Health Care Reform

[jestagrl79]

Huh - I feel like I'm getting attacked here. I do NOT want a national health care plan. It is currently cheaper for us to pay out of pocket for all medical expenses for our family of 4 than to pay our current health care premiums through my husband's employer. This, and I get to chose what treatments my family gets, not Aetna, and certainly not the government. I would like to see some accountability for breach of contract. I like the concept of cooperatives, and would likely participate in that.

For what it's worth, Aetna didn't blink an eye paying $26K for my son's treatment for failure to thrive last year - my cost, $35. However, the "solution" for his failure to thrive was a special formula at ~$450 a month, which they consider a grocery item and not a medical necessary treatment.

[scubabob]

You'll get no personal attacks from me, but any policy positions I perceive as supportive to UHC will probably be attacked by me. I hope you understand.

[jestagrl79]

Originally Posted by scubabob

You'll get no personal attacks from me, but any policy positions I perceive as supportive to UHC will probably be attacked by me. I hope you understand.

Indeed, I do, and appreciate you clarifying your stance. I'm most interested in what people here think would be a good step to reforming health care.

I do when someone with a pre existing problem can't get a insurance company to pay for it...smacks of bleeding heart liberalism to me....or communism in other words.

This quote seems to sum up a common theme here.

My son was born with a medical condition, do you think that was his choice? Or would you blame me for that? Should he be completely ineligible to receive insurance, forever? Any illness he may ever get, from a cold to diabetes, could feasibly be connected back to this condition. I'm sorry, but I don't find it unreasonable to care for preexisting conditions. Most conditions, if cared for proactively, will cost significantly less than reactive care would.

There's also a lot of talk of government waste and fraud, and I'd just like to point out that the insurance companies & hospitals do the same thing. Sorry for the "girly" examples, these are just the things I can recall from our recent insurance numbers.

Example - a circumcision is billed at $500 to the insurance company. If I don't have insurance, it's $50.
Example - a birth costs $15k, birth control for 5 years would cost $500. Which one of these do you think the insurance company won't cover?

[AllenW]

Originally Posted by jestagrl79

Indeed, I do, and appreciate you clarifying your stance. I'm most interested in what people here think would be a good step to reforming health care.



This quote seems to sum up a common theme here.

My son was born with a medical condition, do you think that was his choice? Or would you blame me for that? Should he be completely ineligible to receive insurance, forever? Any illness he may ever get, from a cold to diabetes, could feasibly be connected back to this condition. I'm sorry, but I don't find it unreasonable to care for preexisting conditions. Most conditions, if cared for proactively, will cost significantly less than reactive care would.

There's also a lot of talk of government waste and fraud, and I'd just like to point out that the insurance companies & hospitals do the same thing. Sorry for the "girly" examples, these are just the things I can recall from our recent insurance numbers.

Example - a circumcision is billed at $500 to the insurance company. If I don't have insurance, it's $50.
Example - a birth costs $15k, birth control for 5 years would cost $500. Which one of these do you think the insurance company won't cover?

His choice? Don't be foolish, of course not, but did you ever consider health care before he was born?
Sounds like many think its ok to skate though life paying no one till they need help, then expect to be covered only if needed.
And the rest of us (meaning the govt) are suppose to pay for it all..nope, no thanks.

Al

[akula]

Many of the insurance company decisions really are penny wise and pound foolish. With the recent news about the government's recommendation on mammograms, I'd expect any UHC system to follow in that fine tradition.

When it comes to preexisting conditions, the problem is that people with legitimate needs are lumped in with folks who might not buy insurance until they run into trouble, then dump it. When I bought individual plans, the preexisting condition part usually said they wouldn't cover it for one calendar year from the purchase date. IMO, that's fair for adults- not so much for newborn infants, especially if the parents have been carrying the policy.

I remember that the policy we had did not have maternity coverage- we'd have had to buy it (at over $100/month) and keep it in force for a full year before it would cover anything, all while they kept cutting back coverage on things like birth control. While I understand they don't want people having two lines (or however many it is) on the little stick and then popping for coverage, it was pretty maddening when we were already paying over $400/month for the two of us (and we incurred almost no costs for them; two months' premiums would have more than covered our heath costs for the year). Needless to say, I was quite happy when Walmart rolled out the HSA plan so we could quit flushing our money down the BlueCross/BlueShield toilet- it was good coverage, but individual coverage is murderously expensive even for a young healthy couple.

[jestagrl79]

Originally Posted by AllenW

His choice? Don't be foolish, of course not, but did you ever consider health care before he was born?
Sounds like many think its ok to skate though life paying no one till they need help, then expect to be covered only if needed.
And the rest of us (meaning the govt) are suppose to pay for it all..nope, no thanks.

Al

Al - thanks. That actually makes sense, looking through that lens. We've always been insured in some form or another (parents, college, employer), so we've been paying the piper, so to speak, before any of us had what are now considered preexisting conditions.