America's Inadequate Healthcare

[Daz_Hockey]

RE: America's Inadequate

exactly, ok perhaps I'm assuming too much here, but I assume health insurance is calculated like any other insurance, i.e. the less you use it, the less you pay and vice-versa.

You see what I'm saying now, for me at least (even the figures shown above from "normal" Insurance paying US Citizens seems unbelievably high for me), I mean, okay, if you need to see a doctor under private health care, you see one then and there, and maybe it is slower in the nationalised health system, but not if it's "serious" how you define that is up to you, but I dont know, I never pay more than about £30 a month National Insurance (about CAN$60) and thats taken strait out of my wages.

but you see my point right?.....ease of use sure, but what about the chronically sick? who are ill all the time, it is like a house falling down many times surely?, it would simply prove uninsurable in the end?

 

[#juan]

Juan

I believe the three month waiting time is for anyone who has moved from out of province. (Or at least that's what I've been told.) At least that's a plausible reason for such a delay.

Toro

We used to have a no pay system in Canada. If you came from Alberta to B.C. you did have a waiting period but until that waiting period was over, your Alberta plan would cover you. If you needed a specialist you got a referral from the GP.

 

[tracy]

I can't say I hate the American health care system since I'm a part of it. I provide good care to my patients and they are all guaranteed care. I can say that I didn't enjoy the experience of being a patient here and I do see a difference in how money affects the care patients receive here which makes me uncomfortable. I have seen insurance companies do really assinine things that could have resulted in serious harm if not for a very moral doctor telling them to screw off.

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: America's Inadequate

2. Cuba actually has a more advanced Health system than in the US

Well you're just going to have to elaborate on that one before I comment.

How about the more than 40 million people without health insurance?

I'm not one of those. With a population of 300 million, that means 87% of the population have access to the best medical system in the world.

But If I were poor, I'd rather be in Canada.

The 40 million uninsured includes those receiving medicaid, being uninsured doesn't mean you have no health coverage. The poor have health coverage, it's the middle class that usually has a problem.

 

[Daz_Hockey]

RE: America's Inadequate

ITN, Cuba has better nationalised health system than most of the world, let alone the US, they have amazing doctor's, the facilities are fantastic (although they could be better if it were not for a certain blockade)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_of_Cuba

check the link out above, you will be very surprised, their system and the amount of doctor's per capita they hve is amazing, and the quality of work is probably the best in the world.

There you go, and I would consider myself middle class, so I would assume, with the comments I made about and the assumption that Health insurance companies are similar to other insurers, I'd be in a bit of trouble if it were not for a "free-at-the-point-of-service" healthcare system like the NHS or the canadian system.

 

[tracy]

I believe Cuba was rated highly for efficiency, not as being the best system in the world. It's easy to be efficient when you pay your staff peanuts. I can't imagine calling them the best in the world. They don't produce new knowledge in medicine/nursing.

I do think the fact that their life expectancy is so high just goes to prove that the cheaper old fashioned tried and tested methods of health improvement are still the most important (diet, exercise, preventative health). As much as people talk about MRIs, CTs, and expensive new technologies, those things are not what result in a great improvement in the health of the general population.

 

[Daz_Hockey]

RE: America's Inadequate

maybe not, but I just always feel a little uneasy when I think of people who are probably in the same position as me in countries like the US, who struggle with shockingly expensive healthcare.

Perhaps it's an english thing, I dont know, but I'm of the opinion health care should be readily available and free to those who need it, while obviously it needs money and taxation is needed for it to survive, I think the National Insurance Tax used in the UK is probably one of the best, in that the amount you pay varies on a person-to-person basis so the poor dont pay much and the better off do.....but by no means is it anywhere near say....$210 dollars a month

 

[tracy]

I agree with that Daz, probably cause I'm Canadian. I believe wholeheartedly in a government funded, universal system because I do think it's far better than the alternative. I just see the downsides of it too. The UK is notoriously bad for nurses right now thanks to underfunding. Despite a nursing shortage on the wards, many trusts won't hire new nurses or use agency nurses because they don't have the money (and let's not forget that UK nurses are already low paid to begin with, I can easily make twice what a nurse in London makes). So new nurses graduating from school are having trouble finding jobs and the nurses already working are stuck working short staffed. That's not good for nurses or patients. Canada did something similar in the early 90s and they are still trying to recover from it in some places. I get advertisements all the time trying to recruit me back to Canada. I do plan on going back, but I can see why nurses who have been down here for years and years don't want to leave. Cuba has an advantage in that it doesn't allow free emmigration so they aren't in danger of losing so many health care workers, but they do still lack a lot of services and they don't have the money to put into research.

 

[Daz_Hockey]

RE: America's Inadequate

I agree, currently the British NHS is recruiting a very large number of Fillipino, Indian and Mylasian nurses (obviously partly for cost reasons and partly because it's almost impossible to find a qualified british nurse willing to take the same pay)

I think the problem is actually 2-fold of a system such as the NHS, because people pay it in their taxes, they dont really "feel" like they are paying towards it, and therefor should not pay anymore......and of course on top of all the government red-tape that is a bit of a throwback mishmash of Thatcherite redtape and 70's Socialist inefficiency.

It's a mindset really, people do moan about the British NHS, but as I say, it's one of the best in the world....seriously though, is it just me or is it more than a coincidence that New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the UK all have national healthcare systems which were pretty much invented in or around the 1947 point?.

 

[tracy]

They aren't even hiring those foreign nurses like before. The nursing and midwifery council has made it mandatory for those nurses to do a supervised placement before they can get their nursing lisences which makes it a lot harder for them and since the UK's own new nurses are desperate for work, employers don't need to recruit abroad like they used to. I can't explain the frustration I felt when I graduated with my nursing degree in Canada only to be unable to find a full time position despite people always talking about the nursing shortage. I feel for those new British nurses because they are going through the same thing.

I'm sure you're right and the commonwealth countries' approaches to healthcare were influenced by eachother. It's always nice to be able to learn from someone else's attempts isn't it?

 

[Daz_Hockey]

RE: America's Inadequate

It is indeed, although I think it traces back to Lloyd George, the british empire and all that, I mean outwardly at least, it seems more aurturistic than any Private Health System, but that's not to say the quality is any better in a national system, it just seems fairer.

It's just tricky to balance a land of freedom with no or little governement intervention against a government with a "cradle to the grave healthcare" ethos....where does big brother stop I suppose would be one opinion, and of course by paying large taxes for such a system is playing into their hands, but aside from paying a MUCH higher rate, I see no other way than privatisation in the end anyway.

I mean, my great-Aunt vividly recalls the doctors turning away at her parents door because they had nothing to pay them with pre-nationalisation, surely people have to realise high taxes are a truth people have to face so the money can be passed on to improve the number and quality of nursing, but will the public accept it?...that is the problem.

Besides, we all know that nursing isnt about the money in the end anyway (or at least that's the speil I got on many a wednesday evening from sittin in a student nurses dorm while at uni after a night out.....none of the girls...and some boys I met doing nursing courses mentioned it) but there does come a point I suppose, especially if the barriers are being put up.

 

[athabaska]

The part of our health care system that is private has always worked fine for me...eyes and teeth. if I get a toothache I call up my dentist and see him right away. If I need a follow up appointment it's usually within a week at a time of my convenience.

The same with vision. I can call up my optometrist and have a same day exam for $60...about the same price as an oil change and new headlight for the car.

I'd prefer to have a blended system for the rest of the body. General visits to the doc, walk-in clinics and so on paid out of pocket and anything beyond 'x' amount in a year ($1000 or so) paid by the taxpayer.

 

[tracy]

It is a tricky balance for sure Daz. Most Americans don't seem to get realize their government is already heavily involved in healthcare provision. Even most private hospitals get money from Medicaid or the state version of it (Medical here in California) so I see no reason why privatization would decrease the cost to taxpayers. Americans can't be refused emergency care at any hospital regardless of their insurance status. The government winds up picking up the tab in the end or the hospital just eats it and passes that cost onto the people who do have insurance. Billing and insurance are very complex here. You'd be surprised at the number of people who don't even understand their own insurance and what it covers. I've had several families who were shocked to find out that there was a one million dollar lifetime cap on their baby's coverage. The care we provide is extremely expensive and for a really sick premie, it's easy to go past that. Then the bills go to the family because they don't qualify for medical. It's really scary for them and I think it's almost cruel to add money worries to such a stressful time.

As far as those nursing students...I don't think anyone goes into nursing for the money, cause you couldn't pay anyone enough to do this if they didn't love it. None of us expect to get rich. However, I do think we expect to be reasonably paid. I don't go into work for free and if I couldn't make a reasonable living here I would move elsewhere. The only thing saving the British is that the US requires new UK nurses to take extra training before they come because the UK nurses are not trained as generalists. The immigration process for them takes somewhere in the neighbourhood of two years. If not for that barrier, I'm sure many, many more would be leaving.

 

[Daz_Hockey]

RE: America's Inadequate

I have no doubt about that Tracy, for example my degree is in Business IT/Computing and I'm doing a PGCE in Education, now the barrier isnt that bad for teachers and IT Pro's so I see a lot of people moving out there, but I'm sure your aware of the "brain drain" it happened over here in the '60's and from the news I watched in Canada on CBS, it's happening there now too then.

But Athabaska, that's just too uncanny, and I think it goes to back up my hypothesis that most of the british, sorry commonwealth of nation's national health systems were created by a group of people, because those (Dentistry and Optomotristry) are the 2 medical care systems not covered by our national healthcare system (Well, the jokes about the "british teeth" have more than a ring of truth ).

I know for example that my Neurosurgeon, and others are actually "rented out" by our health care system from Private agencies who charge a fortune because the consultants also kicked up a fuss here and eventually got their own way.....at a fair cost I might add.

But I see wht you mean about the cost of neonatal Tracy, a large percentage of my operations were performed during the first year or so of my life, I still speak to my Neonatal/pediatric Consultant (he's just a Neonatal one now), I remember him telling me that (at least in my hospital) all the childhood neurological operations were performed by Neonatal/pediatric consultants and their registrar's, so they have to be increadibly trained and therefore would probably demand a higher wage along with the high cost of equiptment.

He said that, in the end though, he was glad it was passed over to specialist neurosurgeons as it's their only feild, so I would summise by that, that until recently Neonatal staff here were either paid well for multi-tasking or paid badly and run off their feet, knowing the NHS, it's probably the latter, But I can understand how much it costs, I suppose nearly every tricky neo surgery mush require much more skill and there demand a high price tag...but of course the patient doesnt understand that.

 

[tracy]

I'm glad you were one of the lucky babies Our neos don't do the surgeries either. It's just too specialized for them to be able to keep up their competency in that area as well. We have pediatric surgeons for that. Neonatologists are expensive as are surgeons, nurses, the equipment, etc. Just the length of time some of those babies spend in the hospital makes their bills high even if they aren't needing all the specialized care. One of my babies was in for 7 months. I know in Canada the room charge for a HEALTHY baby post partum was about $1000 a day. That's just to stay in the hospital. I imagine it's a lot more for a NICU baby and a lot more in the US. But even assuming it was only 1000 a day that means that before the doctor's fees, surgeries, meds, etc that baby's bill would be over 200K. She was well worth it though I saw her last week and she's ADORABLE.

 

[SaintLucifer]

Re: RE: America's Inadequate Healthcare

Canada's system may have issues and be far from perfect, but as a Canadian who has lived in the US for the past 7 years, I vastly prefer it to the US one.

Here, it's all about the money. Do you have insurance? Which one? What's covered? What are the co-pays? (A term I hadn't heard till I moved here)

I also hadn't heard of people declaring bankruptcy due to medical expenses until I moved here. Nor seen fancy ads on tv for drugs - wonder how the companies pay for those?

When I moved to Louisville,KY I had to get a 'finder company' to locate a doctor who was took my new companies insurance plan and who was taking new patients. Isn't this 'free enterprise' mantra (along with socialism is bad) supposed to be about freedom and choice? Choice to take the insurance your company offers - if you are lucky and they have it - or pay even more if you don't. Choice to go to the doctors in your insurance plans system, or pay more to go to another one. Choice to change doctors when your company changes insurers - to save money.

Of course, if you really want to hear a Canadian lay the hate on the US system, I'll get my wife on here She's had to deal with it more taking the kids to doctor/dentist appointments and such. (Just don't mention dealing with the orthodontists office and the insurance company. She'll be mad for the whole day and we'll all suffer )

Let me get this straight. Your company pays for your health-care coverage yet you complain that you have not the 'choice' to see whichever doctor your prefer? Incredible! You would be wise to remain silent and do as your company asks. You have the choice of sticking with your company's health-care plan or purchasing your own. This is indeed freedom of choice. No one is forcing you to accept your company's paid health-care plan. It is in the best interests of your company to use the most cost-effective plan they can find. They are not in the business of providing you and your family with health-care. That is the business of the insurance company they would deal with. Your company is in the business of maximizing their profits. This is what we humans cal capitalism. You must learn to realise your company need not provide you with any health-care coverage at all but they choose to do so in order to keep a happy, functioning and efficient workforce. They do not provide you with this health-care because they owe it to you. Your company does not owe you a thing. They have provided you with a job - a means by which you may support your family. Giving you health-care means your company has furthered their own risks not only by hiring you in the first place but also by taking on the added cost of your health-care coverage, something they are not obliged to do.

Those people you claim declared bankruptcy due to health-care costs down there in the U.S.A.? They never had health-care coverage now did they? You neglect to mention this.

You complain about changes your insurer makes to save money. Do not all businesses do this? If they did not they could very well go into bankruptcy themselves. Insurance is a risky business as far as capitalism goes. Insurance companies are in the business of making profits. Is this not what the U.S.A. is all about? Is this not what you fought my people in 1776 for? The freedom to make as much money as possible? The freedom to embrace capitalism to its fullest?

You do understand here in Canada private insurers pay for dental care? Dental care is not socialised here. Either the individual pays for it through an life-insurance policy or their employers pay for it. This in no way differs from the American system. Strange that the dental system here is extremely efficient (pure capitalism) but the health-care system is falling apart?

Myself, I would adopt a fascist healtcare system. This would mean private enterprise runs the healthcare system for the State and very heavily-regulated. This would prove to be a more efficient system since private enterprise has the incentive of profits whilst they are kept under control by the fascist guidelines under which they must operate. Everyone knows private enterprise is far more efficient than any government system simply because there is no incentive for the health-care industry when it is 100% government-owned. Do they care if you must wait 2 years for an operation that under a fascist system you would probably receive in less than a week? In the U.S.A. system of health-care one could have an MRI done upon their person the very next day. Here in Canada, my mother had to wait more than a year for a simple MRI. This is simply inefficiency at its best.

 

[notme01]

And the most advanced medical technology is in the United States.

__________that only because our Canadian doctors works in the state

 

[notme01]

I also hadn't heard of people declaring bankruptcy due to medical expenses until I moved here.

if the US president would take care of their own instead of declaring wars for no reasons and spending the US taxes money on war supplies they would have medicare US citizens ask for it

 

[Daz_Hockey]

RE: America's Inadequate

I dont know, call it the twisted logic of an Englishman (Fee-Fi-Foo-Fum I smell the blood of...well you know jack and the beanstalk..lol ed.), I just cant comprehend (perhaps ITN can help me here) how any country can justify not putting healthcare on a list of civil taxes like the police or Fire service (I'm assuming you only pay for those with your tax dollar there?).

But I do feel that if the US think's it has a problem with healthcare, they might do well to take a look at the UK and say "there by the grace of god".

 

[Kreskin]

If they call it the "Grace of God Heathcare System" the republicans might buy into it.