Vrede wrote:Correct me if I'm interpreting you wrong but I'm hearing that as a result of the ACA:
You are not rejecting ACA-covered patients.
You are helping patients get coverage that was not available to them before, including, I assume, the young adults and people with pre-existing conditions that are better off under the ACA.
You fought Haley and won.
Sounds like the anecdotes are now 2-2.
No we are not rejecting ACA covered patients.
We assisted patients to enroll, if they chose to. Many chose not to, and we bid them adios. Before ACA we would have treated them, as it cost us nothing but our time. Now the situation is different, and they do not get seen. Also the enrollment period is over, so if a patient gets cancer and is uninsured, they are turned away.
We fought Haley, and won....for now. If medicaid rates drop in the future, we will not see those patients. Likewise, if ACA rates become so low we go underwater, they too will go.
Vrede wrote:It sounds like you're saying that some people that were getting chemo drugs and your services for free can now get ACA coverage or Medicaid but have chosen not to and thus got your "adios". Is that a bad thing?
Some simply cannot afford the premiums or deductables, or do not qualify for Medicaid, or put off enrollment thinking "I'll never get sick". At any rate, they are all out of luck. I think there are more people in central South Carolina who are now going without cancer care than there were before Obamacare.
There are also some that were getting general care at free medical clinics who now have Obamacare and don't qualify for those clinics, but cannot find a GP who will take them.
The next 6 months will give some idea of whether the program has been a success or failure. I think it is too early at present to declare either.
Vrede wrote:Is it really that people that do not qualify for Medicaid or the ACA subsidies (available up to $46k per year income for an individual) really cannot afford the premiums or deductibles, or just that they preferred getting chemo drugs and your services for free?
Godd 'ole Obamacare...let's look at this scenario and decide how great Obamacare really is..first, this refresher:
"Death panel" is a political term that originated during the 2009 debate about federal health care legislation to cover the uninsured in the United States. The term was coined in August 2009 by Sarah Palin, the former Republican Governor of Alaska, when she charged that the then-proposed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act would create a "death panel" of bureaucrats who would decide whether Americans—such as her elderly parents or children with Down syndrome—were "worthy of medical care". Palin's claim, however, was debunked, and it has been referred to as the "death panel myth", as nothing in any proposed legislation would have led to individuals being judged to see if they were worthy of health care.
Palin's claim was reported as false and criticized by mainstream news media, fact-checkers, academics, physicians, Democrats, and some Republicans. Other prominent Republicans such as Newt Gingrich and conservative talk radio hosts Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin backed Palin's statement. One poll showed that after it spread, about 85% of Americans were familiar with the charge and of those who were familiar with it, about 30% thought it was true.
For 2009, "death panel" was named as PolitiFact's "Lie of the Year", one of FactCheck's "whoppers", and the most outrageous term by the American Dialect Society.
Palin's claim that "death panels" were included in the proposed health care legislation was preceded by comments of other conservatives who criticized the same section of the bill.
On July 16, 2009, former lieutenant governor of New York, Betsy McCaughey, a longtime opponent of federal healthcare legislation said Section 1233 of HR 3200 was "a vicious assault on elderly people" because it would "absolutely require" Medicare patients to have counseling sessions every five years that would "tell them how to end their life sooner". Conservative talk radio hosts including Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham repeated McCaughey's claim. The AARP, a non-profit lobby group for retired persons, responded that the sessions were in no way designed to encourage euthanasia, but would instead help seniors make better decisions and would help ensure that their wishes were followed. PolitiFact said the proposal provided Medicare coverage for optional counseling sessions for patients who wanted to learn more about end-of-life-planning.
On July 24, 2009, an op-ed by McCaughey was published in the New York Post. In the piece, which was titled "Deadly Doctors", McCaughey falsely asserted that presidential advisor Ezekiel Emanuel believed the disabled should not be entitled to medical care, and quoted him out of context. On July 27, excerpts from the McCaughey's op-ed were read, with approval, by Representative (Rep.) Michele Bachmann (R-MN) on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. Within days, Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), then the Minority Leader of the House and Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI), the Republican Policy Committee Chairman, repeated claims that Section 1233 would encourage "government-sponsored" euthanasia, and Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) charged that the proposal would "put seniors in a position of being put to death by their government." On July 30, former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich, declared that the House bill had "a bias toward euthanasia". The Washington Post reported on August 1, 2009 that the claim had been spreading via "religious e-mail lists" and internet blogs. In early August, members of Congress held town hall meetings that were marked by hostility—including shouting, sporadic, physical altercations and comparisons between the proposed reforms and Nazi Germany.
I myself thought these claims were silly.....but now, this:
I have a friend (68) who had a massive heart attack in early March. He had quadruple bypass surgery in Winston-Salem and was transferred, in critical condition to the VA in Durham where he has been in ICU since. His wife was informed this past Monday, the 14th., that he would have to vacate the VA by Friday the 25th., as Medicare or VA benefits would no longer cover his care! They would have to find a skilled nursing facility for further care. Only one could be found that would take him in, and it's in Virginia, and Medicare will only cover his first 20 days.......
Now...what's this about the fine, upstanding Obamacare for seniors?
Vrede wrote:Yep, it has nothing to do with the ACA. 68 year olds don't need or get ACA coverage, people that don't need hospitals don't get Medicare or VA hospitalization benefits, and Medicare has never covered long term skilled nursing care.
Of course, your friend's wife could choose the GOP plan: "Let Him Die".
So, MrB., how did you decide to blame the ACA when it has zero relevance to your friend's situation, ODS perhaps?
Except that he never made such a claim. Look closer.
The article is from **1984**. And there's a correction at the bottom of the page, from 1993:
Mr. Lamm provided excerpts from the 1984 speech, in which he spoke philosophically about the terminally ill of any age, about the extraordinary costs of high-technology medicine and about the ability of medical science to stave off death far beyond considerations of quality of life.
Except that he never made such a claim. Look closer.
The article is from **1984**. And there's a correction at the bottom of the page, from 1993:
Mr. Lamm provided excerpts from the 1984 speech, in which he spoke philosophically about the terminally ill of any age, about the extraordinary costs of high-technology medicine and about the ability of medical science to stave off death far beyond considerations of quality of life.
Vrede wrote: "Yep, it has nothing to do with the ACA. 68 year olds don't need or get ACA coverage, people that don't need hospitals don't get Medicare or VA hospitalization benefits, and Medicare has never covered long term skilled nursing care. Of course, your friend's wife could choose the GOP plan:.....
So, MrB., how did you decide to blame the ACA when it has zero relevance to your friend's situation, ODS perhaps?"
So....just who's in charge of administering Medicare and the VA?
Depending on your level of VA benefits, Medicare or your insurance provider is billed by the VA, and they pay the VA for charges the patient incurs; say 80%.
The VA covers the remaining 20%, or bills the vet for deductibles, non-covered charges, etc. Somewhere, somehow, some bureaucracy has decided he's reached his maximum allowed benefits, despite being in critical condition in the ICU at the VA.
His wife doesn't choose the Obama plan that you described as "68 year olds don't need or get ACA coverage, people that don't need hospitals don't get Medicare or VA hospitalization benefits" so someone has decided it's best that he die?...everyone has a right to live.
Not knowing my friend's complete situation, how can you say the ACA has zero relevance? Who's/what's ODS?
Here in Columbia, I have worked with (not for-thank God) the Dorn VA Medical Center for 30 years, and see these type delays weekly. What takes 3 days in the civilian setting to get done takes 3 months. For example, I just saw a poor vet who had a partial penectomy (Babbit procedure) for a cancer, along with a node dissection in the groin, done in August 2013. He was supposed to get postoperative radiation to prevent a recurrence. Because that system moves so slowly, the paperwork did not get approved until last week, at which time I saw him with an ulcerated painful recurrence in the groin about the size of a softball, that grew under the noses of the physicians at the VA. He also has spread now into the lungs, and will have a slow, painful, costly death.
BTW I agree that the ACA has nothing to do with VA and Medicare healthcare problems, but it is related to the federal government running these programs.
Also my prior point about Lamm was that politicians on both sides of the aisle say and do stupid things.
Vrede wrote: "No political spin here, this is my work and I dealt with all of this......"
Wneglia wrote: "...BTW I agree that the ACA has nothing to do with VA and Medicare healthcare problems, but it is related to the federal government running these programs..."
Thanks Vrede...that's why I made that post; I knew you'd be in a position to explain it, while Doc nailed my point.
I don't know their financial situation, but I thought it odd that he'd be run out of the hospital while in critical condition in the ICU; as skilled nursing facilities do not have all the highly-specialized life support equipment found in hospitals. Maybe they've deemed him too critical to continue life-saving treatment, knowing he may not survive anyway......I just don't know.
I have no political leanings on opinions expressed by either political party; I have no trust in either.
When I said I vote as an Independent, I mean that I vote my conscience rather than a "faithful" party member.
Vrede wrote: "No political spin here, this is my work and I dealt with all of this......"
Wneglia wrote: "...BTW I agree that the ACA has nothing to do with VA and Medicare healthcare problems, but it is related to the federal government running these programs..."
Thanks Vrede...that's why I made that post; I knew you'd be in a position to explain it, while Doc nailed my point.
I don't know their financial situation, but I thought it odd that he'd be run out of the hospital while in critical condition in the ICU; as skilled nursing facilities do not have all the highly-specialized life support equipment found in hospitals. Maybe they've deemed him too critical to continue life-saving treatment, knowing he may not survive anyway......I just don't know.
I have no political leanings on opinions expressed by either political party; I have no trust in either.
When I said I vote as an Independent, I mean that I vote my conscience rather than a "faithful" party member.
Maybe your friend is at the point of diminishing returns......before my mother died of colon cancer twenty years ago, she spent quite some time in and out of hospital. It got to the point that the doctors suggested that she just go home, that further treatment was of no benefit. They gave her a prescription for pot pills and sent her home. She died less than a month later. Personally, I'd rather die at home with pot pills than at the hospital with or without pot pills. Death panels and insurance companies are not part of that equation. And I registered as Independent because I didn't want either party harassing me with unsolicited phone calls and mailings.
Vrede wrote: "Maybe his wife has not given you all the details or things have not been adequately explained to her."
Those thoughts have not been entirely dismissed from my mind.
This nations health care system with all it's rules and regulations that mainly benefit the insurance companies is what bugs the hell out of me.
Back to the VA.....a few years ago arthritis in my left shoulder necessitated rotator cuff surgery at the VA. During the surgery the "ball-joints" were smoothed to get rid of the deterioration cause by the arthritis.
My right shoulder is now experiencing the same symptoms; a grinding sensation with pain, so I made an appointment with my primary care doctor, who in turn sent me for X-rays. He then told me that I had acute arthritis in my shoulder and that the arthritis is something that I'll "just have to live with" as practically all aging people experience arthritis. (you think?) So I ask him why I couldn't undergo the "ball-joint polishing" to get rid of the deterioration to possibly prevent another rotator cuff operation. His answer was that the gummit has cut back on performing surgeries in all but absolutely, extremely necessary cases. A burning pain that I treat with ibuprofen now travels up the right side of my neck, but damn!..... my shoulder don't hurt because I'm learning to "live with it"!
Many people are on payment plans. This is the very start of the program. How many of those "unpaid" instances are simply pending the first payment on schedule?
...on everything from Operation Fast and Furious, to Benghazi, to...
I *thought* I detected a trace of targeting the effing stupid there. Confirmed.
"Democrats bragging about the number of mandatory sign-ups for Obamacare is like Germans bragging about the number of mandatory sign-ups for 'train rides' for Jews in the 40s."
- TN State Sen. Stacey Campfield
rstrong wrote:"Democrats bragging about the number of mandatory sign-ups for Obamacare is like Germans bragging about the number of mandatory sign-ups for 'train rides' for Jews in the 40s."
- TN State Sen. Stacey Campfield
Just this morning I sent this moron an email congratulating him on his ignorance and conveying to him how he makes me embarrassed to have grown up in TN. I went on to explain how, in a party with no shortage of wingnuts, that he is an outstanding wingnut......a real piece of work. I hypothesized that part of his wingnuttiness could be because his mommy gave him a girls name; I suggested he overcome his angst about it and be a man. I signed it "Intestinally yours" and my name. He wrote back a few minutes ago and apologized for his recent remarks about the Jews riding a train analogy, and that he intended no insult to anyone. He went on to babble about how the present administration and the health care reform in particular are "destroying our freedoms" in this country. I think he really believes this stuff he spouts. Tragic. I won't write to him again; it's a waste of time.
