Obama health care law upheld. - Page 2Register Today!
- Jun 28, '12 by malamud69Not sure if I agree with that take(it does come from a magazine dedicated to keeping the status quo of the corporation) Yes it looks good for nurses and PA's etc..that is great...But it can be great for doctors as well...remember...the reason the cost has gone up is not because of these supposed "bad" regulations that keep us down..in fact regulations are there for our safety...do you want some unlicensed so and so performing surgery on you??? Or even fixing your plumbing???What do we want to go back to? The days when rivers would catch on fire and people were beat to death in nursing homes???HMMM I say theses "regulations" are good for all of us. The reason cost is up is once again because of the greed at the top. It is going to take a major paradigm shift for those at the top to actually start caring about people instead of their bottom line. That is really all this article is saying...doctors who have become brainwashed into thinking that the only way to survive is to play into the hands of big pharma and insurance companies need to start changing the way they operate...if enough of us start at the grass roots it can change! At the risk of being cliche' look at Patch Adams!~Doctors without borders etc...etc...it can be done.
- Jun 28, '12 by GrizabelleWell, I can understand part of the physician's concern given it stipulates they get paid less if a pt is non-compliant. It puts a lot of pressure on us to get the patient into compliance.
For example : Im overweight thus not in compliance with my doctor's and nurses recommendation to lose weight and my diabetes / HTN/ etc is getting worse.... it's not my Dr's fault I cant find time to exercise and I cant afford to eat what Im supposed to eat, why are they getting paid less because I dont make time to take care of myself? It's not like there is a nurse or doctor coming to my door everyday to take me to the gym.
That's a simplification but it's the basic reason a lot of physician's don't support the act.
I personally find it shameful that we are the only industrialized so-called "democracy" that doesnt have nationalized health care. Im hoping the kinks will get worked out as we go.
- Jun 28, '12 by imintroubleQuote from whichone'spinkAbsolutely. The majority of our pts are Medicaid or no insurance. Our hospital is already run on a shoestring. We barely scrape by.No, I believe this will suck for nurses. Hospitals will get less and less (already happening) for care provided, and therefore that means nursing jobs will still be hard to come by. Maybe there will be nursing job growth in areas outside the hospital, but I don't see hospitals hiring more nurses. Which sucks, because frankly, even to get a job in an outpatient setting, hospital experience is required.
The new policies will allow more people to get health care. A good thing for them. Less money to cover that expense. Bad for hospitals and nurses.
I refuse to watch the news today. Does anybody tell the truth anymore?
- Jun 28, '12 by SuperMeghan91BBC. I don't even bother with the American 24 hour news channels anymore.
- Jun 28, '12 by MorganBI think this is a major victory for the country. I of course know it poses many challenges, but the bottom line is, everyone has the right to recieve care. That being said I think it will challenge nurses and doctors alike to do more education, and focus more or prevention.
- Jun 28, '12 by marcos9999YES!!! Thank you Mr. Obama and thank you Chief Justice Roberts. I think this ruling is the right thing to do for all Americans. Is one step to create a more humane and socialized health care in the United States. We can't let hospitals become profit centers led by greed instead of humane care. Hospitals don't like this ruling because they will now have to be more transparent and act more in the lines of the social "non profit status" that were given to them allowing them not to pay taxes. This non profit status was created in the 50 -60's as an incentive for hospitals which at the time had difficulties. Times have changed and now hospitals are managed like profit centers where patients are numbers and statistics to be manipulated with one objective only: to provide unlimited profits to it's CEO's and shareholders. Many hospitals are using sub-standard equipment and low quality medical aids; trying to cut pay from nurses in order to maximize their profits just as if they were in the business of making tires or selling potato ships. If this ruling goes forward we should see some changes as millions of Americans will be included in health care and nurses will play the larger part on this being hired again. Nurses unlike rich people spend their money benefiting the economy everywhere. This will revolutionize the health industry creating tens of thousands of jobs. Why is this bad? This will mean more competition and therefor a lowering of prices for everyone. This is only bad for those who want to create concentration of wealth and an exclusive economic atmosphere where a few participate and the many are unemployed.
- Jun 28, '12 by DespareuxNot really sure how I feel about this health care law. So far, all the pros and cons are mostly theoretical and people are very concerned, at least that's how I would summarize the current situation.
- Jun 28, '12 by malamud69How can that be??? If there is more money available then there will be more to provide quality care. Don't you see that because the people at the top are so greedy is why you operate on a shoestring budget...its not because they have to they want to keep their pockets full. This is direct control by the corporate health insurance machine. How can you not see that???
- Jun 28, '12 by Tragically HipI have PCIP insurance in Florida, the "high risk" pool that's available in over half the states. It became available here as an outgrowth of the ACA. Without it, I would have no insurance. Nothing. That's what I had for the eight months preceding the time I started on PCIP.
I'm starting nursing school. Would I even be allowed into a clinic without health insurance?
That's the selfish perspective. The real issue is that not many people have any idea what the ACA contains. They tend to like what they hear when informed about it. They don't realize that it's slowly coming into force, and that most of it won't be implemented until 2014. Students in their early-to-mid 20's can now stay on their parents' plan -- a big deal.
From the politicians trashing the ACA, I have yet to hear an alternate idea. They offer nothing but the status quo, which is a slow motion train wreck. They appeal to people who already have health insurance through their employers, and claim that the ACA will force them out of their plans. It's nonsense. Companies are increasingly dropping their plans as it is, or reducing benefits while increasing deductibles and co-pays. Even with insurance, some people are left with crushing bills after a serious illness.
There are a couple of dozen of good health care systems in the idustrialized world. Most or all of them are better than the current U.S. system, by objective measures. Sometimes we just don't want to know.
- Jun 28, '12 by marcos9999Quote from malamud69Agree with you. If the trickle down effect was true, we'll be rich by now because corporations are making record profits while the rest is unemployed and suffering horrible problems with their families and children. I understand the rich people who believe in the "trickle down theory" but I cannot understand the poor of low middle class who think they are going to be part of the money one day.How can that be??? If there is more money available then there will be more to provide quality care. Don't you see that because the people at the top are so greedy is why you operate on a shoestring budget...its not because they have to they want to keep their pockets full. This is direct control by the corporate health insurance machine. How can you not see that???