why are people against socialized medicine?

[Seeker]

Swanson, I'm not sugesting that any elderly person be placed ahead of any younger person for a "transplant" that clearly has a better chance of being successful for a longer term in a youthful adaptive body than an elderly one.

But I am suggesting that when a Doctor decides that a pacemaker could help an elderly person lead a normal effective life for even a few more years, and that the patient wants this surgery, that no Insurance comapny should be allowed to intrude and come to the conculsion (and find a way/reason/excuse) to not cover this surgery.

I don't honesty believe that the government will micromanage Doctors to this degree. I believe that a medical system that allows patient/doctors to interact and come to the mutual decision of what is in the best interest of both parties, IS THE BEST way. Obviously what we have now, does not work.

Media and what they cover is another private business that has abused the rights of individuals; all in the name of letting people know, whether or not they want to.

Malpractice is a problem -- one of the reasons doctors do order so many tests is to cover themselves. Judging what is wrong with a person is not an easy task. We're all human. Juries that make outrageous awards do not realize that they too pay.... because yes, costs pay forward too.

I don't know that national health care will be better than private; but I do know that private is not working. The costs are high, but do you think Insurance companies will lower those costs? Only one way of that happening.... and that is for them to have competition from another form of healthcare. Monopolies are not a good thing... and right now, the Insurance Companies have the upper hand.

Every single dollar is tied to the world. It cannot leave the world. All we are is who we are. No more nor any less. In the end, money will not matter. Perceived "waste" will not matter. Only that we each do the best we can.

[disneysteve]

I am suggesting that when a Doctor decides that a pacemaker could help an elderly person lead a normal effective life for even a few more years, and that the patient wants this surgery, that no Insurance comapny should be allowed to intrude and come to the conculsion (and find a way/reason/excuse) to not cover this surgery.

This happens at all ages, not just the elderly, and not just with private insurance. I recently had a Medicaid patient with back problems. His Pain Management specialist ordered a particular item for him. Both his Orthopedist and his Physical Therapist agreed that it would benefit him. Medicaid denied the request. The doctor appealed and was still denied. So even though this patient has government insurance and had 3 healthcare providers in agreement that the item was needed, he couldn't get it.

[disneysteve]

(and DS is also 100% correct -- America needs to become better at preventative care -- do you all know how long it takes to make an appointment for such a simple thing as a mamogram -- last time for me 7 months; and I have insurance).

That's ridiculous. Where do you live? Around here, it might take a week to get an appointment for a mammogram, maybe 2 weeks tops.

[nmboone]

Working at a pharmacy, I deal with all types of insurance. Medicaid is one of them. I'm not sure how the medicaid system with prescriptions work in other states but usually children's medicaid scripts are always free. Adults usually pay from .50 to 3.00 for a rx. I think this fee is ridiculously low. I'm not against medicaid at all for the record, but I think that some of the people (definitely not all) could pay a little more. It could help offset the medicaid system for sure. Maybe $1.00 or .50 for a child's rx (depending on income of course) and maybe a $1 increase in an adult's rx. I know most of the people could afford it.

[disneysteve]

Working at a pharmacy, I deal with all types of insurance. Medicaid is one of them. I'm not sure how the medicaid system with prescriptions work in other states but usually children's medicaid scripts are always free. Adults usually pay from .50 to 3.00 for a rx. I think this fee is ridiculously low. I'm not against medicaid at all for the record, but I think that some of the people (definitely not all) could pay a little more. It could help offset the medicaid system for sure. Maybe $1.00 or .50 for a child's rx (depending on income of course) and maybe a $1 increase in an adult's rx. I know most of the people could afford it.

I've often thought the same thing. I guess the problem is identifying who could and couldn't afford it. They could base it on income. If they did that, I do think they should put a cap on out of pocket costs since I have some patients who take 6 or 8 or more different meds each month and even a small copay would add up at that point, especially if there are multiple family members filling prescriptions.

[nmboone]

Yeah it would be a challenge, but if it could be done it would help the system recoup more costs. There could be cutoffs though like the one you mentioned. I'm certainly not suggesting making the poor poorer.

[swanson719]

As far as prescriptions are concerned, it would seem that a simple solution such as a flat annual rate for people with a large number of prescriptions would do. Say $500 a year for someone with 10 or more prescriptions filled monthly at a certain income level, and $250 for someone at a different level. They have sliding scales like this all through the private sector - it's not so unreasonable to apply it to medicine.

Furthermore, we need a review of who has final authority in a determining who receives health care. I.e. - If 3 or more doctors determine that a patient needs certain care, then it should be covered by the insurance, regardless of their personal underwriters determination. Why should insurance cover defensive medicine, but not the treatment? That makes no sense. I'm not suggesting that we provide care for everyone, rather that those with insurance shouldn't be denied care after the doctors determine it is needed.

[Ramose]

Is obamacare a step in this direction?

[davidharvey]

"People" are not against it.

It's the Insurance Companies, who are against it. They would lose millions of US $$ if they lose control of the Health System.