Health Care

I am finally able to follow the Health Care debate full swing and I am appalled by some of the crap that I've been hearing from Republicans. Like the following statements in the 17 Nov Blog post to Prescriptions on the NYTimes website:

'“I mean, let the rationing begin,” said Representative Dave Camp of Michigan, the ranking Republican on the Ways and Means Committee. “This is what happens when bureaucrats make your health care decisions.”'

And Insurance companies are what? Philanthropists who never ration health care? Another such statement:

“Agencies will be created that will make decisions just like this, that some lifesaving screening is not worth it.”

And Insurance companies don't decide which procedures are worth paying for and which aren't? What about the HPV vaccine for women that can prevent cervical cancer, how many insurance companies and plans won't cover that?

And further on the paranoia of republicans, or the desperation to derail some actual change in our country, the new medical study that breast exams don't need to occur until 50 is going to ruin a woman's chances of health as this woman says:

'Representative Sue Myrick, a North Carolina Republican and a breast cancer survivor, said she did not think a government commission “should be engaged in decisions like this between a woman and a doctor.”'

And then I wonder how a government agency can be worse than the following study of how insurance companies operate? I mean really?

'An analysis by the National Women’s Law Center in 2008 found that insurers charged 40-year-old women from 4 percent to 48 percent more than they charged men for the same individual insurance plans. The House bill would make such “gender rating” illegal.

The same study also found that in some states, insurance companies can reject applicants for certain “pre-existing conditions” that effectively exclude women, like having had a Caesarean section or being the victim of domestic violence.'

Domestic Violence? That a woman can be charged higher premiums or get refused coverage because she was subjected to the will of a violent husband? Are you serious? On top of getting the shit beat out of you you can't go to the doctor to get treatment? Or see a professional who might help you get out of it? I can see why the republicans are so concerned that the public option will be horrible, god forbid women's rights are extended. And a Caesarean? I'm sorry you've had a not so great pregnancy and an 'unnatural' birth, sorry, you can't get coverage

And living in the UK for only 2 months I've gone to the doctor here. I've gotten prescriptions and I've talked to friends. In the states people complain that they'll have to wait in an emergency for care and there will be long waiting lists to get into the doctor etc. I have never in the states gotten into a doctor next day, rarely even within a week even if its serious but not an emergency. I've not had to wait more than 3 days to get into an appointment here and often same day or next. As for ER trips? How many hours is that? My friend told me that though it was perhaps an off time she spend 30 minutes in the emergency room before someone saw her and for something relatively minor. The people who needed urgent care got it and then then people who needed it less urgently waited a little while. I can't think of a time when I went to an emergency room for anything where I waited less than an hour.

And prescriptions are interesting unless you are receiving benefits from the government you pay around 7 pound whether your prescription is 30 pence or 300 pounds. In the end it evens out. Its not hard. Its not illogical, its not a trap. And more needy people like single moms and elderly, the disabled and low income families don't have to pay for their prescriptions.

And of course if you want you can see a private doctor and get your own insurance if you feel like it but why bother when a plan is willing to cover you so well? Is it perfect? No. But what is perfect? Is having millions of uninsured people and millions poorly insured better? So, I hope the bill goes through the senate and maintaining abortion right and still keeping the improved health care for women removing the bias that insurance companies have created in their corporate capitalistic interest. Is bureaucracy really worse than corporate capitalist ideals? At least bureaucrats have constituents to please while corporations have stock holders, who do you think will take better care of your health?

[Sack, Kevin. "Republicans say Cancer Screening Guidelines Portend Medical Rationing". New York Times 17 November 2009: http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/republicans-say-cancer-screening-guidelines-portend-medical-rationing/]

[Seelye, Katharine. "In Congress, a predicament for Abortion Supporters". New York Times 14 November 2009: http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/another-standoff-may-be-looming-on-abortion-issue/ ]