EHR's - Does this make sense?

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by chanel, Jul 22, 2010.

  1. chanel
    Offline

    chanel Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    12,130
    Thanks Received:
    2,746
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    People's Republic of NJ
    Ratings:
    +2,749
    CNSNews.com - Obama's Electronic Health Records Czar: HIV Status and Abortions Need Not be Included

    I read the article twice and still don't get it. He seems to be saying that the EHR only needs to contain the information that the patient wants in there - which is fine with me. However, if people choose not to disclose that info to the govt., what's the friggin point?
     
  2. Samson
    Offline

    Samson Póg Mo Thóin Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,357
    Thanks Received:
    3,742
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    A Higher Plain
    Ratings:
    +4,210

    I think the health records of anyone only really need to contain information that would effect them in the future....seems to me HIV status would be an essential piece of information, but abortion....not so much:

    But I'm only an amature gynecologist.:redface:
     
  3. chanel
    Offline

    chanel Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    12,130
    Thanks Received:
    2,746
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    People's Republic of NJ
    Ratings:
    +2,749
    What about smoking? BMI's? High cholesterol? If insurers are going to do risk assessments and charge accordingly, wouldn't unprotected sex - abortions; STD's, etc. be considered risky behavior?

    I'm fairly certain that when this becomes reality that I will inform my docs that I want NOTHING in my health report except name, address and SS#.
     
  4. Samson
    Offline

    Samson Póg Mo Thóin Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,357
    Thanks Received:
    3,742
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    A Higher Plain
    Ratings:
    +4,210
    What Insurers?

    Why would Nationalized Healthcare be concerned with "risk assessments and charge accordingly?"
     
  5. Zoom-boing
    Offline

    Zoom-boing Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    25,061
    Thanks Received:
    7,260
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    East Japip
    Ratings:
    +10,120
    I'm confused. It says the info in the EHR is between the patient and doctor, that they decide what is or isn't included. It says the EHR program is voluntary, no specific info is required to be included in the records and the doctor needs the patients permission. If the doctor chooses not to participate, they get penalized by less than 100% of Medicare/aid payments. Ok. But then it says that the EHR must include a patient's 'problem list'. No specific info is required . . . except for the specific info that is required? What if the doctor wants to list this but the patient doesn't?
     
  6. chanel
    Offline

    chanel Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    12,130
    Thanks Received:
    2,746
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    People's Republic of NJ
    Ratings:
    +2,749
    Exactly zoom. I don't know if this is a poorly written article or the EHR component of the HC bill was poorly explained. I'm going to side with the latter.

    And Samson - of course insurers (or the eventual govt. UHC) is going to use this info to set premiums. Why else would anyone need it except the doctor who already has it?
     
  7. Samson
    Offline

    Samson Póg Mo Thóin Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,357
    Thanks Received:
    3,742
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    A Higher Plain
    Ratings:
    +4,210
    I don't think there will be premiums with UHC....at least not for everyone.
     
  8. chanel
    Offline

    chanel Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    12,130
    Thanks Received:
    2,746
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    People's Republic of NJ
    Ratings:
    +2,749
    UHC is probably ten years down the road, doncha think?

    There are many people who argue that smokers and fat people should have to pay more. But I'm saying so should drug addicts and whores. Or are they a protected class now? Hard to keep up...
     
  9. Samson
    Offline

    Samson Póg Mo Thóin Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,357
    Thanks Received:
    3,742
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    A Higher Plain
    Ratings:
    +4,210
    Under UHC, of course addicts, whores, the mentally ill, and every sort of self-inflicted ailment will be covered.

    Why else would we have UHC?
     
  10. chanel
    Offline

    chanel Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    12,130
    Thanks Received:
    2,746
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    People's Republic of NJ
    Ratings:
    +2,749
    I know they'll be covered, but shouldn't their insurance cost more if that's the way they do it? In fact, doesn't it work that way now with "high risk policies" for people with HIV and cancer and what not?
     

Share This Page