Sun Devil 92
Diamond Member
- Apr 2, 2015
- 32,078
- 11,097
- 1,410
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #41
If a family wants to blow their life savings to keep grandpa alive for an extra year, or if insurance companies can sell expensive insurance that covers such extremes, it's not a bad thing. It's people spending their money howAnd this is where I think you're misguided.
Be careful what you wish for.
I am all ears as to how this might not be the case.
I didn't start this thread to argue a point. I started it to raise these questions.
I can't say it is a bad thing. What I need to know is where we spend our dollars.
A very touch subject is end of life care. As I understand it, we spend about 30% of our total health care dollars on people in the last year of life.
I quickly looked and found this:
Medicare, the health insurance program for the elderly, spends nearly 30 percent of its budget on beneficiaries in their final year of life. Slightly more than half of Medicare dollars are spent on patients who die within two months.
30% or a small variation, one has to ask what we are getting for that.
Now, I'd like to see what Singapore does with regards to EOL issues.
they want. You and I might think it's a waste, but others disagree. They obviously find some value in it.
EOL care is no longer a "personal decision" in the USA -- largely.. It's the Medicare reimbursements and highly controlled MediCare supplemental markets that we all are FORCED to share. In fact ---- it's ILLEGAL to "blow a wad" on Gramps in almost all cases. I know -- my Dad died (partly) because I was not able to fund a simple variation on a procedure that Medicare would not allow..
You'll need to explain.
You are saying that had you paid for a procedure on your own, you would have been in violation of the law ?
If the patient is admitted for a particular reason that is covered under Medicare - you cannot ALTER the treatments or services rendered in ANY WAY by private funding or subsidizing deviations from Medicare standards. The doctors will then not be reimbursed for a DIME of the total cost.
In this case, there were recurrent serious UTInfections due to an enlarged prostate and the solution was radio heating of prostrate which is approved for local anesthesia. The Urologist refused to put him on the table because it's painful and requires a lot a cooperation and was afraid he wouldn't comply.
I wanted them to put him under general anesth. which the doctor said was possible, but Medicare would reject his entire claim if I paid for it..
That sounds terrible.
I am sorry for you and your father.