So with all the talk about healthcare, what is your ideal?

[Aelwydd]

 

I think the ideal health care system would look quite different from either the current system we have now, or a government run, centralized model.

 

IMO, our best destiny as a species lies with decentralization, localization, a more towards smaller, and more interdependent communities.

 

Along those lines, I would be on board with a provincial system, similar to Canada's, since the U.S. is geographically and demographically very diverse. Regionally-based health councils that administer health care for the surrounding area would be more efficient, more in tune with local needs and demands, more democratic, more versatile, and less expensive.

 

Federally, the government's responsibility should be fairly straight forward: set minimum coverage standards for provincial/state health agencies; provide a set amount of federal dollars to help support each province; provide a clearing house for compilation of national statistics on various indices of health; provide temporary "bridge" funding for when citizens move from one province to another until they have established residence and coverage in their new homes.

 

I think the federal government should also provide generous endowments to institutions of higher learning, to promote the study of diseases and development of new treatments and medicines that are not profit-based.

 

In terms of what the local health care system might look like, I tend to favor Japan's model of many small clinics that are technologically outfitted for everything from basic lab work to X-rays and EKGs. These clinics charge a flat fee that is strictly regulated, and they are largely underwritten by the government (in my ideal system, this would be the local community or state). Doctors, nurses, and other practitioners would be eligible to receive their training at either greatly reduced tuition rates or free tuition, in exchange for agreeing to serve their community for a set number of years (not for free--but agreeing that they will not take their free education and move elsewhere immediately, that is).

 

Pharmaceuticals is a tough issue. I'm not sure what the answer to that is, because these companies have so much money, and so much political power, it's really insane. Same thing for very large hospital groups.

[fraidycat]

My ideal is somewhere in the middle.

 

First, Universal healthcare - absolutely. With one caveat, abusers of the system will be charged co-pays. I haven't worked out exactly how this would be established, enforced, etc. but we are talking IDEALS here, so... I personally know some "abusers", so this is not completely out of left field. Mental health professionals would be included in the universal coverage, too.

 

Second, I'd like "alternative" therapies/practitioners to be covered visits. Naturopaths, acupuncturists, natural supplements, etc. In my opinion, this is where some of the best preventative care is to be found.

 

Here is where my "middle approach" lies. Third, a tiered system, ultimately relieving the burden of the long wait lists, overcrowded emergency rooms, etc. so while "the rich" may get faster care, so would "the poor", in turn. But, at least with the universal care, "the poor" ARE ultimately receiving care, which is better than what exists now.

[bolt.]

Since "abuse" of universal healthcare is most often linked to mental health situations -- I think your first two ideas dovetail quite nicely.

 

I don't like the idea of being able to pay extra to get necessary care sooner, or better care by doctors who are thought to be worth paying extra to see. If we are talking about ideals, why not just have enough care for everyone to receive prompt service?

[Slartibartfast]

 

When I first developed asthma eight years ago, albuterol was $10  and Flovent was $55 for the month. The same items are now $60 and $250.

 

 

The problem with albuterol is that they made the CFC albuterol illegal and put out a new inhaler that was CFC-free. The CFC-free albuterol was conveniently under patent so everyone was gouged on an old med because they took out the CFC which we were all inhaling anyways!

 

I am still mad about that!!

[swimmermom3]

The problem with albuterol is that they made the CFC albuterol illegal and put out a new inhaler that was CFC-free. The CFC-free albuterol was conveniently under patent so everyone was gouged on an old med because they took out the CFC which we were all inhaling anyways!

 

I am still mad about that!!

 

I think that was part of the problem with Flovent as well. I've always wondered why there wasn't a way to reuse the inhaler and purchase canisters separately.

 

 

A huge "yes" to covering mental healthcare. I don't know how I forgot that on my "wishlist."

[Slartibartfast]

I think that was part of the problem with Flovent as well. I've always wondered why there wasn't a way to reuse the inhaler and purchase canisters separately.

 

 

A huge "yes" to covering mental healthcare. I don't know how I forgot that on my "wishlist."

 

They probably won't do that until the current patent runs out and then they will repatent for a dosage counter restarter.

 

 

:cursing:  :cursing:  :cursing:

[fraidycat]

Since "abuse" of universal healthcare is most often linked to mental health situations -- I think your first two ideas dovetail quite nicely.

 

I don't like the idea of being able to pay extra to get necessary care sooner, or better care by doctors who are thought to be worth paying extra to see. If we are talking about ideals, why not just have enough care for everyone to receive prompt service?

True. In an ideal world... :)

 

I guess I still was allowing reality and idealism to clash a bit. :D

[Laura Corin]

 Now I wonder what the bill would have been if I lived elsewhere....

 

Zero in Scotland.  There's a small charge for a prescription in England - £8 except for children, those over 60, those on low income and, I think, some people with chronic diseases.

 

L

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

Zero in Scotland.  There's a small charge for a prescription in England - £8 except for children, those over 60, those on low income and, I think, some people with chronic diseases.

 

L

 

My prescriptions run around that price - usually under 10.  The plan we have was negotiated by DW's teacher's union, which is a word that unfortunately engenders hostility.  Throw it back two generations, and about a third of all workers were unionized;  now, well....there are a very few remaining professions.

 

The point is collective bargaining helps control individual costs, and if that collective includes, say, 300 million people under a universal umbrella, I would imagine costs could go down quite a bit.  It could perhaps even work at the state level, but then you'd have radically different coverage state to state, and unfortunately, it would be driven by local politics.

[Murphy101]

I think it's royal stupid to tax supposed "Cadillac" plans. For craps sake, I thought the goal was to get everyone better insurance coverage? Why the heck penalize them for it? Wouldn't it make more sense to offer incentives to create/get better plans?

 

And yeah, none too happy the prez had no problem exempting himself from risking having a suck insurance plan. :/

[Pawz4me]

And yeah, none too happy the prez had no problem exempting himself from risking having a suck insurance plan. :/

 

The president isn't "exempted" any more so than many millions of people are, including DH and our family and, I would guess, many families represented on this board.  Because we, like the president, are covered by an employer group plan.

 

The Obamacare exemptions that aren't.

 

As far as Congress, that's a bit tricker to explain.  This Factcheck article sums it up.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

I think it's royal stupid to tax supposed "Cadillac" plans. For craps sake, I thought the goal was to get everyone better insurance coverage? Why the heck penalize them for it? 

 

I agree, although I'm sick of the "Cadillac" moniker, because it implies an elitism not necessarily embodied, or even chosen by the plan holder.   Yes, DW has a great plan, achieved through collective bargaining (the horror), for which the district deducts a chunk from her paycheck.   Yes, I'm closing in on a million dollars worth of treatment over the past three years, and I would wish the best coverage possible for anyone else who has lain in an ICU with 12 lines running into and out of his or her body.

 

Most of the healthcare debate is horribly skewed because the people debating are not really, really sick, and our brains are not wired to imagine the worst will ever happen to us.  Perhaps a long term hospital stay is in order for every elected representative -- catheterization mandatory.

[TranquilMind]

I think this is a huge factor.  Although I get the impression from doctors that I can't be healthy without them.  That in order to be healthy I have to visit them regularly and take drugs...for every piddly thing.  So that is why I basically never go to the doctor's.  I don't want to be treated for anything. 

 

I think I've gotten paranoid and extreme in the opposite direction.  Growing up I had a mother who did have a lot of health problems.  She took us to the doctor every other week.  They always found something to give us drugs or treatment for although frankly I'm not sure what the point was half the time.  So now I just hate going there.  Again, I don't want to be treated.

 

What would be my ideal?  I guess honesty.  There are drugs out there that can treat lots of things, but how much do they REALLY improve my life.  How much longer do they REALLY let me live?  

The bolded is my biggest problem right there.  I will not be subjected to practice medications for anything.  I don't need anything, and when I do, I know what it is, so I tell them (like the rare antibiotic). 

 

I know what I'm doing and do not need to be pestered by anyone.  I don't know anyone who eats a better diet than I do, yet in my 50's, I still have a few pounds left to lose and it's not easy. 

 

I read once that the best thing you can do for your health after the age of 50 is to take NO prescription drugs (obviously, not applicable if we are talking about insulin or something life-sustaining).  I agree.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

Perhaps a long term hospital stay is in order for every elected representative -- catheterization mandatory.

 

Sorry...I have to revise myself.   The actions above would mean going to NIH at Bethesda and getting world class care with a staff huddling around your bed, Blackberries at the ready.   Instead, I propose each rep must go to an inner-city ER or what would otherwise be routine care, wait 8 hours, alone, and pay cash.

 

Nah, even that wouldn't work.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I agree, although I'm sick of the "Cadillac" moniker, because it implies an elitism not necessarily embodied, or even chosen by the plan holder.   Yes, DW has a great plan, achieved through collective bargaining (the horror), for which the district deducts a chunk from her paycheck.   Yes, I'm closing in on a million dollars worth of treatment over the past three years, and I would wish the best coverage possible for anyone else who has lain in an ICU with 12 lines running into and out of his or her body.

 

Most of the healthcare debate is horribly skewed because the people debating are not really, really sick, and our brains are not wired to imagine the worst will ever happen to us.  Perhaps a long term hospital stay is in order for every elected representative -- catheterization mandatory.

 

FTR, the plan you have would not be considered a "Cadillac" plan.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

FTR, the plan you have would not be considered a "Cadillac" plan.

 

 

Really?  Even with vision and dental and prescriptions and low co-pays and a flex account?   I'm dumbfounded, and relieved -- I never liked Cadillacs -- too floaty -- plus you need a light blue suit and white shoes to drive one, or at least you did.

[swimmermom3]

I agree, although I'm sick of the "Cadillac" moniker, because it implies an elitism not necessarily embodied, or even chosen by the plan holder.   Yes, DW has a great plan, achieved through collective bargaining (the horror), for which the district deducts a chunk from her paycheck.   Yes, I'm closing in on a million dollars worth of treatment over the past three years, and I would wish the best coverage possible for anyone else who has lain in an ICU with 12 lines running into and out of his or her body.

 

Most of the healthcare debate is horribly skewed because the people debating are not really, really sick, and our brains are not wired to imagine the worst will ever happen to us.  Perhaps a long term hospital stay is in order for every elected representative -- catheterization mandatory.

 

In my personal experience many of the loudest opponents to government intervention in healthcare believe they are simply too virtuous or too righteous to ever be affected. They are angry with those who do not follow their shining example and have no desire to "pick up the tab" for others not as equally virtuous or righteous. We know of three situations where those involved did everything right and our current healthcare situation (the lovely "free market") imposed devastating effects.

 

A young man who picked up his brother from a party so the boy wouldn't drink and drive was t-boned by a car full of drunk teens. The young man spent three months in a coma and then required rehab. He worked two jobs and attended law school while being financially responsible for his younger brother. How many young people do you know that could recover from that type of situation financially.

 

A middle-aged father of two taking good care of himself by biking to work was mowed down by a hit and run driver and spent five months in the hospital.

 

A fifteen year-old boy with bone cancer. His medical treatment and subsequent death left his well-insured (teacher's union) family at the brink of bankruptcy and divorce.

 

Disease and injury can happen to anyone at any time. No one, no matter how devout, physically fit, and  financially well-prepared you are, is exempt. I want to live in a country with healthcare that makes recovery in all senses of the word possible. I also want a healthcare system that does not allow pharmaceutical companies to make $5 billion a year off of a medication that causes more deaths (Advair) than actually die from the disease the medication is supposed to be treating.

 

[bolt.]

When I take my car to a mechanic, I expect him/her to try to sell me things I don't quite need, to ask me come in for tune-ups more regularly than they are actually required, and to exaggerate the importance of all the things they want to do for my vehicle. I expect this behaviour because the mechanic is more prosperous when I do those things. I expect him/her to be and sales-minded, because that's the way to be a successful business person.

 

When I take my body to a doctor, I don't have the expectation of a sales experience. My personal experience with universal healthcare (Canada) has never included the message that I can't be healthy without regular visits, unnecessary prescriptions or plenty of testing "just in case". Maybe I've got a good doctor, or maybe the system is good -- but there is no advantage to the doctor being sales-minded, because there aren't any above/beyond profits to be made by such actions. Instead, my doctor seems interested in keeping my usage of the system to only what I truly need. It's been a few years between check-ups, so she'd like to see us a bit more often than that, but she never makes a big deal out of it.

 

That's why I have trouble with dentists, opticians and vets: they are indeed sales-minded, but they fit in my mental box of a doctor, so I have to check myself before agreeing to every "service" they suggest. I can't imagine having to take that kind of suspicion with me to doctors and hospitals too. I like that there aren't any pressures on my doctor other than meeting my needs and moving on to her next appointment. I think that's why I've never felt suspicious of her motives, and I can trust her recommendations.

 

I think that's one very big difference between for-profit and government healthcare. Maybe there are some pressures (meeting budgets... making sure you work the right number of hours... I don't know) but I'm not sure I could handle a sales-minded doctor.

[TeacherZee]

I am very happy with my current system. Are there problems? Yes. But overall I am happy. We have a single payer system where I can choose any doctor in my county, private or public. Right now I choose a private practice. I pay approximately $20 for a doctors visit up to a certain amount each rolling 12 months. When I was in therapy for my depression I came up to that amount quickly and after that all visits were free (it is about ten visits). The "co-pay" means most people think twice about unnecessary visits but no one has to put off necessary visits. For planed visits there can be a wait, but for emergency care I have always gotten an appointment that day.

 

Sometimes we see a nurse for some routine care. For example someone with diabetes would see the diabetes nurse for routine care. She (usually a she) will have extra training in diabetes care.

 

My mother is a nurse. She works at a nursing home and her team also does hospice/palliative care in the community (everything from someone with a diabetes sore to end of life care for a cancer patient).

 

With my sisters first child she stayed at the hospital for 3 days (a midwife delivered my niece) with her second child she went home the same day (baby born in the wee hours of the morning and she was home in time for dinner) but went back two days later for a check-up I think she would have loved to have the midwife come visit at her house :)

 

My sister is training to be a district nurse. The district nurses do a lot of care in the community as well. They will do immunizations and well-child checks among other things.

[Aelwydd]

Can someone please share with me how "Cadillac" insurance is defined by ACA?  What constitutes "Cadillac?"  Overall cost of the plan? Coverage percentages...?

[creekland]

The bolded is my biggest problem right there.  I will not be subjected to practice medications for anything.  I don't need anything, and when I do, I know what it is, so I tell them (like the rare antibiotic). 

 

I know what I'm doing and do not need to be pestered by anyone.  I don't know anyone who eats a better diet than I do, yet in my 50's, I still have a few pounds left to lose and it's not easy. 

 

I read once that the best thing you can do for your health after the age of 50 is to take NO prescription drugs (obviously, not applicable if we are talking about insulin or something life-sustaining).  I agree.

Ok... all I can say to this is I'm really glad "I" don't have to go to my specialist's appt. - where they're going to figure out what is in my head causing some double vision and hearing issues - knowing what it is and telling them what I need to make things right.  My plan it to share symptoms with them, let them do the CT scan (or anything else they recommend) and listen to recommendations for (hopefully) fixing it.  If I had to go in there knowing it all myself... would I even have to do the surgery (if needed) myself?

 

I'm also glad I didn't have to figure out and treat my youngest's epilepsy on my own nor without the prescription drugs that stop him from having seizures (the type that many lay people with medical training told us WEREN'T seizures - but testing confirmed they most definitely are).

 

I'm also glad it's all covered with our health sharing group.

[Mrs Mungo]

I think it's royal stupid to tax supposed "Cadillac" plans. For craps sake, I thought the goal was to get everyone better insurance coverage? Why the heck penalize them for it? Wouldn't it make more sense to offer incentives to create/get better plans?

 

 

I agree. This was one of those compromise issues that helped it pass. Taxing "Cadillac" plans was part of McCain's plan that the republicans insisted putting in the legislation on to help balance the expense, just like the tax on medical equipment.

 

In my personal experience many of the loudest opponents to government intervention in healthcare believe they are simply too virtuous or too righteous to ever be affected. They are angry with those who do not follow their shining example and have no desire to "pick up the tab" for others not as equally virtuous or righteous. We know of three situations where those involved did everything right and our current healthcare situation (the lovely "free market") imposed devastating effects.

I agree with this. I have noticed that some of the biggest proponents of universal healthcare are people who have experienced one or more devastating illnesses in their families.

 

I also want a healthcare system that does not allow pharmaceutical companies to make $5 billion a year off of a medication that causes more deaths (Advair) than actually die from the disease the medication is supposed to be treating.

 

This is a tough thing. My son has done great on Advair (asthma is not his lung issue, albuterol inhalers basically do nothing for him). His doctor tried other meds, and they just didn't work as well. :/

[Mrs Mungo]

Can someone please share with me how "Cadillac" insurance is defined by ACA? What constitutes "Cadillac?" Overall cost of the plan? Coverage percentages...?

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010) imposes an annual 40% excise tax on plans with premiums exceeding $10,200 for individuals or $27,500 for a family (not including vision and dental benefits) starting in 2018.

I believe even this statement is a little misleading because My understanding is that the tax is only on the amount above those premiums.

 

Unless you know what the employer contribution is of anybody's individual plan, then you have no way of knowing if they have a Cadillac plan. Even some teacher's union plans could count as Cadillac plans in high COL states.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Can someone please share with me how "Cadillac" insurance is defined by ACA? What constitutes "Cadillac?" Overall cost of the plan? Coverage percentages...?

It is defined as a Cadillac plan if the premiums exceed a certain amount for individual or family. Off hand I don't know the amounts.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

I believe even this statement is a little misleading because My understanding is that the tax is only on the amount above those premiums.

 

Unless you know what the employer contribution is of anybody's individual plan, then you have no way of knowing if they have a Cadillac plan. Even some teacher's union plans could count as Cadillac plans in high COL states.

Unlikely as usually those premium levels are only reached by having extremely low/no copays or deductibles. They are extremely rare to find as part of a general employee/union plan.

[Mrs Mungo]

Unlikely as usually those premium levels are only reached by having extremely low/no copays or deductibles. They are extremely rare to find as part of a general employee/union plan.

Again, that depends upon the state. High cost of living states like Massachusetts are predicting that it could affect half of their workers, including civil employees.

[Aelwydd]

Thanks, Mungo and Chocolate. I thought I had read something to that effect when reading about ACA, but wasn't sure. The corporation I work for does share how much our policy costs. It covers about 85% of our policy. We have a very good plan at 90/10 coverage and no deductible; the overall cost is about 13k a year.

 

I had been wondering if our premium would jump a lot higher next year, because I thought it might meet some definition of "Cadillac" insurance. The cost is going up but only by about $20 a pay period. I suspect that if our insurance wasn't negotiated by a large corporation in a booming industry, the cost would be much, much higher.

 

Which makes me wonder how accurate a litmus test cost is when large groups may negotiate much better health plans for a lot less.

[SweetMissMagnolia]

haven't looked at the obama-care offerings but I would like something affordable of course--no deductible....affordable meds and co pays for hospital/dr visits....something that didn't lock me into only certain docs and something that didn't have long waiting times for certain procedures to be "approved" by the insurance company......that being said we have AETNA through dh's work and our plan is pretty good.....not sure how much comes out of his check because I only look at the check stub if there's a problem but our meds are affordable (unless it's a NEW drug),some of my diabetic supplies are actually covered at 100% (a first for me),and so far our dr visits and hospital e/r visits have been affordable......

[QueenCat]

So, my son would die because we couldn't pay cash for his medical care? You find that ethical? How?

 

I was thinking the same thing.............

[QueenCat]

Can someone please share with me how "Cadillac" insurance is defined by ACA?  What constitutes "Cadillac?"  Overall cost of the plan? Coverage percentages...?

 

I'm not sure............ but I was stunned that ours is not considered Cadillac.........

 

[livetoread]

My husband is a city employee. We live in a low COL area and the plan the city offers its employees is considered a Cadillac plan. The city will be phasing in a silver level plan to replace it, but we don't know what specific changes will be coming yet. Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.

 

Edited to say:

It's my understanding that a plan is considered Cadillac if the total cost of employee and employer contributions exceeds a certain amount. However, after doing a quick search that says the amount is 27,500 for family policies, I'm confused. I know our policy will be about 21,000 this year. So either the city HR dept. thinks premiums will be that high by 2018 when the penalty starts, or there is more too it than just the premium cost.

[Mrs Mungo]

My husband is a city employee. We live in a low COL area and the plan the city offers its employees is considered a Cadillac plan. The city will be phasing in a silver level plan to replace it, but we don't know what specific changes will be coming yet. Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.

 

Edited to say:

It's my understanding that a plan is considered Cadillac if the total cost of employee and employer contributions exceeds a certain amount. However, after doing a quick search that says the amount is 27,500 for family policies, I'm confused. I know our policy will be about 21,000 this year. So either the city HR dept. thinks premiums will be that high by 2018 when the penalty starts, or there is more too it than just the premium cost.

*Or* the HR department hasn't really researched it enough to know and is making an assumption?

[SwallowTail]

My ideal would be something where I could just go in when I really felt like I or my family member needed medical care, and it wouldn't ruin us or put us into risk of bankruptcy.. 

 

I have had to stand in the doorway of my bathroom, watching my husband writhe in pain, trying to figure out if he was possibly dying and thus validating the potential financial ruination that would come from making the call to 911.  I have fainted and laid on the floor while possibly having an ectopic pregnancy burst, and had horrible bleeding w/ the subsequent miscarriage at home for days and weeks, b/c I couldn't do a hospital.  I have passed a kidney stone at home with no meds and no follow up.  I have probable heart disease (genetic) and cannot afford testing/evaluation.  I have serious needs for counseling and can't afford it.  I had something bite me the other day and my finger feels like it is on fire, and it keeps getting worse, and I can't go to the ER, and I doubt an urget care center could help me on this one.

 

I would happily pay 7-10% of our gross annual income for a plan or into a universal/single payer plan to receive healthcare at no further out of pocket cost. (Stipulated by this replacing or lowering the current medicare tax we pay).

 

** I should add, we are a middle class family, with heath insurance, with a 10K deductible.

[TravelingChris]

I would like to have a federally subsidized or maybe both federally and state subsidized plan for uninsurable people. 

 

Next, I would take medicaid funding and put it into funding clinics, instead of following the people.  I would staff clinics with medical students, PAs, CNP,s, and some doctors to supervise and assist in difficult cases,  I would fund some medicaid funding for things that couldn't be done at the clinics like surgeries and hospitalizations.  Oh, and the clinics wouldn't be free- they would be low cost- like $5 but not free.  Next, I would make insurance plans available across state lines and work to remove myriad state mandatory coverages. 

 

I would make HSA accounts available to everyone who wants one, not just people who don't have insurance or whatever.  (We have never been allowed to have one, I guess because we have insurance, but ourinsurance doesn't cover vision and hearing and those things are expensive).  That would introduce true competition, especially if they all didn't have to provide the exact same service.

 

I would have a federal law mandating that loser pays in law suits and that in order to bring a lawsuit, you have to buy a bond that will indemnify the other party if you lose and capping tort claims.  Europe has so much cheaper lots of things because idiots and scoundrels are not rewarded with giant lawsuit winnings. 

 

Oh and yes, I would be requiring transparency of medical costs that would be published so everyone could know that a knee replacement at Hospital A costs x but at Hospital B costs x+1000.  I know some of you say well who can compare events you don't know will happen like a heart attack?  But most surgeries are planned in advance and for things like where to go to the ER, you could once a year check Hospital A charges y for a broken leg and Hospital B charges y-200.   For many procedures, you might find it much more economical to travel to another state for that hip replacement or whatever.

[TranquilMind]

Ok... all I can say to this is I'm really glad "I" don't have to go to my specialist's appt. - where they're going to figure out what is in my head causing some double vision and hearing issues - knowing what it is and telling them what I need to make things right.  My plan it to share symptoms with them, let them do the CT scan (or anything else they recommend) and listen to recommendations for (hopefully) fixing it.  If I had to go in there knowing it all myself... would I even have to do the surgery (if needed) myself?

 

I'm also glad I didn't have to figure out and treat my youngest's epilepsy on my own nor without the prescription drugs that stop him from having seizures (the type that many lay people with medical training told us WEREN'T seizures - but testing confirmed they most definitely are).

 

I'm also glad it's all covered with our health sharing group.

Well, I'm sorry that you had those issues, but honestly, didn't you google the symptoms on several sites (assuming you could sit up and see well enough here) and figure out pretty much what the possibilities were? 

Obviously, if you were too ill, or taken away in an ambulance, this isn't possible.

 

That's always my first resort (since the internet, of course), and I've pretty much always been dead on, as to what I was experiencing.   I even figured out (kind of late, actually!) that I needed to go to the ER for an appendix issue, when the "flu" that I thought I might be experiencing did not seem to change within 3 days.   When I got in, the day after surgery I met an internist who was also a patient, while I was walking my IV around.  He didn't know either!  He also thought he had the flu and he was a doctor. 

[TranquilMind]

My ideal would be something where I could just go in when I really felt like I or my family member needed medical care, and it wouldn't ruin us or put us into risk of bankruptcy.. 

 

I have had to stand in the doorway of my bathroom, watching my husband writhe in pain, trying to figure out if he was possibly dying and thus validating the potential financial ruination that would come from making the call to 911.  I have fainted and laid on the floor while possibly having an ectopic pregnancy burst, and had horrible bleeding w/ the subsequent miscarriage at home for days and weeks, b/c I couldn't do a hospital.  I have passed a kidney stone at home with no meds and no follow up.  I have probable heart disease (genetic) and cannot afford testing/evaluation.  I have serious needs for counseling and can't afford it.  I had something bite me the other day and my finger feels like it is on fire, and it keeps getting worse, and I can't go to the ER, and I doubt an urget care center could help me on this one.

 

I would happily pay 7-10% of our gross annual income for a plan or into a universal/single payer plan to receive healthcare at no further out of pocket cost. (Stipulated by this replacing or lowering the current medicare tax we pay).

 

** I should add, we are a middle class family, with heath insurance, with a 10K deductible.

That's terrible, that you pay for insurance but still can't use it because of the $10,000 deductible!  What's the point of that, I want to ask the insurance companies?

[creekland]

Well, I'm sorry that you had those issues, but honestly, didn't you google the symptoms on several sites (assuming you could sit up and see well enough here) and figure out pretty much what the possibilities were?

 

This made me chuckle... of course I googled several sites (who wouldn't?). Every single one of them came to a dead end saying - "go see a dr."

 

Even with that I opted to wait a year and a half since it really didn't/doesn't seem that terrible.

 

Now I have a "basic" diagnosis from the specialist and I've spent a bit of time on google again. I found one really good site. Here's what they say WITH a diagnosis:

 

The various etiologies of _____ comprise one of the most sweeping differential diagnoses in all of ophthalmology. The patient who complains of _____can have something as benign as dry eye or as life-threatening as an intracranial tumor. The cause may be as rare as Wernicke encephalopathy or as common as convergence insufficiency. “It’s a huge differential diagnosis,†said Nurhan Torun, MD, director of the neuro-ophthalmology service at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and an instructor of ophthalmology at Harvard Medical School in Boston. “______ tends to be intimidating for many practitioners.â€

 

Intimidation may even turn to dread. “When most ophthalmologists see a patient with a chief complaint of _____, they hate it,†said Michael S. Lee, MD, associate professor of ophthalmology, neurology and neurosurgery at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis. “They often don’t know what to do with the patient.†What they do know, of course, is that the proper workup will take longer than a standard office visit.

 

Then it goes on to talk about something like 20 different causes and things one has to look for to try to rule out 19 of them... NONE of them being super easy for the average person to do while looking in a mirror...

 

DH and I spent a bit of time in the car today (returning from his high school reunion).  Therefore, our "talk" turned to several different things, one of which was wondering exactly how many times I've ever been to a doctor since we've been married.  If you eliminate all aspects of being pregnant and childbirth, the answer is 4 times.  We've been married over 25 years.  I've seen a doctor to update immunizations, get antibiotics for pneumonia, get antibiotics for a tick bite, and to get a health certificate to work.

 

I'm not anti doctors or medicine.  I just happen to believe the body is super good at fixing most things itself - and it usually is.  However, there are some times when it isn't.  (There have been more than one student at my school who have had cancer - and a couple with heart issues.)  For those times, I want some sort of assistance with the payments should they be high.  Even if we had opted to save 10K per year for those 25 years, it might not be enough to cover something really high - not to mention needing to spend some of it for things the kids have needed over those years that we couldn't do in house (epilepsy, broken collar bone, etc).

 

I'd really like Universal Health care personally - even though I doubt I would use it any more than I'm doing now.  I just feel health care should be a right, not a privilege for those who can afford it.

[TranquilMind]

This made me chuckle... of course I googled several sites (who wouldn't?). Every single one of them came to a dead end saying - "go see a dr."

 

Even with that I opted to wait a year and a half since it really didn't/doesn't seem that terrible.

 

Now I have a "basic" diagnosis from the specialist and I've spent a bit of time on google again. I found one really good site. Here's what they say WITH a diagnosis:

 

The various etiologies of _____ comprise one of the most sweeping differential diagnoses in all of ophthalmology. The patient who complains of _____can have something as benign as dry eye or as life-threatening as an intracranial tumor. The cause may be as rare as Wernicke encephalopathy or as common as convergence insufficiency. “It’s a huge differential diagnosis,†said Nurhan Torun, MD, director of the neuro-ophthalmology service at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and an instructor of ophthalmology at Harvard Medical School in Boston. “______ tends to be intimidating for many practitioners.â€

 

Intimidation may even turn to dread. “When most ophthalmologists see a patient with a chief complaint of _____, they hate it,†said Michael S. Lee, MD, associate professor of ophthalmology, neurology and neurosurgery at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis. “They often don’t know what to do with the patient.†What they do know, of course, is that the proper workup will take longer than a standard office visit.

 

Then it goes on to talk about something like 20 different causes and things one has to look for to try to rule out 19 of them... NONE of them being super easy for the average person to do while looking in a mirror...

 

DH and I spent a bit of time in the car today (returning from his high school reunion).  Therefore, our "talk" turned to several different things, one of which was wondering exactly how many times I've ever been to a doctor since we've been married.  If you eliminate all aspects of being pregnant and childbirth, the answer is 4 times.  We've been married over 25 years.  I've seen a doctor to update immunizations, get antibiotics for pneumonia, get antibiotics for a tick bite, and to get a health certificate to work.

 

I'm not anti doctors or medicine.  I just happen to believe the body is super good at fixing most things itself - and it usually is.  However, there are some times when it isn't.  (There have been more than one student at my school who have had cancer - and a couple with heart issues.)  For those times, I want some sort of assistance with the payments should they be high.  Even if we had opted to save 10K per year for those 25 years, it might not be enough to cover something really high - not to mention needing to spend some of it for things the kids have needed over those years that we couldn't do in house (epilepsy, broken collar bone, etc).

 

I'd really like Universal Health care personally - even though I doubt I would use it any more than I'm doing now.  I just feel health care should be a right, not a privilege for those who can afford it.

Goodness, I hope your situation turned out to be closer to the "dry eye" diagnosis! 

 

I do agree that sometimes what you read can scare the heck out of you. I have had a couple of those moments myself.

Like you, I rarely see a doctor, but geez...when your appendix burst and you stay home three more days, you kind of can't fix that one on your own, so I know how that is.  I did try several different things though, to get my body to fix itself!  :)

 

Health care should be a right, but it has GOT to be affordable.  It isn't affordable for anyone right now, insurance or not.  Most people can't drop eleven hundred (WITH insurance) when an unexpected issue (with no warning and cuold not have been prevented) popped up, as it did for my husband recently (eye thing).  We could but gee...that's ridiculously unaffordable for many. 

[creekland]

Goodness, I hope your situation turned out to be closer to the "dry eye" diagnosis! 

 

I do agree that sometimes what you read can scare the heck out of you. I have had a couple of those moments myself.

Like you, I rarely see a doctor, but geez...when your appendix burst and you stay home three more days, you kind of can't fix that one on your own, so I know how that is.  I did try several different things though, to get my body to fix itself!  :)

 

Health care should be a right, but it has GOT to be affordable.  It isn't affordable for anyone right now, insurance or not.  Most people can't drop eleven hundred (WITH insurance) when an unexpected issue (with no warning and cuold not have been prevented) popped up, as it did for my husband recently (eye thing).  We could but gee...that's ridiculously unaffordable for many. 

Dry eye was pretty easy to rule out... unfortunately... but I'm still rather hopeful it will be something reasonable vs something not so reasonable.  Time will tell.  We're still in the checking things out time period.  Four visits to the doctor in 25 years (not including pregnancy and childbirth) and 2 already in a month's time this year with more promised.  I like the former better... (NOTHING against doctors - I'm just not in my comfort zone there).  The "good" thing is I'm considered basically healthy aside from whatever this issue is.  I should be set for another 25 years... :lol:

 

My ideal for universal healthcare would probably model the Canadian version even though I KNOW it's not perfect (have a Canadian step-mom).  It's just better than what we have.  Everyone would have their basic needs met whether for the flu or transplants - emergencies would be quick.  Not so emergencies would have a wait (they sort of do here now anyway).  If one wanted better than basic treatment they could pay extra for it if they could scrounge up the $$ - just as they do here now.

 

How to pay for it?  I'd add extra sales taxes just as CA does.  My teens who stop and buy a coke would be contributing.  The billionaire who buys a Ferrari would be contributing.

 

I do not believe there is a perfect health care system out there in this world.  I wish there were.

 

I'm generally fairly libertarian and/or conservative - this is just one of those issues where I disagree with them as I think health care should be a right.  It shouldn't matter who has how many $$ or who wins various "lotteries" for those "rare" times when the body can't fix itself.  No one should have to live with something - or even not knowing about something - due to their financial situation.

[Upward Journey]

My ideal for universal healthcare would probably model the Canadian version even though I KNOW it's not perfect (have a Canadian step-mom). It's just better than what we have. Everyone would have their basic needs met whether for the flu or transplants - emergencies would be quick. Not so emergencies would have a wait (they sort of do here now anyway). If one wanted better than basic treatment they could pay extra for it if they could scrounge up the $$ - just as they do here now.

 

How to pay for it? I'd add extra sales taxes just as CA does. My teens who stop and buy a coke would be contributing. The billionaire who buys a Ferrari would be contributing.

 

I do not believe there is a perfect health care system out there in this world. I wish there were.

 

I'm generally fairly libertarian and/or conservative - this is just one of those issues where I disagree with them as I think health care should be a right. It shouldn't matter who has how many $$ or who wins various "lotteries" for those "rare" times when the body can't fix itself. No one should have to live with something - or even not knowing about something - due to their financial situation.

Amen.

[TranquilMind]

Dry eye was pretty easy to rule out... unfortunately... but I'm still rather hopeful it will be something reasonable vs something not so reasonable.  Time will tell.  We're still in the checking things out time period.  Four visits to the doctor in 25 years (not including pregnancy and childbirth) and 2 already in a month's time this year with more promised.  I like the former better... (NOTHING against doctors - I'm just not in my comfort zone there).  The "good" thing is I'm considered basically healthy aside from whatever this issue is.  I should be set for another 25 years... :lol:

 

My ideal for universal healthcare would probably model the Canadian version even though I KNOW it's not perfect (have a Canadian step-mom).  It's just better than what we have.  Everyone would have their basic needs met whether for the flu or transplants - emergencies would be quick.  Not so emergencies would have a wait (they sort of do here now anyway).  If one wanted better than basic treatment they could pay extra for it if they could scrounge up the $$ - just as they do here now.

 

How to pay for it?  I'd add extra sales taxes just as CA does.  My teens who stop and buy a coke would be contributing.  The billionaire who buys a Ferrari would be contributing.

 

I do not believe there is a perfect health care system out there in this world.  I wish there were.

 

I'm generally fairly libertarian and/or conservative - this is just one of those issues where I disagree with them as I think health care should be a right.  It shouldn't matter who has how many $$ or who wins various "lotteries" for those "rare" times when the body can't fix itself.  No one should have to live with something - or even not knowing about something - due to their financial situation.

Your idea to add the cost to sales taxes is a good one.  We all buy things, that's for sure.  It wouldn't benefit one group more than another. 

[creekland]

Your idea to add the cost to sales taxes is a good one.  We all buy things, that's for sure.  It wouldn't benefit one group more than another. 

 

Everyone contributing is something I really like about it too.

 

FWIW, with regards to my issue... it's now a confirmed abnormality in the head  (MRI confirmed) that is hopefully benign...

 

These things could happen to anyone - at any age.  I've never smoked anything, seldom drink, seldom talk on cell phones - very seldom, and am generally healthy (normal to low BP, borderline diabetic, but it's been that way for years and it hasn't caused any eye issues, generally healthy diet, etc).  I just happened to "win" the lottery - as did everyone else seeing the specialist I'm seeing (perhaps different "winnings" but nonetheless, worthy of a specialist).  No one should have to be turned away due to their income or be afraid of going due to not being able to afford it - no one.  No one should have to come up with 20 - 40% after a high deductible either.  I believe we're going to be ok financially.  I hope everyone in the same boat is - yet I know they won't be unless/until our country gets serious about health care being a right not a privilege of the wealthy.

 

 

[Jane in NC]

Everyone contributing is something I really like about it too.

 

FWIW, with regards to my issue... it's now a confirmed abnormality in the head  (MRI confirmed) that is hopefully benign...

 

These things could happen to anyone - at any age.  I've never smoked anything, seldom drink, seldom talk on cell phones - very seldom, and am generally healthy (normal to low BP, borderline diabetic, but it's been that way for years and it hasn't caused any eye issues, generally healthy diet, etc).  I just happened to "win" the lottery - as did everyone else seeing the specialist I'm seeing (perhaps different "winnings" but nonetheless, worthy of a specialist).  No one should have to be turned away due to their income or be afraid of going due to not being able to afford it - no one.  No one should have to come up with 20 - 40% after a high deductible either.  I believe we're going to be ok financially.  I hope everyone in the same boat is - yet I know they won't be unless/until our country gets serious about health care being a right not a privilege of the wealthy.

 

Sending you best wishes, hopes and prayers, Creekland. 

 

And agreeing with the point made in the last paragraph!

 

Hugs,

Jane

 

[TranquilMind]

Everyone contributing is something I really like about it too.

 

FWIW, with regards to my issue... it's now a confirmed abnormality in the head  (MRI confirmed) that is hopefully benign...

 

These things could happen to anyone - at any age.  I've never smoked anything, seldom drink, seldom talk on cell phones - very seldom, and am generally healthy (normal to low BP, borderline diabetic, but it's been that way for years and it hasn't caused any eye issues, generally healthy diet, etc).  I just happened to "win" the lottery - as did everyone else seeing the specialist I'm seeing (perhaps different "winnings" but nonetheless, worthy of a specialist).  No one should have to be turned away due to their income or be afraid of going due to not being able to afford it - no one.  No one should have to come up with 20 - 40% after a high deductible either.  I believe we're going to be ok financially.  I hope everyone in the same boat is - yet I know they won't be unless/until our country gets serious about health care being a right not a privilege of the wealthy.

I pray you are ok.

[Caroline]

Your idea to add the cost to sales taxes is a good one. We all buy things, that's for sure. It wouldn't benefit one group more than another.

Actually, poor people end up paying a much higher percentage of their income in sales tax than middle class or wealthy people.

[creekland]

Actually, poor people end up paying a much higher percentage of their income in sales tax than middle class or wealthy people.

One could set it up that necessities (basic food from a grocery store or farmer's market, normal clothing, etc) are not taxed just as many states (inc PA) do now with the regular sales tax.

 

If one can afford that fast food (or any restaurant) supper or convenience store coke, they can afford the health care tax to go with it.

 

As I said before, no system is perfect. We are trying to make something that can work even with a few flaws.

 

Those with less income tend to pay more percentage-wise for their healthcare now if they can get it.  A $2500 deductible for wealthier folks is nothing.  For those with less income, it's pretty major.