Universal Health Care

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41315890/ns/us_news/

I’m not sure if I am doing this properly…so bear with me, I am still a newbie here!

I saw the above article on MSNBC and read through the commentary on that site regarding the issues addressed in the article.

I thought it provided much food for thought and would be a great topic of conversation here, as it deals with many of the concerns many of us had expressed throughout the healthcare debate and what still is wrong with our systems.

I’m limiting my initial post on this (this time) because I’m not sure what specifically bothered me most about this article and would appreciated hearing others take on it.

While I am happy that Gabby Gifford was able to receive the help she needed, I’m disturbed by the story of the boy who was not provided such as access, even though he had medicaid.

There are other issues that to  me, seemed glaring, as well, regarding class issues, that our nation just does not like to address.

Previous article50 Ways To Leave Your Blogger
Next articleHow Will America Truly Recover From the Economic Collapse?
For the last 21 years, I worked in international trade as a licensed customs broker, international freight forwarder and international trade consultant. I ended up in that business after having studied Journalism and communication in college. (Strange how that worked) Over the last 3 years I have been trying to change my life and my career, so I left my job, returned to school and am on the last leg of completing my Bachelor's of Science in Business Administration and Economics, and am planning on going on for my masters in International Business. It might seem odd that I decided to formally study the business I was in for 21 years...but there is a reason for that... I hope to teach and write on the subject in the future. I'm a mother of 2 young adults and have many hobbies; reading, researching, writing, blogging, decorating, are my current favorites.

76
Leave a Comment

Please Login to comment
20 Comment threads
56 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
19 Comment authors
Ana44jdmn17KarateKidDustyMillsBigDogMom Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
KarateKid
Member

People are asking about you, abby. I just told two or three to check this site out.

AdLib
Admin

Just saw this headline in our news widget:

Rep. Giffords speaks for first time since shooting

How cool is that?

bito
Member

GABBY!!!

Ana44
Member
Ana44

Hi Abbyrose,
Am happy to be able to follow your fine posts here; many are missing you at HP, but understand why. This is a much better forum, actually. Be Well.

KarateKid
Member

Good to see you, GW, you’re one of my favorite people.

DustyMills
Member

It’s nice to see some friends here……Abby Rose, I mentioned this subject in a couple of comments last week at HP. I was hesitant to even bring up the Congresswomans care after her injury, as it seemed kind of petty, but as I said then it truly shows the inequity between what is now class differences among our people.

No one ever mentions that we continue to have thousands of Americans who die everyday due to lack of medical care, who speaks for these people? Do we just allow people to die in the US b/c they have either been discriminated against by the insurance industry or cannot afford medical care?

Nothing in our politics today makes my blood boil like this subject…..I keep remembering what then Senator Obama spoke about during his campaign…..”everyone should have the same HC as the members of Congress”…..yes, we should, but if the republicans have their way, we won’t.

Nora
Member
Nora

Abby, great post. The type of health care and rehabilitation services that will loom in the future under private insurance and Republican leadership is frightening. Think of the medical/rehab. services available to the ruling family and their cronies in Saudi Arabia. They are able to get the best care in and outside the country. Their people, however, are dealing with underfunded and understaffed public hospitals.

According to fellow graduate students from the country, the average person finds him/herself dealing with gross negligence, poor or inconsistent professional practices, lack of registries (for cancer, liver disease, etc.), and so on.

We will have great health care like what Gifford has received and will continue to receive. However, fewer and fewer people will have access to it while the majority deal with sub-par standards.

BigDogMom
Member
BigDogMom

Hi Nora, good to see you here, as silentdances stated, we are becoming a two class society now, the haves and the have-nots, there is no middle class anymore.

We have allowed this to happen to us and until Corporations are taken out of the equation, via campaign finance and we rise up and demand equal care, it’s only going to get worse for us.

Nora
Member
Nora

Hi BigDogMom, it’s good to see you here too. We truly have allowed this to happen to us. Unfortunately, even single payer may not take care of our health care access disparity (although it may be superior to the barbarity looming). I find that unless we have serious changes to food subsidy and processing practices, health indicators will continue to show worsening outcomes. Of course, the racket known as health insurance will continue to post profits.

BigDogMom
Member
BigDogMom

Don’t get me started on food subsidies and processing practices…the movie “Food, Inc.” says it at, they are killing us slowly because of the bottom line and shelf life!

PocketWatch
Member

Before the last Presidential election, I had an interesting conversation…

Location: Panhandle area of Oklahoma, one of the most conservative areas of the country
Participants: The owner of a large truck repair company, a couple of his mechanics, a vendor, and 3 customers, and me

Subject: Socialism (I have no fear!)

Someone used the word, and I stopped them and asked the following:

Without regard or thought as to how to pay for it, would you agree or disagree with these things…

That every citizen has the right to basic health care without regard to ability to pay…

That every child born in the US should have an education up to about a 2-year degree or vocational school…

That it is a crime that there are homeless people in this country, and that everyone should have at least a roof over their head, nothing fancy…

That it is shameful that there are hungry people in the richest country in the world, and that no one should lack for at least a couple of square meals a day…

And if we could have all those things… just the basics of those things, would you be willing to pay more in taxes to ensure your kids and grandkids would be OK?

—-

I got a very interesting reaction… a lot of nodding heads and no objections, many thoughtful looks, and they all agreed that they would be happy to pay higher taxes if that’s what they got for their money. No squalling about paying for somebody else’s problems… none of that. They all understood the issue of shared responsibility and risk.

I’ve had similar experiences and conversations since then with real people. When put the right way, people recognize the need for these things. Their common sense gets shouted down and drowned out by bumper sticker slogans and screaming talking heads and sloganeering politicians.

I am firmly convinced that the right message, using the right approach, and the right language can get people to see what’s right in front of them. I am also convinced that most people do not have this locked-in political stance that is assumed by the MSM and the political parties.

I mean, my God! If I can get people like this to see the sense of a socialistic agenda in 15 minutes of Socratic conversation, how hard should it be?

Chernynkaya
Member

PW, your story illustrates something I have to remind myself of on a daily basis, kinda like an affirmation: Americans ARE reasonable. it’s hard to have faith in that. (And BTW, are you familiar with the work of George Lakoff? http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml)

The locked in stance you speak of is to me a deliberate attempt to keep us divided to prevent real uprising–or at least real demands. And they play on an undereducated, over-distracted populace.

What both the Left and the Right ignore (or choose not to see) is that voters are now beginning to turn their backs to the excesses of the Right, as they are taking a clearer view of the maturity of this Administration. They forget that the voters will do the same to the Left the more shrill it becomes.

Now, don’t get me wrong. As a Leftie, I like what the Left wishes for and if you scratched my surface, you’d see a socialist– someone who is frustrated by this President about 1/3 of the time. But the difference between me and many of my ideological compatriots is that I hate the Right more than I am frustrated by the middle.

I am willing (albeit with unhappiness and incomprehension) to accept the fact that America is a center-Right country for now, and that means I have to play the cards dealt. It doesn’t mean shutting up or making nice or accepting defeat. But it also does not mean trying to defeat this President by allowing my purity to play into the hands of Karl Rove. But I digress. Sorry.
I see that President Obama is being smart by building on his popularity as the adult in the room, and by reminding the populace that they are better than the Right’s haters. But I am worried too. The fact is, the middle are not passionate; they will not make those calls come 2012, nor knock on doors. Every Party must walk the tightrope of keeping their base enthused while appealing to the huge middle, but each Party NEEDS their base. Pundits say, “Whatever. Where’s the Dem base gonna go? They won’t vote Repub.” How stupid! What they WILL do is sit in their asses and stay home. Obama has recently risen in the polls—good! But he still needs the Dem base, and I fear their alienation is reaching the point of no return.

What you say about messaging is very true! I think that is Obama’s approach, which will be effective in reaching those still persuadable. It’s not as emotionally satisfying as many on the Left would like– they’d like Obama to tell them to STFU. I get that, but it’s more important to reach hearts and minds.

Gransview
Member
Gransview

Abby, glad to see you! Was hoping to find you somewhere!

SueInCa
Member

Abby

Good first try there, Abby. I just saw the movie John Q again the other day. I had forgotten that it was about the lack of healthcare and insurance companies putting the almighty dollar ahead of even people who are covered. I don’t know if you ever read the book Rainmaker by John Grisham but it was the same. The insurance company just kept denying the claim and it was standard practice hoping the client would get tired of trying. Now days they are not even trying to hide their disdain for their customers.

I wonder what would happen if a father did what John Q did in the movie? Would we applaud him? Would the judicial system work in his favor? Would his hostages end up attending his trial because in the end they really liked him?

I am glad Gabrielle got the medical care she needed, but there are alot more out there who deserve it as well. We all deserve good, decent, affordable healthcare but there is something (capitalism) in this country that just won’t allow it to happen.

Silentdances
Member
Silentdances

In my opinion, what shows the problem (one of many) in our society started from the shooting, to finally accumulate in such news pieces as these. It’s much easier to see towards the end. The contrast between the value of Gifford and those whom have to deal with TBI, or really anyone that has suffered some injury.

The news at the time of the shooting and for a bit afterward, could be summed up as ‘Congresswoman Gifford, Judge Roll, and those other people’. There’s a brief period following where the other victims are spoken of in a sort of human interest story aspect. Eventually the original narrative continues.

Also notice how Jared was especially shown to be a deranged monster. Normally (except in smaller towns, where most people know one another) This incident would have made a minor mention in some local news piece, ending up as a statistic later on (statistics dehumanize people). This type of reporting is very common. The only other type that (normally) makes headlines are those that are particularly brutal.

We live in a strictly tiered society. Almost everything you come across reinforces the value of people based upon their ranking.

What’s wrong with the story above and in general, is the failure to recognize how precious each life and person is. It’s also the acceptance of that failure.

*being able to edit my post for having missed something is kewl beyond measure*

Chernynkaya
Member

Abby, you articulated something that I have thought but never said aloud—about the gold standard health care that Rep. Giffords is getting. At the time, it seemed petty to mention it, but I thought it. I want her to get the best, but I want us ALL to get the best too. Why should health care be based on ability to pay? Yes, I understand the realities of cost and access. But there IS a tremendous amount of waste, and the actual costs get lost when hospitals charge $20 for an aspirin.

Plus, we have to somehow take a realistic look at where those costs are, although this is a very delicate subject. Should a premie weighing 2 pounds at birth get the resources that would insure the health of older children? Should an 80-year old get a transplant? I don’t know the answers, but the questions are valid, I think.

Hey, big tip o’ the hat to you!

jdmn17
Member
jdmn17

I worked as a therapist in the 70’s at the local county hospital. We had a lot of indigent patients and did our best to help them, scraping together the best we could within a limited budget. To be honest, in some cases the therapy we provided was more outcome focused because we had limited time with them and the resources to support it. They left us as good as we could get them but once they got back “home” and came to us for followup I saw all too often how they slipped back into their disabilities and were often worse than when they left. Contrast that with a one year stint at one of the most prestigious medical centers in the world. Patients there all got gold star treatment and amazing followup. It isn’t really fair of course since wounds I dealt with (burns) didn’t seem to give a socioeconomic damn about how much money you had. Thanks Abby, nice post

funksands
Member

Abby, most excellent to see you posting here. I despaired briefly when I saw you were gone at the “other” site. I look forward to more!

Chernynkaya
Member

FUNK!! Hooray!

PocketWatch
Member

Question for discussion…. I don’t have a sense of what people envision…

Would a single payer, everything for everybody health care system be preferable (think about the problems that might result), or should it be more of a single payer basics plan, with the ability to add riders privately to cover “extras”?

(Who would determine what is basic and what is extra, for example…)

funksands
Member

One of the interesting issues that many single payor and/or Medicare-style delivery systems are facing worldwide is that they aren’t asking citizens to pay enough into the system.

If our current system is revamped to focus on outcomes, rather than procdures I think the finances would improve tremendously.

However, like squeezing a balloon, a different problem occurs;

If outcome becomes the standard of payment with a Medicare-type delivery system, then prevention of disease will become the most-cost effective way to battle that cost. The problem with that is that there are not nearly enough physicians to deliver general preventative medicine.

In my opinion, we’ll need to end up with two tiers of medical practioners. The doctor that specalizes in a particular type of care, i.e. cardiology, and a different tier of “doctor” who’s specialty is localized preventative care.

That will create a need for tens of thousands of new practioners. The AMA and medical schools will fight this tooth and nail, and these new “medical infantry” will not be able to rack up a million dollars in school debt simply to obtain the designations to do their work.

It’s a difficult question.

PocketWatch
Member

FS, good to see you… I was tempted to troll you, just for old time’s sake (like 2 days ago) so you’d feel at home, but refrained. 😉

I think you are on to something, and maybe MORE than 2 tiers… 3 or 4 maybe.

If I have a cold, I really don’t need a doc, I just need someone that can check to be sure it’s nothing worse and maybe give me a scrip for something to ease the symptoms, give flu shots, that sort of thing.

Next level is maybe flu, small cuts, ordinary stuff that doesn’t need much more than the average military medic or EMT couldn’t do.

After that, normal pregnancies, sprains, maybe even simple broken bones… I don’t know…

Then you get into the heavier stuff that needs a full time staffed and equipped clinic.

Finally, full-on hospital and after care for serious stuff.

Seems to me that at each level, your records might be available and they could bump you up to the next level easily.

Point is, if I need a few stitches, I’m sure a competent nurse or EMT could handle it just as easily as a doc could.

Chernynkaya
Member

PW I know there are several problems inherent in Single Payer, and, as you mentioned, even Medicare-for-all has issues. But I don’t expect perfection from the get-go. The main thing for me is that everyone have access to basic care, and by that I mean beyond First Aid. In an older post, writer Marion discussed her issues with health care in the UK. But to me, and to my son who went for a long period without ANY health care, that seems like Paradise. I have no problem with incremental change vis a vis health care overhaul, because I see it as broken now. I wish everyone could immediately get the care that Giffords is getting, but I know that’s not possible. In the meantime, if I have a heart attack, I want to be getting reasonable care. And better still, having the ability to get preventive treatment and drugs. i don;t think that’s too much to ask.

Silentdances
Member
Silentdances

I think a single payer system would be the better choice. It’s my belief that many of the problems that arise are a feature (in that they spread money around and increase the GDP), and are not necessarily problems in and of themselves. I could, however, be wrong in this belief. I could see a basic system with purchasable perks eventually leading back to a similar system as we currently have.

Chernynkaya
Member

Abby– BRAVA! You did it and that’s the spirit, girl! (OK, now, I’ll read it.)