Rationing Healthcare!

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by GHook93, Aug 6, 2009.

  1. GHook93
    Offline

    GHook93 Aristotle

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    17,915
    Thanks Received:
    3,126
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +4,927
    I keeping hearing this night and day on the radio that the government will ration healthcare! That experimental drugs and treatments will be denied. That people in need of treatment will be denied.

    Guess what people, ration already happens in the private system:
    (1) Preexisting conditions :
    If you have individual insurance, then they deny you coverage for the condition you actually need! Think about it. You need insurance for your health. Say you have a condition like MS, you need insurance to cover that! Yet the company tells you sorry we need to ration this way, because its unprofitable to us. If you work in a small business, you could have to under go a physical and get the same treatment. If this is not rationing, then WHAT IS?

    (2) Increasing Premiums or Dropping Coverage:
    Look busters we agreed to cover you as long as you didn't get sick or injured and request any claims. You made too many claims last year now we are dropping you? OK that was harsh, we are only raising your premium 200% no biggie! Hey small business owner in the corner, don't hide, because your people keep making claims, like that Asshole Joe Cancer! Joe Cancer either needs to go or we raise your premium 300%, while taking away things we cover (Note: more than likely Joe Cancer is out on the street with a gigantic Cobra expense!). If this is not rationing THEN WHAT IS?

    (3) Removing coverage from a group plan:
    In large companies its typical to not cover treatments such as OT, physical therapy or speech therapy, because only a small segment of the workforce will ever encounter them. I am sorry your son can't talk, but its more profitable for us to not cover it, how about you just give him some lolly-pops and tell people he would talk, but he has a lolly-pop in his mouth! If this is not rationing THEN WHAT IS?

    (4) Denying experimental treatments and drugs:
    This is what I find amusing about the R attacks on UHC, because the private healthcare denies experimental treatments and drugs all the time! Bone marrow transplants for cancers victims are routinely denied because the probability of it working is low and the cost is high! Experimental drugs get the same results. People do know that the HIV drug that has been prolonging people's lives (and is extremely expensive) was for a long time viewed as experimental and not covered. Even today many plans don't cover it! AMAZING! Who are the pundits on the radio crappin! If this is not rationing, THEN WHAT IS?

    (5) The HMO:
    The HMO has one purpose, INCREASE profits by denying as much as you can. I had an HMO for a little bit and its was pain to get anything. I was denied allergy shot coverage! ALLERGY shots! They said I didn't have allergies! Amazing! Ask anyone with an HMO, they make it difficult to get coverage and routinely get denied needed coverage. When if comes between 2 options they ALWAYS go with the more inexpensive option. If this is not rationion, THEN WHAT IS?

    (6) The 80/20 copay PPO:
    The PPO, the great alternative to the HMO! You get choice! Great! But it comes a huge cost. The 20% out-of-pocket! I am going to have a child in 1 month. Every other child I my take was $1,000 (note: I pay more for the 90/10 PPO plus). The total hospital bills come can out to $10K and neither of my kids had any complications. We were in and out of the hospital on a regular schedule! I had shoulder surgery. The total bills came out to $22,000, my take again was $2200. If you don't think a 20% copay deters many people from getting needed treatments and surgey you are crazy. The copay is an self-rationing mechanism! Again if this is not rationing, THEN WHAT IS?


    Conservatives if you are going to make a case against UHC, then fine do it, but don't do it disingeniously! Don't toss out that healthcare will be rationed, while ignoring the fact that its rationed now!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. GHook93
    Offline

    GHook93 Aristotle

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    17,915
    Thanks Received:
    3,126
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +4,927
    I am surprised no one is refuting this, because this is such a widely used talking point for the anti-UHC crowd!
     
  3. vharlow
    Offline

    vharlow Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    20
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +4
    People only have pre-existing condition clauses in policies when they were not covered by some policy for a period of 63 days, or whatever...can't recall the exact period, but FYI that is a government regulation. There may be a time period when that clause is in effect, say for a year or something...it's not for always. If you lose a job and coverage, you can and should purchase a temporary policy which can be quite inexpensive, or choose COBRA coverage.

    If you are expecting a government takeover of health care to cover OT, speech therapy, etc., think again. It won't happen.

    If government takes over health care, and they determine you don't have allergies, do you really think government will pay for allergy shots for allergies you don't have? Think again. it won't happen.

    The kind of rationing that conservatives are concerned about is for the elderly. How many transplants will not occur because you are over 60? How many surgeries will not be done because you are over a certain age...how many hip replacements that allow people to walk won't be done, how many pacemakers will be denied., etc. You get the picture. The elderly will be heavily rationed, according to Obama's own words.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. GHook93
    Offline

    GHook93 Aristotle

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    17,915
    Thanks Received:
    3,126
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +4,927
    Right off of townhall.com, where many of the pundits write for!

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2009
  5. GHook93
    Offline

    GHook93 Aristotle

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    17,915
    Thanks Received:
    3,126
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +4,927
    Well said! :clap2:
     
  6. Centrism'sVoice
    Offline

    Centrism'sVoice Seceded from USMB

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    813
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +58
    Doesn't help if you're not employed again by the time your COBRA runs out. Depending on the pre-existing condition, it really can be impossible to get any temporary insurance at all. My sister was in a car wreck 5 years ago, in which she broke several bones and had to have some leg muscles reconstructed. She's completely able-bodied now, but nobody would insure her aside from her employer's policy.
     
  7. vharlow
    Offline

    vharlow Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    20
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +4
    Her medical claims should rightly be paid by the car insurer of whoever was to blame for the accident, not her health plan in the first place. The health carrier would go after the car insurance to pay for anything they paid out. That's the way insurance works. No health coverage for the pre-existing condition caused by that accident would not be a problem. If she was looking for a policy that had that pre-existing condition written in, it would only be for a specified period of time for that condition only, and would cover her for other problems.

    People don't understand insurance at all, that's why it's so easy for politicians to demagogue and blame "insurance companies" as "evil" when most of the restrictions on them were created by the government regulations in the first place.

    Insurance is not easy to understand. That's why insurance reps have to have hours and hours of training before they can get licensed. Ordinary people find it very difficult to understand all the ins and outs of tort law, etc.
     
  8. Centrism'sVoice
    Offline

    Centrism'sVoice Seceded from USMB

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    813
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +58
    The initial claims were never an issue, and what happened at that point was exactly as you described.
    This is the part you're missing: apparently no such policy exists. I should mention at this point that my sister is a longtime career journalist, and she is well aware of how to research a situation. If she says nobody will insure her due to problems from the accident, I'm prepared to accept that.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. vharlow
    Offline

    vharlow Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    20
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +4
    HMO's MUST accept her. They cannot turn her down. Some are fairly good.
     
  10. veritas
    Offline

    veritas OBKB

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +135

    What? You don't understand it much either. Pre-existing conditions can and are slapped on by INSCOS all the time, sometimes retroactively. Subrogation should occur in the car accident scenario, but many times it doesn't. Sometimes the carriers are the same and then things can get really convoluted. Each state has its own laws which makes for an overwhelming C*F if an accident happened in a state where the policy was not initially issued. Most states and policies require an administrative remedy before a legal one, state insurance administrations are full of revolving door insurance execs, lobbyists, adjusters, etc.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page