Obama Care

[saden1]

Originally Posted by dmek25

not that its right or wrong, but she went outside their network, when she was warned of the consequences
A woman dying of cancer was denied free National Health Service treatment in her final months because she had paid privately for a drug to try to prolong her life.

Linda O’Boyle was told that as she had paid for private treatment she was banned from free NHS care.

That is a bad policy and I'm sure it's going to be reversed. She was the first and hopefully the last before change in policy takes place. People should be able to supplement their treatment, always.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by saden1

Wow, that's terrible....it should never happen. Fortunately it will never happen here seeing how the drug companies run the prison and ACA is private insurance centric. We're going to put a stop to this sort of thing though.

Terrible indeed, and hopefully, when all the hospitals are eventually run by the government there won't be anything more like this.

[firstdown]

Well to be honest if its a national or private coverage we do need some form of rationing coverage because we are spending billions and billions on treatments each year on people who it will not help. People think by the government getting involved everything will now be covered but if anything less stuff will now be covered by ins. Don't worry if you cough you can run to the doctors but if your dying and need some major watch out because that where they are going to cut cost.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Terrible indeed, and hopefully, when all the hospitals are eventually run by the government there won't be anything more like this.

Let's hope it won't be as bad as the price we are currently paying.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by saden1

Let's hope it won't be as bad as the price we are currently paying.

Of course, the significant distinction is that those families can sue private insurers for damages.

A course of action that's coincidentally not available to veterans in mishaps that occur in a military hospital.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Of course, the significant distinction is that those families can sue private insurers for damages.

A course of action that's coincidentally not available to veterans in mishaps that occur in a military hospital.

You're telling me that if you sign up to serve and get shot in a friendly fire incident you should be able to sue the US? Preposterous proposition. You are only entitled to damages if the a VA Hospital f's up your back surgery not if you pull your back while lifting a heavy box. And of course if you do pull your back lifting a box they give you time off and pay your medical bills too.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by saden1

You're telling me that if you sign up to serve and get shot in a friendly fire incident you should be able to sue the US? Preposterous proposition. You are only entitled to damages if the a VA Hospital f's up your back surgery not if you pull your back while lifting a heavy box. And of course if you do pull your back lifting a box they give you time off and pay your medical bills too.

Maybe you can forward that web address to the family of Marine Sgt. Carmelo Rodriguez.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Maybe you can forward that web address to the family of Marine Sgt. Carmelo Rodriguez.

Let's get one thing straight the government should be liable if it is pure negligence as is the case Rodriguez tragedy but there is something to be said for not allowing any active duty member of the armed to sue the military.

[mlmpetert]

UPDATE 2-Obama tries to humanize the healthcare debate | Reuters


Obama held a press conference on his health care bill on my brothers street yesterday. All of a sudden his street got completely blocked off and he wasnt allowed to leave. He did get a bunch of pictures of the President’s motorcade. It was pretty cool.

So i sent the pictures around to everyone at work, then my boss and i talked about it. At first we thought that I thought that the press conference must have been about home ownership, my brother lives in Falls Church and it’s a very middle class area and about 70% Hispanic neighborhood. But it was about healthcare, so why would you hold a press conference on healthcare in someone’s back yard on the first day the reform starts to take place? To make the emotional aspect of health care reform take prominence………

[mlmpetert]

And then there's this:

FOXNews.com - Do Kids Count? Insurers Stop Selling Child-Only Policies Ahead of ObamaCare Provisions

What do you expect when you force insurance co. to do things that attack their earnings?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

UPDATE 2-Obama tries to humanize the healthcare debate | Reuters


Obama held a press conference on his health care bill on my brothers street yesterday. All of a sudden his street got completely blocked off and he wasnt allowed to leave. He did get a bunch of pictures of the President’s motorcade. It was pretty cool.

So i sent the pictures around to everyone at work, then my boss and i talked about it. At first we thought that I thought that the press conference must have been about home ownership, my brother lives in Falls Church and it’s a very middle class area and about 70% Hispanic neighborhood. But it was about healthcare, so why would you hold a press conference on healthcare in someone’s back yard on the first day the reform starts to take place? To make the emotional aspect of health care reform take prominence………

Healthcare has always been humanized from the get go, this is about combating republican misinformation, connecting with as many voters and winning elections.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

And then there's this:

FOXNews.com - Do Kids Count? Insurers Stop Selling Child-Only Policies Ahead of ObamaCare Provisions

What do you expect when you force insurance co. to do things that attack their earnings?

I agree with the insurance companies....imagine that...that's just crazy! If kids being on their parent's insurance policy stops gaming of the system I'm all for it.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by saden1

I agree with the insurance companies....imagine that...that's just crazy! If kids being on their parent's insurance policy stops gaming of the system I'm all for it.

The only thing it stops is having to write new policies for children already sick. It does not and cannot stop them from adding the already sick kid to their policy. This also sounds so nice but if they could not afford to buy their own policy they probably cannot afford to buy coverage under the parents policy. So what will happen is the sick children who for what ever reason does not have ins. will now get on their parents policy. This will drive up the cost for the employers even though they are not paying the premium it will drive up the losses/rates. Bottom line rates are going up and that chart is just crap.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by firstdown

The only thing it stops is having to write new policies for children already sick. It does not and cannot stop them from adding the already sick kid to their policy. This also sounds so nice but if they could not afford to buy their own policy they probably cannot afford to buy coverage under the parents policy. So what will happen is the sick children who for what ever reason does not have ins. will now get on their parents policy. This will drive up the cost for the employers even though they are not paying the premium it will drive up the losses/rates. Bottom line rates are going up and that chart is just crap.

What the devil are you talking about? They're stopping all child-only policies. They never covered any sick children with pre-existing before ! All they are doing now with this move is trying to garner more customers and add to their bottom line which is fine (the parent comes with the child).

Oh and due to federal law employers can't refuse health insurance if you or your child have a pre-existing condition for more than 18 months thanks to Republican congress passed Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.
.

[wilsowilso]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Second there is not that many people denied health coverage or cannot afford health care to tear apart our health care system. Does it need some work. Yes but goverment is one of the biggest problems with health care coverage today.

Not that many people? That's an absurd statement. How many tens of millions of legal citizens does it take?

Government might be one of the biggest problems, but the biggest problem is that Health Insurance companies have been raping the American people forever and they don't want to give up all that money that they steal from us. Why would anyone want to protect these interests? Money for campaigns. It's all about money.