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 ICU, MS, Radiology, Long term care.

I don't think that is true. The United States spends more per capita than anyone besides the Marshall Islands. The US also ranks 37th in rankings of health care. Just think if all that excessive money was in your pocket instead of profit for some insurance/health care organization/corporation? Lots of people have know this was going to happen, but greed got in the way of reform. Beware of the messages out there. The insurance companies, healthcare organizations and those they serve and serve them have a lot to lose. It just make sense that if health care was universal there would be more people available to work, be educated and raise our level of income, societal norms, etc. Besides, I was between jobs, got sick and hospitalized. $30,000 dollars and years of trying to pay forced me into bankruptcy. The American dream is to own your home and put your kids through college. That dream is gone for me.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
QUOTED FROM JSTAND "I love it when people start to assume what the framers of the constitution mean and put their own spin on it. The truth is that YOU, nor Rebelyell, nor I know exactly what the framers meant when they said "general welfare".

We can know exactly, with great detail and certainty what our founding fathers thought of the "General Welfare" clause. Please read below. Keep in mind these are just a few quotes and if you need me to provide more, please let me know.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."

- Thomas Jefferson

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."

- James Madison

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The nature of the encroachment upon American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer; it eats faster and faster every hour. The revenue creates pensioners, and the pensioners urge for more revenue. The people grow less steady, spirited and virtuous, the seekers more numerous and more corrupt, and every day increases the circles of their dependents and expectants, until virtue, integrity, public spirit, simplicity and frugality become the objects of ridicule and scorn, and vanity, luxury, foppery, selfishness, meanness, and downright venality swallow up the whole of society."

- John Adams

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare... they may appoint teachers in every state... The powers of Congress would subvert the very foundation, the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America."

- James Madison

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The constitutionality and propriety of the Federal Government assuming to enter into a novel and vast field of legislation, namely, that of providing for the care and support of all those ... who by any form of calamity become fit objects of public philanthropy. ... I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for making the Federal Government the great almoner of public charity throughout the United States. To do so would, in my judgment, be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution and subversive of the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded."

- Franklin Peirce

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."

- James Madison

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress... Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America."

- James Madison

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

- Thomas Jefferson

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father's has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association -- the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

- Thomas Jefferson

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity, ... [it] would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded."

- Franklin Peirce

Every last quote that you have attached here speaks in broad generality about "general welfare". My criticism was that you as well as the other people I have quoted like to determine for themselves what they think it means and then try to say that the framers of the Constitution agree with them. And forgive me if I am wrong, but I do believe that only one of the people you quoted here was a signer of the Constitution. You might want to check your history before you go quoting the "Framers of the Constitution".

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.

From post # 421

".........we fear a return to the time when an illness could reduce you to poverty that we are willing to fund a universal system of care. "

In 1962, when the concept of Canada's medical program was conceived, healthcare cost were a fraction of the amounts now received by providers of care. One has to consider that diagnostic procedures, tests and medications available today were not available then. However the inflated charges for them and already established things in the USA have inflated grossly, according to "what the traffic will bear" - which is what health insurance companies agree to pay. Huge profits have accumulated due to the belief (false) that pharmaceutical companies pay for all the research done to develop new medications. Grants accessed by those companies pay for the research in glitzy facilities they build to attract credible researchers.

The Canadian program had staff that negotiated lower prices for drugs, lab supplies and hardware, and controlled hospital costs and prevented the overbuying of individual facilities when sufficient machinery was close to other labs/hospitals. In the USA, capitolism is the excuse for competitive facilities to have all the equipment their neighboring facilities have. Since new discoveries in the health care field provide great changes that present a need to obtain more and more of those advances, older proliferation of equipment is wasted. Most of that can't even be recycled!

Therefore it is essential that our country places controls on the amount expended for equipment in communities that are affluent, to provide it for less monied communities. However many Americans see their rights invaded whenever public money is spent on those with fewer economic opportunities...... You can point to decades old provisions in the constitution here, to your heart's discontent, yet the bottom line is usually greedy selfishness and an attitude as that expressed in post # 422.

Since political campaigns have become more and more vicious, with claims by candidates that are unresearched and/or purposely misinterpreted for their own interests. Reality is hard to find these days, yet the evidence of a diminished "middle class" is extensive and the affluence of the rich is even more obvious. Since poor people (other than those who are homeless)haven't the opportunitiy to be seen due to transportation issues, they have hidden in the dark recesses of big cities and in rural areas. It is truer now than at any other time, according to my observations that those without monehy have fallen into a "quicksand" environment that piles debt after debt on their heads, some of which is appropriate and much that is not.

Banks have assigned repeated fees for one error, to those who haven't kept up with their expenses, making any one error exponentially larger according to the ability of account holders to straighten out mistakes and negotiate to pay off debts slowly. Once a debt has been reported to "Unfair Isaac" by the big 3 reporting companies, one's ability to access money to dig themselves out of a financial "hole" become more expensive (higher interest rates, refusals and lack of ability to get out from under the (usually) unjustified amounts claimed to be owed a creditor. If someone can't obtain work where they are currently, and have no reliable transportation to move or commute further away, they slip further into that quagmire of "quicksand", eventually giving up efforts to return to their former lifestyles.

That grim picture is repeated millions of times, with some tragic repercussions. It is a horrible failing to our fellow Americans, to refuse to "lend a hand" to those who have fallen, and derive satisfaction from not being them. Nurses, more than anyone else should be able to appreciate the dilemma of those who have become unemployed due to no fault of their own (mine was becoming 55 and having health insurance companies present me as a liability greater than my employers wanted to bear). We know how anxiety has negative effects on peoples health, presenting autoimmune diseases for them that are life threatening. Then the pharmaceutical remedies' costs exceed realistic expectations. My medications cost me $1500/month for 15 years before a drug program through Medicare became available, which made them affordable and therefore available to me. Meanwhile the symptoms of several illnesses and increasing age affected my ability to work.

My savings are gone, and I am about to lose my home because my income from my exhusband has diminished, which was decreed by a Judge to continue for my entire life and was to end or change only upon the death of my ex spouse or my remarriage. Only hiring an attorney with an "up front payment" of $10-15,000 can change the dilemma in which I find myself. When I applied recently for modification of the mortgage that should make my housing affordable, I was told that I didn't "earn" enough money for one. The only alternative is foreclosure.

The only positive thing I can see, is that I am not alone, millions of others are in my position; and we presently have a government that is actually creating solutions for problems such as those I have described above. Only big business investors and those with large inheritances, who have bilked the public and lied consistantly see that as being negative. Please VOTE thoughtfully and considerately next week!

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Every last quote that you have attached here speaks in broad generality about "general welfare". My criticism was that you as well as the other people I have quoted like to determine for themselves what they think it means and then try to say that the framers of the Constitution agree with them. And forgive me if I am wrong, but I do believe that only one of the people you quoted here was a signer of the Constitution. You might want to check your history before you go quoting the "Framers of the Constitution".

The founding fathers wrote much concerning the subject of "General Welfare." Try reading the Federalist Papers to start with. It is a long and dry read. But it is filled with specifics from our founding fathers. FYI, our founding fathers wrote the Federalist Papers precisely for the reasons of discrediting and exploiting the attempts of some at that time to change the original intent of our Constitution, as you are trying to do now. The 10 Amendment was passed (by elected delegates as well as non-elected delegates of the Constitutional Convention) in order to re-enforce the original intent of Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution. Some at the time of ratification were trying to say, as you are now, that Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives the Federal Government unlimited powers. And....as we can see by the ratification of the 10th Amendment (by elected delegates as well as non-elected delegates of the Constitutional Convention) the consensus at that time definitively answered this question....NO, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE UNLIMITED POWERS. BUT ONLY THE POWERS SPECIFICALLY EXPRESSED IN OUR CONSTITUTION and for the sake of this conversation SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED IN ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 OF OUR CONSTITUTION. Can you tell me what books or other information you've read that led you to the opinion that no one can possibly know what the original intent of our founding fathers?

Up Vote Up Vote ×

re post 423

When I said that Canadians fear a return to a time of poverty due to medical bills I was referring to the middle class. We hear stories of Americans who are employed and have medical bills that have bankrupted them. I have also heard that some American lose their jobs because employers feel they are too expensive to insure. This is something Canadians have decided we will not accept. Forgive me if I have been misinformed but I heard that the American poor already have medical coverage. No taxpayer based system could ever have been created if the middle class had not decided it was a priorty.

I also must say that as a nurse I find your statements about people living in poverty shocking. If we as members of the caring profession can not look at all people and see the humanity who will ?

Up Vote Up Vote ×
The founding fathers wrote much concerning the subject of "General Welfare." Try reading the Federalist Papers to start with. It is a long and dry read. But it is filled with specifics from our founding fathers. FYI, our founding fathers wrote the Federalist Papers precisely for the reasons of discrediting and exploiting the attempts of some at that time to change the original intent of our Constitution, as you are trying to do now. The 10 Amendment was passed (by elected delegates as well as non-elected delegates of the Constitutional Convention) in order to re-enforce the original intent of Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution. Some at the time of ratification were trying to say, as you are now, that Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives the Federal Government unlimited powers. And....as we can see by the ratification of the 10th Amendment (by elected delegates as well as non-elected delegates of the Constitutional Convention) the consensus at that time definitively answered this question....NO, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE UNLIMITED POWERS. BUT ONLY THE POWERS SPECIFICALLY EXPRESSED IN OUR CONSTITUTION and for the sake of this conversation SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED IN ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 OF OUR CONSTITUTION. Can you tell me what books or other information you've read that led you to the opinion that no one can possibly know what the original intent of our founding fathers?

Unlimited Powers = General Welfare?? What kind of comparsion are you making here? I don't care what books you have read, it doesn't give you the authority to tell me what general welfare means. I didn't hear you answer to my question in this post either. If you are such a history expert, then why are you quoting " constitutional framers" who never signed the document???

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Unlimited Powers = General Welfare?? What kind of comparsion are you making here? I don't care what books you have read, it doesn't give you the authority to tell me what general welfare means. I didn't hear you answer to my question in this post either. If you are such a history expert, then why are you quoting " constitutional framers" who never signed the document???

First, I don't have authority to tell you anything, except..... if you choose to listen. Second, knowledge=power=authority. So.... You are wrong. I do have authority to tell you what general welfare means..... if you choose to listen.

Could you be more specific about your first question? Because in my last thread I wasn't making any COMPARISONS......I was stating that those who ratified the 10th Amendment were making a DISTINCTION between federal powers and state powers.

Could you be more specific about your second question? Because there were many elected delegates of the Constitutional Convention who signed the Constitution, who also were elected to the 1st Congress, which ratified the 10th Amendment. The 10 Amendment was passed in order to re-enforce the original intent of Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution. Some at the time of ratification were trying to say, as you are now, that Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives the Federal Government unlimited powers (example in today's terms: taxing for Universal Healthcare). And....as we can see by the ratification of the 10th Amendment the consensus at that time definitively answered this question....NO, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE UNLIMITED POWERS. BUT ONLY THE POWERS SPECIFICALLY EXPRESSED IN OUR CONSTITUTION and for the sake of this conversation SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED IN ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 OF OUR CONSTITUTION. ALL, I repeat ALL other power is given to the STATES. The quotes from our founding fathers in my previous thread were given as a broad reference point for you. There was a quote from an Anti-Federalist, a Federalist, and a President 62 years later. This broad reference point demonstrates both sides of the issue at the time of the ratification of the 10th Amendment and also a President's view of history 62 years after the ratification of the 10th Amendment.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.

Re: Posts #s 426 and 429

This website isn't for the purpose of making others wrong about the constitution, or using that aged document as a weapon. Ammendments have been made, and only a lawyer who is versed about those and who has become an expert regarding it (similar to President Barack Obama who taught constitutional law at Harvard ) could properly argue its contents.

If participants want to say something about their experience or information about "socialized medicine" (which the Reform of Health Care Insurers Bill is not), so that we can all benefit by that knowledge, fine!

If I want to read long lectures about the "founding fathers", the constitution, or comparitive healthcare systems, I will (not)and I'm free to quote truthfully about what is done here or elsewhere.

Let's not get into the ancient art of over expounding about who thinks they're right, etc. The passion expressed about the constitution reminds me of how the evolutionary process has been dinged by some religions that prefer to stick to the even more ancient biblical description, which is hearsay (and therefore not admissable in any legal setting).

I think this thread has been corrupted somewhat, and would like to see actual nurses' experiences working in a system other than that in the U.S., that benefits all the peoples' health, not just a privileged few.

Also, let me say to the Canadian nurse, that all insurance plans here in the USA are inequal. That is why each year the opportunity to change to a different plan, occurs at most places of employment. Those who are unhappy with the amount of coverage they already have, can switch to another that they think may be of more benefit (although it's a hard task, as the writing in the policies is legal jargon that is even dryer than our constitution, and often phrases seem OK that really balance out possible expenses that may not be in a person's former policy).

I was offered a policy where I worked part time less than 33 hours weekly, in a Home Health Agency 7 years ago, that would cost $325/month. I saw no other dollar signs, so I asked what the "cap" (extent of coverage monetarily) was. It took 2 weeks for the head office in another state to reply, that it was only going to take care of medical costs of $1,350 yearly. So I went without medical insurance until a few years later I was eligible for Medicare (at 65 years of age).

However I did experience being fired from 8 great positions after I was 55 years old, for which I was amply qualified and got good evaluations from my superiors. Much later a friend who owned her own company told me about the escalation of insurance premiums for people over 55. In those days, employers paid nurses much less, and the insurance was a "perk" (if it covered one's need for healthcare adequately).

A friend of mine who is a teacher, needed her ankle reconstructed or replaced (due to many fractures that hadn't been treated well), but the insurance the teachers had, would only pay for a fusion. Now her feet point in 2 different directions, which makes it harder to get anywhere fast and she has considerable pain while ambulating.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Very interesting threat, I did not understand Shaka's perspective or the reasoning behind these questions posed! I grew up in Saint Lucia and immigrated to the U.S. Systems tend to be relative economically but often times, market economies may have runaway costs which go un-noticed and more often than not are usually crippling, not only to the intended patients but, to the economy as well. The Caribbean also practices socialized medicine for as long as I can remember and so are most countries outside of the Continental U.S. Part of the fear of socialized medicine for America, I believe and I'm sure most of you will agree, has to do with profit and greed more than it has to do with the relative costs, ROI on technology, or changes in America's degenerative capital structures in healthcare.

In Saint Lucia, and other Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) member states or Federation if you prefer, healthcare procedures including ER, hospitalizations, nursing home care services are free. Prescriptions may be free or subsidized. Procedures and access to costly and prohibitive care often needing expertise not available locally on the island may be sought intra regionally within the Caribbean or in more developed countries. However, the govt will still pay if a panel of regional health professionals finds it necessary. Sometimes a choice, generic vs. brand medicine may be offered to patients/clients but not likely to compromise patient health.

There's no doubt that without govt help and regulation, we will have many more baffled Alan Greenspan(s) in our bleak future. Perhaps economists need to examine the foundations upon which they based the premise that deregulation was/is better than regulation especially in healthcare and the economy as a whole. We are finally waking up as we ourselves find ourselves at the doorsteps of the healthcare system - broke and in need of critical care..! Again, kudos Madwife!!

aserieux

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Intensive care.

I have had three experiences with socialized/nationalized Health Care. I was born and lived in England for 19 years. If you wanted to see a Doctor (GP) you went to one of his surgery hours in the morning or afternoon. I sat in a small room with all manners of illnesses around me, including infectious ones. You were seen on a first come first served basis. I was born with Bipolar Disorder, and especially in High School had constant migraines, depression, and school phobia. My condition was never even talked about. The most treatment I received was a bottle of Parrish's Tonic to "buck me up". I came to America in 1971, undiagnosed, and under the belief that all my symptoms were just character flaws. The first hint that I might have a Psychiatric disorder was a Nurse Recruiter telling me I might consider it , after I quit after just one day with a massive anxiety attack. 1984 I was dx as Unipolar Depressive, 1994 I was finally diagnosed as Bipolar. My point is that the failure to detect mental disease as a child led me to make disastrous decisions.

I served in the AF for many years and saw the effects of "free" medical care. A man who drove for two hours with a broken arm to get to an AF hospital. The girl who woke up our ER Doc at 2 a.m., because she felt a cold was coming on and didn't want to ruin her Christmas. A lady who had experimented with an ice cube in sex play, and came to the hospital for the Doctor to remove it. An endless line of coughs colds, sore backs, minor skin rashes; all coming to get their free bottle of $3.00 Cough syrup, or tube of lotion.

Finally, there was Canada. My wife, a Canadian citizen was home visiting her sister, and caught Bronchitis. Two days later she was admitted to a local hospital for Acute Resp Failure. She called me that night to tell the Nurse how to connect Oxygen to her CPAP mask. It seems they had no R.T. after about 7 P.M. At 1:30 AM I was called by her sister and told she had been intubated and airlifted to a Medical Center ICU. After finally finding out how sick she was, I flew up to Canada. Her medical care was not free, because she had not paid the health portion of Ontario's taxes. I was directed to the accounting dept., who demanded a daily payment of $2,500 a day. I gave them several credir card numbers, and told them to let me know when they ran out. My wife was intubated and on a Propofolol and Morphine drip. No secretions were suctioned out, so I was pretty sure it was viral. Despite being intubated she made sounds like bronchospasm and her heart rate would drop into the 20's until given Atropine. This happened several times a day. I talked with the Unit director about step down care, and was told she would stay in the Unit until ready to go to an unmonitored bed. I finally decided to fly her back to the U.S. She recovered on several step down Units at my local hospital.

I can be reimbursed for the $25,000 her stay and trip cost. But not without Medical Records. Despite requests from her and her Doctor, we are still waiting for a copy of her medical chart. It is now 5 months since she left Canada.

Overall, as an ICU Nurse I found their equipment was old, and not able to ventilate her through the inadequate 7.00 mm ETT. She had no Chest X rays daily, and no CT. I believe the staff was well qualified, but resources were limited.

Philosophically the main difference in american and foreign medecine is that here we are over equipped, over staffed (with Doctors, not Nurses), and we value nthe individual patient. Socialized medecine by it's nature, must allocate scarce resources in a way that best benefits the overall society.

We have plenty of health programs for the uninsured. The problem are the petty rules, and unmotivated staff who run them.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I like what you have to say and you know that we all have different experiences. I am all for socialized medicine and getting rid of the extortionistic insurance companies. Medicare is socialized medicine, so is the VA. Our constitution was written to help prevent monopolies from controlling our economy and sadly enough with deregulations, it has happened. Our government is controlled by corporate entities. They are not human, they are large groups with stock holders. I think that health care needs to be like homehealth. We should be making people take responsibility for their families and teach. To say that because socialized medicine in one place works or does not, may not mean it would not work here. The idea that health care is too expensive for tax payers to subsidize is a notion that may be distorted by insurance companies. There is a doctor in southern California I know of that is nonprofit and she charges 20-35 a visit and 7-15 for labs done in her office. There are other offices opening up with the same model. I hope and pray that it grows. I would like to see the hospitals go back to being real nonprofit hospitals and let experienced, hands on nurses and doctors coordinate them. Hospitals are so managed that managers are in meetings instead of on the floor managing. There is nothing wrong with change, but it is rediculous. From my experience, hospitals are like computers. They change them so much that they become toxic. Staff is stressed, patients are made to feel like numbers, and managers feel disimpowered. The answers are not simple. Americans are given so much misinformation. I just love this web site. It is so neat. I have looked on line for somewhere to vent and finally found it. I wish I had started it. Nurses really need to be able to vent. Just some thoughts!

I have had three experiences with socialized/nationalized Health Care. I was born and lived in England for 19 years. If you wanted to see a Doctor (GP) you went to one of his surgery hours in the morning or afternoon. I sat in a small room with all manners of illnesses around me, including infectious ones. You were seen on a first come first served basis. I was born with Bipolar Disorder, and especially in High School had constant migraines, depression, and school phobia. My condition was never even talked about. The most treatment I received was a bottle of Parrish's Tonic to "buck me up". I came to America in 1971, undiagnosed, and under the belief that all my symptoms were just character flaws. The first hint that I might have a Psychiatric disorder was a Nurse Recruiter telling me I might consider it , after I quit after just one day with a massive anxiety attack. 1984 I was dx as Unipolar Depressive, 1994 I was finally diagnosed as Bipolar. My point is that the failure to detect mental disease as a child led me to make disastrous decisions.

I served in the AF for many years and saw the effects of "free" medical care. A man who drove for two hours with a broken arm to get to an AF hospital. The girl who woke up our ER Doc at 2 a.m., because she felt a cold was coming on and didn't want to ruin her Christmas. A lady who had experimented with an ice cube in sex play, and came to the hospital for the Doctor to remove it. An endless line of coughs colds, sore backs, minor skin rashes; all coming to get their free bottle of $3.00 Cough syrup, or tube of lotion.

Finally, there was Canada. My wife, a Canadian citizen was home visiting her sister, and caught Bronchitis. Two days later she was admitted to a local hospital for Acute Resp Failure. She called me that night to tell the Nurse how to connect Oxygen to her CPAP mask. It seems they had no R.T. after about 7 P.M. At 1:30 AM I was called by her sister and told she had been intubated and airlifted to a Medical Center ICU. After finally finding out how sick she was, I flew up to Canada. Her medical care was not free, because she had not paid the health portion of Ontario's taxes. I was directed to the accounting dept., who demanded a daily payment of $2,500 a day. I gave them several credir card numbers, and told them to let me know when they ran out. My wife was intubated and on a Propofolol and Morphine drip. No secretions were suctioned out, so I was pretty sure it was viral. Despite being intubated she made sounds like bronchospasm and her heart rate would drop into the 20's until given Atropine. This happened several times a day. I talked with the Unit director about step down care, and was told she would stay in the Unit until ready to go to an unmonitored bed. I finally decided to fly her back to the U.S. She recovered on several step down Units at my local hospital.

I can be reimbursed for the $25,000 her stay and trip cost. But not without Medical Records. Despite requests from her and her Doctor, we are still waiting for a copy of her medical chart. It is now 5 months since she left Canada.

Overall, as an ICU Nurse I found their equipment was old, and not able to ventilate her through the inadequate 7.00 mm ETT. She had no Chest X rays daily, and no CT. I believe the staff was well qualified, but resources were limited.

Philosophically the main difference in american and foreign medecine is that here we are over equipped, over staffed (with Doctors, not Nurses), and we value nthe individual patient. Socialized medecine by it's nature, must allocate scarce resources in a way that best benefits the overall society.

We have plenty of health programs for the uninsured. The problem are the petty rules, and unmotivated staff who run them.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

No, it for discussion and we are all free not to read each others opinions. This is a topic that people feel passionate about and maybe we can learn from each other. Probably not, but who knows. LOL

Re: Posts #s 426 and 429

This website isn't for the purpose of making others wrong about the constitution, or using that aged document as a weapon. Ammendments have been made, and only a lawyer who is versed about those and who has become an expert regarding it (similar to President Barack Obama who taught constitutional law at Harvard ) could properly argue its contents.

If participants want to say something about their experience or information about "socialized medicine" (which the Reform of Health Care Insurers Bill is not), so that we can all benefit by that knowledge, fine!

If I want to read long lectures about the "founding fathers", the constitution, or comparitive healthcare systems, I will (not)and I'm free to quote truthfully about what is done here or elsewhere.

Let's not get into the ancient art of over expounding about who thinks they're right, etc. The passion expressed about the constitution reminds me of how the evolutionary process has been dinged by some religions that prefer to stick to the even more ancient biblical description, which is hearsay (and therefore not admissable in any legal setting).

I think this thread has been corrupted somewhat, and would like to see actual nurses' experiences working in a system other than that in the U.S., that benefits all the peoples' health, not just a privileged few.

Also, let me say to the Canadian nurse, that all insurance plans here in the USA are inequal. That is why each year the opportunity to change to a different plan, occurs at most places of employment. Those who are unhappy with the amount of coverage they already have, can switch to another that they think may be of more benefit (although it's a hard task, as the writing in the policies is legal jargon that is even dryer than our constitution, and often phrases seem OK that really balance out possible expenses that may not be in a person's former policy).

I was offered a policy where I worked part time less than 33 hours weekly, in a Home Health Agency 7 years ago, that would cost $325/month. I saw no other dollar signs, so I asked what the "cap" (extent of coverage monetarily) was. It took 2 weeks for the head office in another state to reply, that it was only going to take care of medical costs of $1,350 yearly. So I went without medical insurance until a few years later I was eligible for Medicare (at 65 years of age).

However I did experience being fired from 8 great positions after I was 55 years old, for which I was amply qualified and got good evaluations from my superiors. Much later a friend who owned her own company told me about the escalation of insurance premiums for people over 55. In those days, employers paid nurses much less, and the insurance was a "perk" (if it covered one's need for healthcare adequately).

A friend of mine who is a teacher, needed her ankle reconstructed or replaced (due to many fractures that hadn't been treated well), but the insurance the teachers had, would only pay for a fusion. Now her feet point in 2 different directions, which makes it harder to get anywhere fast and she has considerable pain while ambulating.

Up Vote Up Vote ×