Health care for children & pregnant women first$n

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by Supposn, Aug 20, 2009.

  1. Supposn
    Offline

    Supposn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    863
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Ratings:
    +31
    Children and pregnant women should be among our nation’s first priority.

    I’ll vote against any candidate that advocated or voted for an unsatisfactory health care bill. If Obama signs such a bill, I’ll vote against him. I’ll vote against any federal candidate that failed to openly advocate and diligently strive for a satisfactory health care bill.

    At minimum, a satisfactory health care bill would provide universal medical coverage for pregnant women and children under the age of six. (This could best be accomplished by including them all within Medicare).

    I’m not opposed to additional federal taxes for this purpose. I’m not opposed to a general federal sales tax. There is no logical relationship between income and medical need.

    I’m absolutely opposed to any additional discriminatory taxes, fees or other mandates that are applicable only to employees and/or employers. FICA is the most regressive of all federal tax methods.

    Democrats should not betray their nation and themselves. Why not do what’s right?

    Respectfully, Bernard Belitsky
     
  2. veritas
    Offline

    veritas OBKB

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +135
    Pregnancy is already fully covered. So is care for children through schip by the states for people that qualify, and it is not hard to qualify.
     
  3. Supposn
    Offline

    Supposn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    863
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Ratings:
    +31
    Veritas,
    If it's not universal and an entitlement, it ain't fully covered. All those covered and have genuine need for medical care are not receiving it.

    To the extent that federal government already funds CHIPS, universal coverage would not be an additional federal cost. To the extent that other families, state and county governments, employers, labor and other organizations are incurring such expenses, it will significantly reduce their expenses. To the extent that needy person are not nowreceiving proper medical care, it will remedy the condition.

    During this administration a federal health care bill will almost certainly be enacted. I would rather that bill sufficiently serve a segment of age groups rather than the money be squandered and not sufficiently serve any age group.

    We should give priority to the needs of pregnant women and children under the age of six.

    Respectfully, Supposn
     
  4. veritas
    Offline

    veritas OBKB

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +135
    It's universal, it's a federal mandate distributed to the states. You don't have to be that needy either.
     
  5. OneWorld
    Offline

    OneWorld Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    200
    Thanks Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +17
    Actually it's covered, but this area of how the government AND private sector covers pregnancy needs to be radically reformed. But there's a major disinformation campaign that's been going on in the industry to scare women into taking away their options an choices (because they make more money if they can get more interventions and end up with a c-section).

    I could show you some TV ads from the 50's from the private industry hospitals that would make your head spin. Like when they used to strap women's hands down, and suck babies out regularly with vacuums (and they still do sometimes - the vacuuming part).

    If people had good information, they could make better decisions about child birth, and it would be cheaper on all of us, but the industry has done a great job of lying to people. Other countries don't have outrageous c-section rates, and they also don't have high childbirth death rates like we do. But they also primarily use midwives, where the private industry has ran huge misinformation campaigns about midives in the U.S. and successfully kept them out of hospitals.

    Go private industry!
     
  6. veritas
    Offline

    veritas OBKB

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +135
    I think the anti-vback age is over, oneworld. It was heinous but I think it's over. I've had two c-sections, both were extremely horrible [as getting cut in half can only be] but they were necessary for two breach presentations. I had one the old fashioned way in between and that was easy peasy, and I recommend it, but you get what you get. Childbirth was the number one killer until the latter half of the last century, it's a risky undertaking.
     
  7. wvpeach
    Offline

    wvpeach Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Messages:
    100
    Thanks Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    West Virginia ( God's country)
    Ratings:
    +18
    Pregnant women and children are covered. Children till the age of 18 now I believe.

    Where do you suppose this Supposn has been?

    or in the words of Barney Franks what planet do you suppose Supposn has been living on?



    Oh by the way that is what the latest cigarette tax signed into law by President Bush goes to cover. Schips for kids and care for pregnant women.

    True one day we may have to find a different way of funding it ,- if enough people stop smoking. But for now I think we are safe.
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2009
  8. veritas
    Offline

    veritas OBKB

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +135
    Supposn has rants in need of an issue..........may he find one soon.
     
  9. OneWorld
    Offline

    OneWorld Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    200
    Thanks Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +17
    I can tell you sincerely it's not. In the city I live (and you can PM me if you want to look this up), there's a doctor who performed a v-back in a hospital over here that is getting sued by the hospital and the AMA is moving to take away his license! Baby and momma are and were fine btw...

    I can also tell you because my wife is literally one of the leaders in the child birth movement, and that it's a serious problem. Also, doctors today are not taught how to deliver breach because it's easier for them to do c-section, and of course hospitals and everyone make more money too (and supposedly less risk with insurance companies - ie, this is what the insurance company wants). Midwives can, and regularly turn babies to deliver (and this used to be standard practice). However today OBGYN's are trained surgeons, not experts on pregnancy (pre and post natal).

    If you want more info, or my wife's site just PM me.
     
  10. wvpeach
    Offline

    wvpeach Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Messages:
    100
    Thanks Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    West Virginia ( God's country)
    Ratings:
    +18
    Sounds like to me supposn needs a rant that is based on some facts and makes at least a little sense . Struck out on this one.
     

Share This Page