Socialized Medicine the myths and the facts

Having worked in a country which has socialized medicine I can certainly see the pit falls and the benefits. What I don't understand is the fear behind having socialized medicine In my opinion socialized medicine has more positive benefits than negative benefits. Nurses Announcements Archive Article

The first and the most obvious concern is the cost to the patient and their family, we all know how devastating an illness can be for patients and their family many times I have witnessed the despair when a diagnoses meant further treatment which insurances question and in some cases wont cover. I have seen patients needing costly drugs to keep them alive and being unable to afford them, causing repeated admissions to repair the damage so called none compliance has caused. The first question in none compliance is were the pts actually refusing to take their medication or was it simply they could not afford to buy their medication because they don't have enough money and other bills need to be paid first? If the real reason is the cost then surely it would be more simple of we provided these medications at a more effective price or that all medications cost $5 no matter what they had? Outrageous I hear you shout but the cost of the repeated admission is far more costly than by helping prevent a repeat admission, by providing medicine they can afford.

How about blood tests could these not be done in the doctors office before the pt leaves for home and forgets to go and have a blood draw, or simply cannot get to the lab to have them drawn. I have personally waited in doctors office hours (and paid for the privilege) then been sent to the lab, miles away to sit and wait for blood work to be done. Why could the doctors not employ somebody to be at the office to draw blood on patients?

We should be looking at improving preventative medicine rather than patch it up and see.

Many times I have seen patients discharged with a new diagnoses of diabetes, no follow up at home can be organised because in my city nothing exists to assist these people. There should be a diabetic home nurse who monitors these patients in their own home-rationale, this would again help prevent admissions for diabetic complications, and none compliance.

So you wonder what has this got to do with socialized medicine. Well, in the UK if you have...

  • Children
  • Over 60 for women and over 65 for men
  • Diabetes
  • Asthma
  • Thyroid problems, etc...

...then you get all your medicines for free.

There are in place specialized RN's who focus is on preventative care in the community. There are telephone help lines which anybody can utilize for free.

Maternity care is free a midwife will be assigned to you for the duration of your pregnancy and up to 6 weeks later. The cost of the birth-nothing no matter how you deliver.

I have been asked what kind of care do you receive in a socialized medicine country and I ask them, I am a product of socialized medicine you tell me how my care differs from nurses who have paid outrageous amounts of money to train as a nurse?

Of course even in the UK you can have private care if you chose to pay, this is an advantage if you need hip replacements, knee replacements, eye surgeries-other wise you may have to wait. There are initiatives in place to reduce waiting times for surgeries in the NHS and I hear that dr's can now book surgeries from their office at hospitals all over the UK which helps reduce waiting times, plus hospitals get fined if they don't meet their quota.

I agree MRI's and CT's are not as freely available, but again initiatives are in place to improve the waiting times. Emergency care no different all patients will receive emergency care.

Poor conditions yes there are poor hospitals and there are excellent hospitals, no different to Phoenix AZ.

Questions??

Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.
I've never read in our Constitution where it gives our federal government authority over the states on this subject or many, many, many, other subjects.

Saude:

Here's the way I see posts such as the ones you've submitted (like it or not, asked for because you made them).

Change is difficult for everyone, not just you. When it's needed, it's especially hard, because it means admitting that past ways aren't working.

Questioning governmental procedure by the doubting capability of leadership (our leader taught the American Constitution at University of Chicago's Law School), having achieved his education at Harvard, one of our country's leading Law Schools is futile. It just wastes time and doesn't work. Instead it perpetuates an underground current of discontent! (Where's that head banging "smilie" when I need it?).

Not accepting needed change, attempting to change its course (like stopping a raging river) by compartmentalizing authority (hoping state government will supercede national decrees, when the reverse is true) keeps things circling, to land.....

Arguing using inflated suppositions (like a neighbor holding a firearm at someone's head - did it matter if the neighbor was to one side or the other - I'll bet it did!)

Refusing to believe that in unity there is strength (in a country of this size, with so many immigrants who do not speak the same language literally or figuratively) 100% unity is impossible, even though more babies are dying here due to medical neglect/ignorance, than in some undeveloped countries.

Belief that each person should be healthy and financially successful by their own efforts (the problem being that most of us stumble due to ill health, somewhere along the way, usually later in life, and lose all we had, healthwise and wealthwise). That causes unemployment if businesses depended on the health of owners.

Seeing government as the enemy, rather than an ally to your well being. Due to the greed of many elected officials (for money, for sex, for power, etc., etc., etc.) it has become commonplace for many to idolize that. It is up to every individual to maintain a high sense of their own morality, and accepting nothing less in their elected officials, rather than the seeming prevailing atmosphere of: if you get away with it, it's OK, vis a vis the former governor of Illinois, W. Bush, IAG, banks' lack of allegiance to their customers, and on and on and on and on........

POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO ATTITUDE DEFICITS

Eat well (you know how), drink lots of healthy fluids, breathe deeply, exhale slowly, and think well of yourself and others. Know that you are in a safe place that allows good to happen for everyone.

Meditate often.

Participate with others who enjoy life.

Go to political gatherings (like meet the candidate events) and sop up what you learn, rather than "party lines". Evaluate candidates based on who they are, what you see, and their integrity (not what others say). Then support them, however you can. Let them know you and when you write to them when they achieve their goal of being in office, cite where you met them and clearly say what you want them to do (without resorting to arms).

I met a candidate last week, who is running for the delegate position in a district that is not mine, and I tell others who I meet who are in her district, how great I think she is. It turns out that she's a "consumer advocate" lawyer and might help me get out of my current crunch.

Go to sleep and wake up saying, I'm going to make this a great day, full of achievement for myself and others, You'll be amazed how well that works, when you mean it! You can even set your internal timeclock and wake up when you need to, by saying something like this: "It's 10:30 P.M. I'm going to awake at 6:00 A.M. refreshed, due to all the REM sleep I'll get early and throughout my 8 hour rest that renews my bodily functions and mental health." DO IT!! DON'T JUST "TRY" IT. Sleep deprivation is the main cause of depression, hence negativity, and all the errors made.

I'm sure you will see other ways of solving your world's problems. GO FOR IT!!!

Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.

the article recommended below, is a "must read" for anyone not in favor of uhc!

june 25, 2009

"the truth about the insurance industry"

ezra klein does a bang-up job of explaining the fundamental problem with for-profit health insurance over at his washington post blog. ezra also links to congressional testimony by one wendell potter, who worked in the insurance industry for some 20 years.

i would add only that non-profit private sector insurers don't labor under the same built-in conflict of interest. they don't have "a fiduciary duty to maximize profits."

in europe, every country offers some combination of regulated non-profit private sector insurance and public-sector insurance. the hybrid model seems to work well. if you have only public sector insurance (as in the u.k.) and sarah palin is elected president, you have a problem. don't laugh. were you laughing when gwb was re-elected? okay, some people liked president bush. obviously quite a few people voted for him. but you never know who is going to wind up in the white house. when margaret thatcher took charge in the u.k., she took a hatchet to the national health service. it still hasn't fully recovered.

posted by maggie mahar on june 25, 2009 | [email=?subject=read "the truth about the insurance industry"&body=go to http://www.healthbeatblog.com/2009/06/the-truth-about-the-insurance-industry.html]email this post[/email]

America, as originally intended to be, consisted of a bunch of independent and self sufficient states. These states had total sovereignty over their laws, religions, culture, and way of life, unless otherwise specified within the Constitution. For example, New York didn't really care much if Massachusetts had a State established Christian Puritan religion because it was a sovereign state, independent from New York. Who was New York to tell Massachusetts how to run their state? The states were joined together as a country for purposes of protecting the liberties and sovereignty that each enjoyed collectively within their states. This sovereignty has incrementally through the years eroded to the point where today states think they are now cities and the country now thinks it's a state. Many Americans abhor the idea of government funded health care because it flies in the face of Constitutional principles.

(10th Amendment) The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Once again... I've never read in our Constitution where it gives our federal government authority over the states on this subject or many, many, many, other subjects.

If individuals are ignorant of our American Constitution then their opinions have no authority and their responses are worthless.

The idea that New York, for example, has a Constitutional right to limit or affect in any way Massachusetts laws, religions, culture, health care, and way of life, unless otherwise specified within the Constitution, should be fiercely opposed and tirelessly exposed on the basis of Constitutional illegitimacy.

The end of an America that "consisted of a bunch of independent and self sufficient states...that had...total sovereignty over thier laws, religions, culture and way of life"was bloody and public and happened in 1865.

The Civil War, or, the War Between the States, (as it is still called by many in the 'losing' States) changed the rules of that game forever.

The winning side dictates the terms-this is what it means to lose a war.

Texas, you can no longer think about spliting yourself into five geographical States of Texas, you lost that right. Anyone who wants to purchace and hold a Slave is going to face severe legal penalities,as they should, that 'legal and cultural' way of life is gone.

If you want to have more than one wife, you better have money and be stealthy, because guess what, it's not legal.

If you want to increase your land holdings by forcing your 14 year old daughter to marry the old widower with the big farm, guess what, you will have to find another way to get your hands on that field and pasture.

This is the UNITED States. We have the rule of law. The law is for all the people.

Or it's supposed to be. If you don't have money it is not so easy to access the legal system.

If you don"t have money it is not so easy to access the health care system.

Nothing is what it once was. We are a work in progress. Other places in the world buried the hatchet and figured out how to get along and benefit as many of their citizens as they can with the resources available.

Where is the UNITED States going come down on this issue?

On the side of We the People? Or on the side of We the Big Corporation?

Specializes in M/S, MICU, CVICU, SICU, ER, Trauma, NICU.

Canada: Population 33,000,000

USA: Population 300,000,000

....nursing shortage, doctor shortage....hmmmmmm........

do you think:

Nurses will work for less pay? I know friends of mine that make $100,000.00 NO Overtime.

Doctors will be willing to GIVE UP their salary? Yeah...right....

For the good of the people? .........

Yeah..

Right.

excellent thread. i support socialized medicine , and feel the sooner the better, this was very enlightening and enjoyable

I'm Canadian. The best thing about our health care system is that in your daily life, you never have to think about affording care or not. You see your doctor or receive hospital care and you never get a bill. Our health care covers us no matter what province we are in when we need the care.

Catastrophic injury or illness? Same thing--you receive the care and no bills.

As nurses, we are paid well. And we don't have to worry about our patients' insurance covering this or that--we just look after them.

No system is perfect--there some community services that should be covered, especially for the elderly who need help with ADL's but I think that will come eventually. We could use better coverage for dental and drugs than we currently have, but people can get private insurance plans for that at relatively low cost.

Where health care is FOR PROFIT, that's when it becomes exclusionary and expensive. That's when it becomes an expense like any other in daily life. I would be so afraid to live in the USA where my coverage was a matter of ongoing concern.

How long does a patient have to wait to be seen by a doctor for back pain?

Specializes in ICU, APHERESIS, IV THERAPY, ONCOLOGY, BC.

Socialised medecine or the private sector? the need outweighs the choice. As the choice example of democracy, development of civilisation and freedom, what is civilised about denying health care to poverty stricken persons, homeless, minorities, the unemployed- to name a few? How can we defend insurance companies which have dragged our monetary value and financial markets so far down along with clients who will never recoup losses and face a grim reality of losses and lack of health coverage.

I am tired of the insinuation and ignorance between *Socialisation* as per communist policies/countries and *socialised medecine*. Socialised medecine practiced in *civilised western societies, ie. Western Europe, EU members and in Canada reflect a system of health care developed using tax contributions from employers, employees and industry towards ongoing quality care. Although not ideal in every respect, people are not refused care or entry at hospital doors.

In France, Sweden, UK, the mix of private/public health care has been established for decades. The system is well developed, works well and has existed for decades.

Nursing education is quality managed and increasingly standardised based on a global need and academic periodic assessment to meet new health challenges. Fees for education are reasonable and are not designed to enforce poverty before gaining stable employment.

Salaries for nurses have basically equalised between continents, based on the GNP, currency, taxation and cost of living index. As an example, working in Quebec, I am taxed twice and at my level at a rate of approx. 50% which leaves my net worth and purchasing power less than my north american counterparts. ( cost of living has risen ++over last 3 years and salaries have not been adjusted to meet this)

In view of the above, new pandemics, punitive actions towards nurses and other healthcare members set against the inexorable greed and incompetence seen in AIG bailouts, Madoff and others, a fraction of these monies could have been directed towards new health care strategy.

Such a strategy is urgently needed both for the present and future generations where *socialised medecine* sustains good governance and a democratic model, provides preventative counselling, education and on going care.

Specializes in Acute Care, Rehab, Palliative.
How long does a patient have to wait to be seen by a doctor for back pain?

I just had to make an appointment for back pain and I got one for the next morning with my GP. Last time I went to the ER I waited 20min.

Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.
.
and response

canada: population 33,000,000

usa: population 300,000,000

the important figures are the ratios of nurses; and doctors, to patients

....nursing shortage, doctor shortage....hmmmmmm........ do you think:

nurses will work for less pay? for good health care coverage at affordable rates, sure!

i know friends of mine that make $100,000.00 no overtime. that is probably due to the cost of housing in the area where those friends work. san francisco being a case in point!

doctors will be willing to give up their salary? williingness has nothing to do with it! more service and more hours of work are necessary. doctors are always siting the time they put in, preparing for what they are today. that, they had choice about - to get into a good/great medical school, a good/reputable internship and superior residency (that doesn't destroy their health), and be the best doctors they could be. i always check those facts before i allow a doctor to see me..... yeah...right....

for the good of the people? ......... absolutely!!!!!

yeah.. yes, we can!!!!

right on