everwonder_y

The HHS preventive care provisions is based in value-based insurance design. That is that high value services like cancer screenings, immunizations, family planning, cholesterol and hypertension screenings, etc, services that prevent more costly treatments should be covered with no cost-sharing.Preventive Care Provisions under the PPACA Contraceptives are getting the most exposure, but the preventive care provisions include a lot more than that. Health insurers are on board because it levels the playing field so to speak. In the US most people change insurance companies every 2-5 years, there is little incentive for insurers to encourage cost-saving preventive care where the benefit is likely realized years later by another company. This way people can hop around from company to company but still be guaranteed the same access to preventive care and all insurance companies realize the benefit. Assessing the Evidence of Value-Based Insurance Design

I don't see name calling or emotional appeals, just rebuttals using facts. So you object to the 8 states that don't allow churches to be exempt, but what about the 28 states that don't exempt religious affiliated institutions that operate primarily in NON-faith based capacities and serve people of all faiths? You know, exactly the same criteria that the HHS mandate followed and was in place starting first with Maryland in 1998?

Government run insurance spends ~6% on administrative overhead, while private insurance spends ~20-30% in administrative overhead. Medicare Advantage (private) costs 14% more than traditional Medicare (public). Now which is more efficient, public or private? A socialist system is where the government owns the means of production. That would entail the government owning hospitals, clinics, insurance and employing all health care workers. UHC can be achieved without a completely socialized system. Hardly any system in the world is actually socialist, except the VA here in the US. (the VA achieves some of the highest quality care standards in the world, at around two-thirds the cost) A system like Germany and Switzerland would more accurately represent health care under the PPACA. (e.g. Private system, including insurance - where citizens are mandated to purchase insurance) Health care markets are not freely competitive by the very nature of the industry; (see Kenneth Arrow health economics) asymmetry of information, supply and demand are not independent (physicians supply information, e.g. the diagnosis, and demand treatment), uncertainty (can't predict illness or accidents), and barriers to entry in the market place (physicians, nurses, etc, must be educated and licensed). The only way "free market principles" would work in health care is in a nation full of physicians. That is not to say that the government needs to take over the industry completely, but that government should step in where the market fails and make it more efficient.

Eh, women have been oppressing other women about as long men have been oppressing other men.

this is not at all accurate, 28 states already mandate contraceptive coverage by employer sponsored health plans. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/07/2/gr070206.pdf ^^this is from 2004, since then 8 more states mandated contraceptive coverage to the 20 listed in the publication. institutions that operate in primarily faith based capacities and serve people of that faith are mostly exempted ( though 8 states do not exempt churches). institutions that do not operate primarily in faith based capacities and serve people of all faiths are not exempted. (e.g. catholic affiliated hospitals and universities) wages, health benefits and 401k benefits are components of an employee's compensation package. an employer can not dictate how an employee spends their wages, uses their health benefits or invests in their 401k. this is would be a massive over-reach! your religious liberty ends where your swinging bible hits another person. religious liberty of individuals supersedes that of religiously affiliated institutions. ps mandated maternity coverage (mandated by the pregnancy discrimination act of 1978) is also subsidizing other peoples' sex life by your logic.

i think this is a simple assertion. healthcare (emergency, preventive, specialty, etc) is typically accessed through health insurance in the us. do you think that people should receive health care regardless of their ability to pay? you can certainly argue emtala is a government regulation (enacted by president reagan) that compels hospitals to treat patients regardless of ability to pay. however, the individual mandate is a government regulation that compels individuals to pay for their care by purchasing health insurance, so that tax payers are not left holding the bag. "when the uninsured are unable to pay for care they receive, that uncompensated care is paid for through a patchwork of federal, state, and private funds. the bulk of such care is funded by the government and is crucial to the strength of the nation’s public hospitals and clinics, which provide most of the uncompensated care the uninsured receive." in addition, "uncompensated care costs for direct service programs, such as community health centers, are funded almost completely by public dollars." source: the kaiser commission on medicaid and the uninsured (2007) http://www.kff.org/uninsured/upload/7451-03.pdf

Under the PPACA if you make under 133% of the FPL you qualify for Medicaid. Those with incomes between 133%-400$ of the FPL receive a subsidy (on sliding scale according to income) to purchase health insurance in the exchanges. http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/7962-02.pdf

Typoagain, I'm not necessarily disputing what you're saying, but can you provide a citation about Medicare reimbursement rates being influenced by patient satisfaction surveys?

Despicable legislation. VA's mandatory ultrasound is now set up to performed 24 hours before the procedure. So much for small government and reduced spending. The clinician and the patient should be determining care, not some zealot legislator trying to score political points at the expense of women exercising their constitutional right. Informed consent? My ass! These paternalistic legislators disrespect ALL women (not just women seeking abortions) by deeming women not competent enough to make their own medical choices without unnecessary medical procedures mandated by the Government. Also disturbing, the author of this travesty is a woman, Jill Vogel. Ew.

Come August 2012 no co-pays for preventive care via the PPACA! I believe, this includes, cancer screenings, immunizations, flu-shots, contraception, etc. http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/8219.pdf Hurray!

My school offers them separate. Anatomy and Chemistry are both prerequisites for Physiology. Anatomy and Physiology were each, 4 units with a lab. Chemistry 5 units with a lab. Worked well for me!

A little disappointed in how vague it is. Particularly compared to some of the other health science programs updated admission requirements. Like, some of the allied health FAQ's mention formal group interviews, narrative essays describing health care experience signed by someone who can attest to your hours of work/volunteer experience and note that some programs have limits on the amount of re-takes of prereq's. Though, the nursing FAQ mentions that preference will be given to students who have college degrees and states when going over the HESI A2 requirement - "your proctored essay results will available to the division directly after the exam". Does the HESI A2 have an essay portion?

Oh man, I was hoping they would post a point break down of criteria used to rate applicants. Anyway, good luck on your exam!

oh man! A broken link?! After all this build-up? Boo! Hmm, maybe I should muster up some initiative and call... ETA Okay, gave them a call, they said it should be up by the end of the day

I guess, (even though I don't want to admit it), I unconsciously hoped to have some kind of guarantee to fall back on, by having a place on SLCC's waitlist. Though, when I look outside myself and my insecurities, doing away with the waitlist is better for the profession as a whole (merit based admission=more respect for nurses) and ultimately more fair for all. It's just nerve wracking to have spent two years taking prereq's, while taking a pay cut to in order to get direct-patient-care experience - only to sit now in limbo. I'm ready to start already! LOL I also expected SLCC to post confirmed new start dates in March 2012 and hoped to at least move up a year or two, rather than just a semester, heh. IHC just announced selected students to start their next nursing cohort in Jan 2012. (400 applicants competed for 40 spots! yikes). My gf got in and she was on the waitlist with me; essentially another 40 spots are probably dropped off the waitlist now. I don't know what 'list' SLCC is planning to post in March 2012, if they've emailed new confirmed start dates already, yanno? Anyway, my bets are on a point system like MATC's that I posted up-thread. Though, I wonder if SLCC will require LOR's or give extra points for previous degrees?