Healthcare is a privilege or a right?

[Kathryn]

It would have been much cheaper on the state if he had not had to wait for the crisis to get care.

I'm sorry - but since I didn't give details on his particular crisis, you really can't say this.

Now I'll give the details. He claims to have had a nervous breakdown. So my dad and his wife took him to the emergency room (because of his bizarre behavior) and he was admitted and had all sorts of tests done, for several days.

They found nothing physically wrong with him. However, he was on a veritable BARRAGE of medical prescriptions for pain (?), and for insomnia, that sort of thing - in other words, he was already receiving medical care for some very vague symptoms - which, by the way, they found no evidence for, healthwise, during his week of testing at the expense of others.

So they sent him to a mental health medical facility where he was weaned off all the prescription drugs, and then given an anti depressant, and then he filed for disability benefits.

No surprise there. I think the disability thing is still pending. But I don't doubt at all that he will continue to push for disability benefits indefinitely. He DEFINITELY does not want to actually have to work.

Meanwhile, his wife has gone to work at a grocery store (she hasn't worked at all outside the home, ie trailer, since they got married), so that they can try to get health insurance - and I guess pay their back taxes, since they've been busted for not filing income taxes now.

Crazy.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Sounds like a tool. Unfortunate that there are people like that in our society.

Although my post cannot apply to him, in many other cases it does apply to people who, because of lack of healthcare, wait until a crisis to go to the emergency room where they cannot be turned away.

 

[tomato1236]

Do you feel the same about a ten year old girl with failing kidneys and no means to pay for treatment?

Basically. Except it would be her parents whose responsibility it is to come up with the money.

I'm not opposed to a safety net for people in cases where they are unable to obtain insurance by no fault of their own, but in general, I feel it's irresponsible to EXPECT healthcare regardless of circumstance.

 

[Storm]

Basically. Except it would be her parents whose responsibility it is to come up with the money.

I'm not opposed to a safety net for people in cases where they are unable to obtain insurance by no fault of their own, but in general, I feel it's irresponsible to EXPECT healthcare regardless of circumstance.

So, basically, you advocate leaving the poor to die.

 

[tomato1236]

So, basically, you advocate leaving the poor to die.

Unless, through no fault of their own, they are unable to obtain insurance. Yes. I also advocate leaving the rich to die, if they are unable to pay for services rendered. I do think the price of healthcare is incredible.

 

[Kathryn]

Death rate currently is at 100% just to put things into perspective.

I am not opposed to providing a tax payer supported health system which provides adequate health INSURANCE for those who TRULY CANNOT AFFORD to pay for it themselves.

I am also not opposed to allowing those who can pay for upgrades to do so,

An example - I used to have pretty sorry health insurance. I mean, it was OK, and in fact I had a hysterectomy while covered by that plan and I paid about $2000 out of pocket. Part of that was paid in installments and part was paid up front (I put it on a credit card and then paid the card off.)

That was about 8 years ago.

Since that experience - which was successful but somewhat limiting, I've realized the importance of a good plan. So I pay for an upgraded plan via my company benefits program.

This means I get expanded options, and, I feel, better care that's more easily managed monetarily. I pay more each month, but I get more.

Keep in mind that under the very basic care I received before, my healthcare needs were met, and that my hospital worked with me on managing my bills.

But under my current plan, I've been MUCH happier - and the surgery I had last week cost me $22 out of pocket, so far. I've already met my deductible for the year. I may get some other bills but I'll work out a payment plan with the hospital - and they will work with me, because my insurance has already covered at least 80 percent of the total bill. They will probably knock off most of the remainder of the bill and let me pay an adjusted balance.

Here in Texas, income eligible families can take advantage of a very decent public health insurance program for their kids. They pay on a sliding scale, by income, and many income levels pay absolutely nothing.

No child in Texas should be without health insurance. But of course - the parents have to register for it, and sometimes, based on family ability, have to pay a small premium.

And as we all know - some parents are extremely irresponsible. It's not the STATE'S fault if the parents don't act responsibly.

I'd rather not pay for my insurance - it's a boring bill. But it's necessary. And even when I was a single mom and self employed on a very limited income, I put a priority on paying for insurance. It was the responsible thing to do. I couldn't have cable TV and I drove an older car - but I carried insurance.

 

[Storm]

Unless, through no fault of their own, they are unable to obtain insurance. Yes. I also advocate leaving the rich to die, if they are unable to pay for services rendered. I do think the price of healthcare is incredible.

When are the rich "unable to pay?" Please, if you're going to be a social Darwinist, have a shred of integrity about it.

 

[tomato1236]

Death rate currently is at 100% just to put things into perspective.

I am not opposed to providing a tax payer supported health system which provides adequate health INSURANCE for those who TRULY CANNOT AFFORD to pay for it themselves.

I am also not opposed to allowing those who can pay for upgrades to do so,

An example - I used to have pretty sorry health insurance. I mean, it was OK, and in fact I had a hysterectomy while covered by that plan and I paid about $2000 out of pocket. Part of that was paid in installments and part was paid up front (I put it on a credit card and then paid the card off.)

That was about 8 years ago.

Since that experience - which was successful but somewhat limiting, I've realized the importance of a good plan. So I pay for an upgraded plan via my company benefits program.

This means I get expanded options, and, I feel, better care that's more easily managed monetarily. I pay more each month, but I get more.

Keep in mind that under the very basic care I received before, my healthcare needs were met, and that my hospital worked with me on managing my bills.

But under my current plan, I've been MUCH happier - and the surgery I had last week cost me $22 out of pocket, so far. I've already met my deductible for the year. I may get some other bills but I'll work out a payment plan with the hospital - and they will work with me, because my insurance has already covered at least 80 percent of the total bill. They will probably knock off most of the remainder of the bill and let me pay an adjusted balance.

Here in Texas, income eligible families can take advantage of a very decent public health insurance program for their kids. They pay on a sliding scale, by income, and many income levels pay absolutely nothing.

No child in Texas should be without health insurance. But of course - the parents have to register for it, and sometimes, based on family ability, have to pay a small premium.

And as we all know - some parents are extremely irresponsible. It's not the STATE'S fault if the parents don't act responsibly.

I'd rather not pay for my insurance - it's a boring bill. But it's necessary. And even when I was a single mom and self employed on a very limited income, I put a priority on paying for insurance. It was the responsible thing to do. I couldn't have cable TV and I drove an older car - but I carried insurance.

Fortunately, now you're rich.

I just can't imagine having a team of doctors save my life for free an saying, "bout time you serviced my right, you fools." I could much more, imagine doctors successfully delivering my wife's baby at my expense (with insurance) and thanking my lucky stars that I had the privilege of that care. "It's my right!"

 

[Storm]

Fortunately, now you're rich.

I just can't imagine having a team of doctors save my life for free an saying, "bout time you serviced my right, you fools." I could much more, imagine doctors successfully delivering my wife's baby at my expense (with insurance) and thanking my lucky stars that I had the privilege of that care. "It's my right!"

Right, because people are only grateful when the doctors drive them to bankruptcy.

 

[Walkntune]

As a society we need to have unity. Does leaving healthcare coverage in private hand count as unity?
I watched my mother-in-law die of cancer for two years while she could not afford to be in a private club of proper health coverage. It was a nightmare to deal with!
The (www)americanchristiansociety(com) says it is wrong to leave healthcare in private hands.
The strength of a society can be measured by how it treats its weakest members.
So I guess my question is: Should healthcare coverage be a society thing or private hands?
Cheers!

If healthcare is a right and a society thing,then society should also be able to hold one accountable for how one takes care of their health since it will all fall on the cost of society.

 

[tomato1236]

Right, because people are only grateful when the doctors drive them to bankruptcy.

The bottom line for me, as is the case with most political considerations, is how does it compare with my personal values. I hold a value for gratitude rather than expectation. Of providing for myself. It's important to me to avoid feeling entitled to things, just because I want them. This is what parents endlessly try to teach their kids. Why do these things I learned growing up, which serve to make me a tolerable member of society, not apply in the political realm? Why are things which have not been rights before suddenly inherent and natural rights? And why do I so fear death that I will spend limitless amounts of other people's money to save myself, and only for a time? Now if you could buy eternal youth and immortality, that might be different because wow, that would be something.

 

[Kathryn]

When are the rich "unable to pay?" Please, if you're going to be a social Darwinist, have a shred of integrity about it.

To answer that question accurately, we'd need more clarification on the term "rich" - and we'd also need to know what the medical procedure or treatment would actually cost.

I can assure you that there are some medical procedures that are beyond the affordability of even those whom the current administration deems "the rich" - ie, those making over $200,000 per year.

"Rich" is a relative term. Here in Texas, we have affordable medical insurance for children that is state subsidized (often, depending on income and family size even paid for in full by the state). Even so, there are irresponsible families who would rather go uninsured than pay even the PITTANCE of a premium required to maintain this extremely affordable insurance for their children. Or even go sign up for it FOR FREE.

They would say that they are unable to pay their childrens' medical costs. But are they really? Or is it a choice?

When my 19 year old daughter, who had moved out of my house and quit school, so was no longer on her father's insurance, got pregnant, we did our homework, and found her EXCELLENT and FREE medical care for her pregnancy and childbirth, and subsequent care. Where did this care come from? The local Catholic hospital, not the government.

My daughter was working, and she had to pay a co pay for each visit. That was it. This is a single, black teenage mom. She was treated with dignity and respect, and when she had the baby, she even had a private room (that was luck of the draw, but hey, it was great!).

I could have paid for this myself out of pocket, and I'd STILL be paying for it, because her baby was born a month prematurely and had a slightly longer stay and had to have some additional testing done. But my point is that the tax payer did not have to pick up the tab. When the baby was born, the social worker helped my daughter sign her up on the state health insurance plan, with a co pay. Between WIC and the Catholic services program, my daughter and her baby did very well.

When she got married a few years later, she and her daughter got covered on her husband's plan from work.

This was a case that typically could have been a sob story about the uninsured, but upon researching, we found plenty of programs already in place to provide well for both mother and baby, at minimal expense to tax payers.

 

[Storm]

The bottom line for me, as is the case with most political considerations, is how does it compare with my personal values. I hold a value for gratitude rather than expectation. Of providing for myself. It's important to me to avoid feeling entitled to things, just because I want them. This is what parents endlessly try to teach their kids. Why do these things I learned growing up, which serve to make me a tolerable member of society, not apply in the political realm? Why are things which have not been rights before suddenly inherent and natural rights? And why do I so fear death that I will spend limitless amounts of other people's money to save myself, and only for a time? Now if you could buy eternal youth and immortality, that might be different because wow, that would be something.

Wow. You almost make the position that only the rich deserve to live sound reasonable. Almost.

Me, I think it's indefensible to let a baby die because it's poor.

 

[tomato1236]

To answer that question accurately, we'd need more clarification on the term "rich" - and we'd also need to know what the medical procedure or treatment would actually cost.

I can assure you that there are some medical procedures that are beyond the affordability of even those whom the current administration deems "the rich" - ie, those making over $200,000 per year.

"Rich" is a relative term. Here in Texas, we have affordable medical insurance for children that is state subsidized (often, depending on income and family size) even paid for in full by the state. Even so, there are irresponsible families who would rather go uninsured than pay even the PITTANCE of a premium required to maintain this extremely affordable insurance for their children.

They would say that they are unable to pay their childrens' medical costs. But are they really? Or is it a choice?

And surely after their house burns down and the firefighters do nothing, these are they who would then say "NOW we'll pay the fee!" And everyone will appear and say, "How cruel. These doctors have the power to save them, and because they are evil they stand idly by while people die." As if the solution is for all doctors to exercise their abilities in all cases regardless of payment. Doctors are people. People who wanted to make a lot of money. I would guess it's much less common for someone to become a doctor for purely alruistic reasons. Doctors are just as capitalist as our society. Should they be expected to behave differently?

 

[Storm]

To answer that question accurately, we'd need more clarification on the term "rich" - and we'd also need to know what the medical procedure or treatment would actually cost.

I can assure you that there are some medical procedures that are beyond the affordability of even those whom the current administration deems "the rich" - ie, those making over $200,000 per year.

"Rich" is a relative term. Here in Texas, we have affordable medical insurance for children that is state subsidized (often, depending on income and family size) even paid for in full by the state. Even so, there are irresponsible families who would rather go uninsured than pay even the PITTANCE of a premium required to maintain this extremely affordable insurance for their children.

They would say that they are unable to pay their childrens' medical costs. But are they really? Or is it a choice?

Sometimes even a "pittance" is out of reach.

 

[Storm]

And surely after their house burns down and the firefighters do nothing, these are they who would then say "NOW we'll pay the fee!" And everyone will appear and say, "How cruel. These doctors have the power to save them, and because they are evil they stand idly by while people die." As if the solution is for all doctors to exercise their abilities in all cases regardless of payment. Doctors are people. People who wanted to make a lot of money. I would guess it's much less common for someone to become a doctor for purely alruistic reasons. Doctors are just as capitalist as our society. Should they be expected to behave differently?

In a word? Yes.

 

[tomato1236]

In a word? Yes.

Ok. So altruism is terrific. But how do you mandate altruism?

 

[Storm]

Ok. So altruism is terrific. But how do you mandate altruism?

Well, gee. We manage with protection from fire, crime, and education.

 

[Kathryn]

Where in the United States are babies dying because their parents can't afford the medical care they need to live?

 

[tomato1236]

Well, gee. We manage with protection from fire, crime, and education.

That's true. So why don't we have all of our needs provided by government?