Do You Want Universal Healthcare?

Agrippa · Jul 28, 2008

Good story. I agree that stuff like that shouldn't happen.
But on the other hand, no one ever uses the story of the addict that has come into the ER for the 24th time this month with "abdominal pain," gets dosed with Dilaudid (he's allergic to Toradol, Morphine and Demerol, of course) and leaves, with his cost of "healthcare" (physician fee, supply fee, meds, Xrays, etc) paid for by the taxpayers, as an example of why we need UHC.

Stuff like that certainly shouldn't happen. When they do it's a tragedy. I would rather prevent tragedies like that than prevent freeloaders like that of the addict. Even if the ratio of legitimate cases to "addict/abuser" cases are 1:10 with universal healthcare...I would still be for it. Now Im all for decreasing that ratio, but I think it is a moral imperative for such an advanced country like ours to be able to provide a MINIMUM level of healthcare for all of its citizens.

This is also one reason I'm getting into nursing as I believe that the disparity of healthcare received between the different social classes in this country is shameful. And I speaking about this from experience.

tanthalas · Jul 28, 2008

I just don't understand how it works in other countries but people insist it can't work here. Maybe the government, in the event that they do enact universal healthcare could give people the option of paying the full tax and have unversial healthcare coverage or let people decide if they want private health insurance, thus lowering or eliminating that person from being taxed.
For those of you who live in the UK, Canada or other countries could give me some input it would help.

In British Columbia, private health services are starting to pop up. There are at least two private surgical clinics in my town that accept fees just like the American health care system. The wait times are, indeed, much shorter, but the quality (as far as we have noticed) is not optimal to the public system. Citizens are allowed to have private health care coverage but it costs an arm and a leg.

The crappy thing about a mixed system of public and private is that a lot of the public thinks a dual health care system will help. The ones that can pay and get their needs dealt with asap, and if you can't, you will just wait the waitlist.

Problem is: if there's a problem that goes wrong with a private healthcare system (say a nicked bowel during a laminectomy), most often than not the patient will go into the public system to receive their emergency care at the ER. We've had such cases well over a dozen times at the tertiary care centre I work at.

And to the guy that said the Canadian with a lump in her breast had to wait 9 months: that is not a matter of the failure of the health care system, that is sloppy physician/nurse/health care team work. If something's an emergency, it's an emergency and gets priority.

CHATSDALE · Jul 28, 2008

the woman with breast cancer was in england and not canada, i don't know the specifics of the differences between the two

people are not dying for lack of care here, there are alternatives and we are not heartless if we want some input into the manner of health care

the thing i am so concerned about is that when there is payment from the government there is too much opportunity for fraud

there was a case in where a doctor in an ob/gyn was raking in the money because he was declaring all ob patients as being high risk and had appointments scheduled every week but the women were being seen as if they were normal pgs doctor was a multimillionaire of of government subsidies

there are nurmerous cases of fraud from medicare

we do need to have someone policing the program

Pipsqueak, ADN · Jul 28, 2008

No. This is a free country, and neither the government nor any other entity should control the quality of care I receive. I do not want to receive the cheeper medication or the low cost, lower quality outcome procedure, like the government would provide.

I don't know about you, but "another entity" already control's the quality of care I receive. It's called my insurance company. They forced me to try out approximately 7 different birth control pills to treat my irregular painful menstrual cycles because they refused to pay for the one that I know for a fact worked. They've refused to pay for procedures such as a cervical biopsy.....thank god I had the money at the time to pay out of pocket, otherwise I'd probably be dead now. Oh, and how about the rude, patronizing, and demeaning dermatologist I had to endure because my insurance company refused to pay if I went to another practice. These are just a few of the many many ways the quality of my care is limited and controlled.

Jaguar Boy · Jul 28, 2008

I haven't read all the posts, but what about universal Dental and eye care? Is this covered by UHC in Canada or the UK?

Hello,

I've lived in Canada almost of my life...I've never had dental care covered by government programs, but until recently, basic eye exams were covered within a certain time period.

There will always be positive and negative aspects to any kind of health care provision programs...I am grateful for our publically funded health care system here, and I am one of the very fortunate individuals who has a family doctor whom I trust. I can have emergency and necessary tests and treatment without thinking about paying for it out of my pocket...

Wait times, lack of primary care practitioners is definitely a concern here...and of course there are those who are regulars at an emerg department, drug seekers, self inflicters etc...who's hospital visits are (sigh) paid for with tax dollars. But, anyone with a provincial health card, regardless of their work status, insurance policy etc can receive life saving care without paying for it themselves.

So, are there problems? Yes. But, I believe it is still a good system that we are fortunate to have access too. Would I give it up in favour of a non funded system...no.

brunclex129 · Jul 28, 2008

I don't know about you, but "another entity" already control's the quality of care I receive. It's called my insurance company. They forced me to try out approximately 7 different birth control pills to treat my irregular painful menstrual cycles because they refused to pay for the one that I know for a fact worked. They've refused to pay for procedures such as a cervical biopsy.....thank god I had the money at the time to pay out of pocket, otherwise I'd probably be dead now. Oh, and how about the rude, patronizing, and demeaning dermatologist I had to endure because my insurance company refused to pay if I went to another practice. These are just a few of the many many ways the quality of my care is limited and controlled.

Good point, that's why I'm in favor of a free market system. Let me decide which drug or which procedure I want. Cut out the insurance co., the government, and anyone else who wants to fix prices or control care options. Let me pay for my health care expenses out of my pocket directly to the hospital or health care provider and let me pick any provider I want and the prices will drop dramatically, and quality of care will go way up. Perhaps the only required "health insurance" should be emergency care and catastrophic coverage. Similar to minimum car insurance. Everything else...let me pick what I do and dont want to pay for.

allnurses Guide · Jul 28, 2008

Good point, that's why I'm in favor of a free market system. Let me decide which drug or which procedure I want. Cut out the insurance co., the government, and anyone else who wants to fix prices or control care options. Let me pay for my health care expenses out of my pocket directly to the hospital or health care provider and let me pick any provider I want and the prices will drop dramatically, and quality of care will go way up. Perhaps the only required "health insurance" should be emergency care and catastrophic coverage. Similar to minimum car insurance. Everything else...let me pick what I do and dont want to pay for.

I wish we could go to this system . .. . I really do.

steph

Jolie, BSN · Jul 28, 2008

I wish we could go to this system . .. . I really do.
steph

I have been insured with a high-deductible plan and spending account for the last 3 or 4 years. It is as close as possible to the free-market plan brunclex129 proposes as is currently available, and I think it works very well.

Of course, it requires lots of individual responsibility and planning, which many Americans won't willingly accept.

tanthalas · Jul 28, 2008

I've been posting in this topic quite frequently in the past few days, so I thought I'd share this story which is kinda ironic.

A friend of mine went to Seattle for a daytrip. She ended up in a car accident in which she sustained a fractured tib/fib and femur. She spent a few days in the hospital to have her acute needs treated before being sent up to Vancouver General Hospital. She was in for ~2 days and she racked up a whopping bill of $7000. She did not have travel insurance.

I've always been curious: what happens when an uninsured person requires emergency surgery or stabilization? Does the person need to pay the entire bill afterwards or do they get exempt?

tntrn, ASN, RN · Jul 28, 2008

I've always been curious: what happens when an uninsured person requires emergency surgery or stabilization? Does the person need to pay the entire bill afterwards or do they get exempt?

For the illegals, who refuse to give a SS#, because they don't have one or may be using a stolen one, it goes under private pay at our hospital. But we all know that there's no way it will get privately paid. We eat it; that is, the system eats it; that is, the legal taxpaying citizens, eat it, again.

I don't know what happens in the case of your friend.

I do know that our friends in England, pay through the nose for taxes, and still opt for private insurance because they want to be sure they can count on getting seen, treated, and still have some say-so in where and who.

My friend there has had a very bad thumb, carpel metacarpel problem that occurred after a fall at the school where she taught. The lawsuit took forever, I mean over 2 years, to complete which found the school at fault for bad flooring maintenance. I don't believe to this day that she has not been able to have the surgery for her thumb. That's pretty sad. Even with her private insurance, she was told to wait until the lawsuit was completed. Insane! And completely unacceptable.

allnurses Guide · Jul 28, 2008

For the illegals, who refuse to give a SS#, because they don't have one or may be using a stolen one, it goes under private pay at our hospital. But we all know that there's no way it will get privately paid. We eat it; that is, the system eats it; that is, the legal taxpaying citizens, eat it, again.
I don't know what happens in the case of your friend.
I do know that our friends in England, pay through the nose for taxes, and still opt for private insurance because they want to be sure they can count on getting seen, treated, and still have some say-so in where and who.
My friend there has had a very bad thumb, carpel metacarpel problem that occurred after a fall at the school where she taught. The lawsuit took forever, I mean over 2 years, to complete which found the school at fault for bad flooring maintenance. I don't believe to this day that she has not been able to have the surgery for her thumb. That's pretty sad. Even with her private insurance, she was told to wait until the lawsuit was completed. Insane! And completely unacceptable.

I don't understand why your friend would wait for 2 years for surgery the waiting time targets under the NHS means that waits of this length should no longer happen, I know working through our waiting lists that we are heavily penalised if we fail to achieve the 18 week targets so I can only asssume there is another reason for the delay. If she has been listed for surgery 2 years ago then under the NHS she would have recieved the surgery unless there is something else within her medical history that needs treating prior to surgery.

woody62, RN · Jul 29, 2008

I was temporarily disabled a few years ago with a broken back sustained in a freak accident. Without modern healthcare, I would still be disabled.
My father was partially disabled from military service. My mother eventually became disabled from lupus. Both died early in life. My two sisters died early from cancer. Otherwise, life has been good to me. I am healthy and fortunate.
Woody62, for people like you, I'm happy to help out. Your disability has already been determined. I wish you well.

Thanks. My point, according to some because I was able to return to graduate classes, I was able to work. Some thought it was more important, to their pocketbook, that I and others return to work, to any type of work. I wonder how many of those who are against people receiving SSDI and medical insurance assistance, in favor of them returning to a minimum wage job, would be willing to accept the same, if they found themselves in a like position? Very few. And for those that think they have saved enough, think again. The twenty-one days I spent in ICU, in 2006, were billed at more then $206,000. Try paying for that a few times and see how fast your saving go.

Neither I nor anyone else who is in favor of universal healthcare is looking for a free ride. One way or another society ends up paying for everyone Else's healthcare. We can attempt to control those expenses or we can allow for profit insurance companies, hospitals, physicians, and others to make the rules and the profits. And restrict access. No one system has all the answers. But I do know that we pay out one of the largest portion of our incomes to support a healthcare system that does not meet the needs of our citizens.

Woody:twocents: