcare.

[Guest]

We are already paying for people who cannot pay. We pay MORE for each procedure and service than any other industrialized nation. It will save me money not to have to pay increased costs due to all the people who cannot pay.

 

We have insurance and our medical bills are insanely high. :(

 

I don't see how that could work in practice (I understand the theory). Aren't the people who cannot pay for the healthcare the same people who would not pay taxes (or more in taxes)?

[EKS]

I'm just saying I don't see the cost of health care going down if we go to a single-payer system.

 

It goes down because *everyone* is insured. It goes down because there is no longer a profit to be made by insurance companies. It goes down because pharmaceutical companies won't be able to charge exorbitant fees for drugs because the single payer won't pay that much.

 

But people also need to realize that we're *already* paying for it. We pay for other people's healthcare in our insurance premiums and we pay for it in our taxes and we pay for it in higher hospital bills. The money is coming from somewhere and it's coming from us.

 

It is ridiculous that my family has a wonderful healthcare policy simply because we have the good fortune of my husband working for an employer that covers everyone at 100%. Yes, 100%. Nothing is deducted from my husbands paycheck and we have no out of pocket expenses. If my husband were to lose his job tomorrow, we would be paying $1000 per month with no prescription coverage (which between everyone in the family would come to something like $500 per month).

Edited July 16, 2012 by EKS

[Haiku]

I live in the US and have private health insurance. I have two kids with chronic/life-threatening illnesses. Everything I have read in this thread about why UHC could be bad is something we've experienced with private insurance.

 

Waits for appointments and referrals? Yup.

Can't choose your own doctor? Yup.

Not getting needed care? Yup.

Atrocious medical expenditures? Yup.

 

Our current healthcare nightmare is the mail-order pharmacy we are forced to use (our insurance company will not cover monthly maintenance medications from the local pharmacy) failing to send our child's life-saving, can't-miss-a-dose medication because of billing errors on their end and failing to inform me of this. My child ran out of medication.

 

I spend hours on the phone every month battling the health insurance company to pay for things that they are contracted to pay for but they are trying to weasel out of. I have anxiety attacks over my kids not getting their medication. Health care concerns take up huge amounts of my time and emotional energy.

 

One of my children qualifies for a state-run program for children with medical handicaps. Honestly, the care we receive through that program is superior to the care we get through our private insurance. We see private doctors, the state pays, and we have no anxiety. And we pay for this program through taxes.

 

Everyone I know who lives in a country with UHC is horrified by how much we pay for medical care through premiums, deductibles, and co-pays. One year we spent more than half of my husband's (white-collar, college-graduate-level) income on medical care. We are completely hamstrung by the costs. Our friends in UHC countries pay far less in taxes than we pay out of pocket. The idea that UHC costs more is largely a myth.

 

Just as some people claim they will never understand how I could expect that we all pay for one another's care, and how that is stealing their money, I will never understand how they can be ok with their fellow humans not having access to the same level of quality care they enjoy. The "I've got mine" mentality that permeates those ideas is shocking to me.

 

Tara

[Impish]

Just as some people claim they will never understand how I could expect that we all pay for one another's care, and how that is stealing their money, I will never understand how they can be ok with their fellow humans not having access to the same level of quality care they enjoy. The "I've got mine" mentality that permeates those ideas is shocking to me.

 

Tara

:iagree:

[Slartibartfast]

I don't see how that could work in practice (I understand the theory). Aren't the people who cannot pay for the healthcare the same people who would not pay taxes (or more in taxes)?

 

There are subsidies for lower income people.

[Haiku]

Oh, and as far as people not trusting the government with their healthcare -- you'd rather trust the CEO and board of a company whose job is to make money for its shareholders? I trust the government to treat people fairly and equally far more than I do a profit-driven corporation.

 

Tara

[Dealea86]

UHC would lower costs because the costs of the insurance companies would be removed, profit-incentives would be removed (reimbursement rates would be fixed), and everyone would have access to preventive care, instead of the current system we have where the insured pay higher costs to compensate for the uninsured accessing care. It's a fact that in countries with UHC, health care costs are significantly lower, and in the long run the same thing would happen in the US.

 

Of course the economic transition would not be easy and the costs would probably be higher up-front and many insurance company employees would lose their jobs, as someone mentioned. But under the current system, healthcare costs continue to spiral out of control and many people can't move, change jobs, or even start their own business because they are chained to their current health coverage and can't risk losing it.

 

I know that's the argument for UHC... I just don't understand how that's going to work. It's already hard to find a doctor that accepts Medicare. Why? Because Medicare reimbursement rates are too low and there's too much paperwork involved. How is that going to work when all the patients have that same reimbursement rate?

 

Patients are still going to sue. They will still want the top-of-the-line experimental treatments that are super expensive. They will still want private rooms in the hospital, etc. We're entitled Americans, after all. :tongue_smilie:

 

So while I really, really hope that the new healthcare law (and potentially UHC, should we ever go there) helps make things better for everyone, I just can't see how that is possible. UHC works great in other countries, I see that. I just don't believe it would work here the same way.

[SKL]

Just as some people claim they will never understand how I could expect that we all pay for one another's care, and how that is stealing their money, I will never understand how they can be ok with their fellow humans not having access to the same level of quality care they enjoy. The "I've got mine" mentality that permeates those ideas is shocking to me.

 

Tara

 

Well, since we are getting personal now, I also do not understand how people can say "I hardly pay anything for my [socialized] health benefits" like that's a good thing - knowing that means someone else is picking up the responsibility for their family's basic health needs.

 

Don't get me wrong - I have no problem with spreading the risk of catastrophic illnesses/injuries, nor with providing a safety net for folks between jobs and folks who are disabled. However, I think that basic health needs are a personal / family responsibility, kinda like basic hygiene. Everyone who is able to work should feel responsible to budget for basic health needs.

 

I notice that often the folks most pro-national healthcare are the ones who would, under such a system, pay a smaller share of the cost than their family's share of the services. Perhaps they'd feel differently if they'd be out of pocket an extra $10k or so per year under such system.

[Impish]

I know that's the argument for UHC... I just don't understand how that's going to work. It's already hard to find a doctor that accepts Medicare. Why? Because Medicare reimbursement rates are too low and there's too much paperwork involved. How is that going to work when all the patients have that same reimbursement rate?

 

Patients are still going to sue. They will still want the top-of-the-line experimental treatments that are super expensive. They will still want private rooms in the hospital, etc. We're entitled Americans, after all. :tongue_smilie:

 

So while I really, really hope that the new healthcare law (and potentially UHC, should we ever go there) helps make things better for everyone, I just can't see how that is possible. UHC works great in other countries, I see that. I just don't believe it would work here the same way.

When the going rate is the going rate, there's no room to manouver. Drs will simply have to adjust.

 

Private rooms here are either covered by additional private insurance, or oop. It's not like you can't get private rooms, just not on gov'mt $...unless it's deemed a need, and then the hospital only charges the reg rate, but you get your private room anyways.