When we make physicians employees of the state, then we can tell them what to do.Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife
Do you think we should do that?
When we make physicians employees of the state, then we can tell them what to do.
Do you think we should do that?
Anytime you change rules midstream someone is going to get the short end of the stick.
The one part I wonder about is that the kids on your plan until 26 thing does not cover maternity for them, even though they are at a prime age for that kind of thing happening. I wonder what happens in those situations?
I'm honestly not sure. I'm 50/50 on this one. There are countries where this seems to work and there are countries where it doesn't seem to work well. One example I can think of is Mexico - they have socialized medicine for people that pay into the system via formal work, meaning those annoying sidewalk vendors don't qualify. And it's not of the best quality. Then you can go to the hospital I went to in Mexicali for my ultrasounds that caters to Americans and Canadians and has the latest equipment and is cleaner and more sterile than the hospital I had my surgery in here in Phoenix. If you have US dollars and know of US prices, that hospital is quite cheap - it's kind of like Mexican free enterprise at work in a way. Definitely a two tiered system, which is what I have read is coming here. Those on Medicaid and the exchanges and Medicare, vs. those who can afford US concierge medicine. I don't know that I like a two tiered system here BUT I understand I am also a hypocrite as I don't mind it in Mexico one bit as I can afford the nicer hospital if it is not a huge procedure. I don't know that I want health care personnel to be employees of the state, I just don't know on this one. After my issues with being denied by error of the Arizona Department of Economic Security this past Spring, I just don't know if I trust the government to handle health care well - though I did get my surgery and Medicare overall seems to work well. But health care workers accepting government based health care are not employee of the state.
Short answer, I see pros and cons and I'm not sure. Rob
There are numerous articles on this, but quoting HuffPo for obvious reasons
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5044270.html
The Affordable Care Act increased insurers' costs by forbidding denial of coverage to consumers with pre-existing conditions and by imposing taxes and fees to fund aspects of the new law. To make up for ACA costs and keep premiums low, Blue Shield asked its doctors and hospitals to accept payments from the insurer at rates reduced up to 30 percent.
Not surprisingly, some doctors and hospitals rejected Blue Shield's reduced payment rates and decided not to re-sign contracts with the insurer.Iorio has not been able to find a urologist for her son or an ob-gyn who is both covered by her insurance and practicing in a hospital that is covered. She's called over a dozen doctors who are covered by her insurance, and each has told her that if she or her son needs an operation in the hospitals the doctor contracts with, it won't be covered.
"My insurance is pretty useless. And I'm not fussy about what doctor I see," Iorio said. "I don't know what to do. I may just drop it for myself and keep my son on it. It's really depressing."
Before joining Covered California, Iorio had an individual Blue Shield plan that was cheaper than what she now pays and that gave her wider access to doctors and hospitals.
Wagner said she is hopeful that more doctors and hospitals will join Blue Shield's network in the future. "With any large sweeping change like the implementation of the ACA, there will be some confusion in the market," she said. "I expect it will get better."
In the meantime, consumers like Iorio feel trapped.
"I'm paying $500 a month and every doctor I'm calling is saying, 'No, I can't see you,'" she said. "I feel like a second-class citizen."
This article interestingly enough is one of the ones I read in regards to this issue. And I see some real issues and concerns here, yes. I really need to consider myself lucky - I had issues with Banner Good Samaritan hospital in Phoenix misdiagnosing me with cancer and pancreatitis during my surgery stay of 13 days in May - and then when I came for my last follow up visit and asked for a scrip of a prescription cream I picked up in Mexico to fade the scar I was lectured at some length about how "unwise it is to buy medications in Mexico". I was lucky as I was able to switch to another hospital and doctor that are actually within walking distance of where I live. But....not everyone seems to have that kind of luck under ObamaCare. It's like IL said, there are winners and losers here and for once in my life I'm one of the winners. This does not mean I care for other people not to be winners, though - it just means that I got lucky. I would rather others have the options I have been lucky to have so far. Rob
Came back to add - here in Arizona there is an insurance provider on the exchanges (Health Net) that is one of the least expensive in the nation and that has extremely narrow networks, just like in the HuffPost article above. And a lot of consumer complaints and a very tarnished image. My mother has Health Net and she had problems finding a provider for her mammogram for the first time ever as the network even for Medicare has shrunk. She managed to find a provider eventually but even she said if it's that much of a hassle next time, you can go to Mexico with me and I'll have it done there. (She doesn't want to go alone which I believe is understandable). Rob
Yes, it is true that many doctors are refusing to see Medicare patients, at least in SC. My students who work at doctor's office complain about it, especially the effect on the elderly poor, who are now not being seen.
Up here in MI, we cannot find any primary care doctors taking new patients, and we have employer BC/BS.
On the other hand, my husband's three medical emergencies in May have been covered by insurance, and it has worked semi well, although it has taken a lot of phone time to get the insurance company to pay what it is supposed to pay.
On the other other hand, my asthma medication has gone up so much it is unaffordable, at 450 dollars a month, although the subsidized folk get it for virtually free.
It almost seems the point of OC is to kill off the chronically ill and elderly.
Doctors have always had the choice to see or not see Medicare and Medicaid patients: its not an Obamacare thing. It's just like they can take Aetna but not UnitedHealthcare. Rates of capitation (the amount of money doctors get for seeing each patient) probably varies, but I'm not sure how much. It's not high in any case--the managed care organizations are the Walmart of the medical industry, trying to see how low they can go in terms of reimbursing doctors for care. So if doctors don't like it, they just don't sign up with the insurance company--doesn't matter if it's private or government.
"Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
www.silententry.wordpress.com
Your post here very much scares me - no fault of your own. Seriously, under these conditions, why even own traditional property? Better to live in a mobile home somewhere close to the border if you can't qualify for Medicaid and just do all your medical in Mexico and give up on a lot of what society say you should have as far as materialism/consumerism. Interestingly enough though, I read of this small town in west Texas that is not far from the border that is allowing tiny housed to be placed on lots in town - those 120 SF small homes that are getting trendy now. I see some hope here - more people severely downsizing and having more options to offshore their medical. I do see some hope here but for me the hope is not going to look like most people would want it to.....Rob
My issue here is the fact that when ObamaCare was rolled out there was no discussion that doctors may end out refusing to see you due to reimbursements not being high enough. Does anyone remember that being addressed? I never thought I'd say this but I'm really grateful to be low income because at least I can get my pills for free - at the moment, anyway. I don't know how long it is sustainable for me to have my meds for free and I'm not counting on it for any length of time but for the moment, it's nice. But the point is, not everyone qualifies for this. Interestingly enough, the health care overhaul I so wanted - and actually got - may give me more reasons to make a run for the border - and not just me, but many other people, too. Now is a good time to be an offshore medical professional, no doubt. Rob
Why would you expect the purveyors of Obamacare to admit that all may not be rosy with it?
From our President of the United States:
Let me be exactly clear about what health care reform means to you…if you’ve got health insurance, you like your doctors, you like your plan, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan. Nobody is talking about taking that away from you.”
In the spirit of fairness, this quote may be slightly out of context in that the Prez was talking about plans (if you've got it you can keep it) but unfortunately, that wasn't true, either.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote