The real Obamacare plan

[ssneade]

get ready folks.....



this will surely get hijacked as well......

[jgmartis]

Cancer Survivor Dies After Transplant Is Approved By CIGNA Insurance Company - cbs5.com

Dec 21, 2007 3:30 pm US/Pacific

Transplant Approval Takes Too Long, Teen Dies
Lawsuit Expected

A 17-year old died just hours after her health insurance company reversed its decision not to pay for a liver transplant that doctors said the girl needed.

A 17-year old died just hours after her health insurance company reversed its decision not to pay for a liver transplant that doctors said the girl needed.

Nataline Sarkisyan died Thursday night at about 6 p.m. at University of California, Los Angeles Medical Center. She had been in a vegetative state for weeks, said her mother, Hilda.

"She passed away, and the insurance (company) is responsible for this," she said.

The family is planning to sue the insurance company, their attorney said Friday.

Attorney Mark Geragos said he also plans to ask the district attorney to press murder or manslaughter charges against CIGNA HealthCare for the death of Nataline Sarkisyan.

The insurer "maliciously killed her" because it did not want to bear the expense of her transplant and aftercare, Geragos said at a news conference outside his downtown Los Angeles office. He did not say when or in what court he would file the suit.

Nataline had been battling leukemia and received a bone marrow transplant from her brother. She developed a complication, however, that caused her liver to fail.

Doctors at UCLA determined she needed a transplant and sent a letter to CIGNA Healthcare on Dec. 11. The Philadelphia-based health insurance company denied payment for the transplant.

CIGNA stated her plan did not cover "experimental, investigational and unproven services," her doctors said, reports CBS News station KCBS-TV.

On Thursday, about 150 teenagers and nurses protested outside CIGNA's office in Glendale. As the protesters rallied, the company reversed its decision and said it would approve the transplant.

"This is an incredible turnaround generated by a massive outpouring around the country that proves that an engaged public can make a difference and achieve results," said Rose Ann DeMoro, executive director of the California Nurses Association and National Nurses Organizing Committee, one of the rally's organizers, reports KCBS.

Despite the reversal, CIGNA said in an e-mail statement before she died that there was a lack of medical evidence showing the procedure would work in Nataline's case.

In their letter, the UCLA doctors said patients in situations similar to Nataline's who undergo transplants have a six-month survival rate of about 65 percent.

Officials with CIGNA could not immediately be reached for comment Thursday night.

[SailKing1]

If I read correctly "a six month survival rate of 65%" I would question the reason-ability of that transplant myself. And that would be if it as me receiving the transplant.

[badsanta]

I dont understand what the health plan will become, But I do understand a very common need. As a paramedic for almost 30 years and in public safety much longer I have seen some great advances in health education and technology. In the last 10 years I have seen an incredible increase in people that have real medical problems refuse service because the cant afford to pay the hospital. They are being hounded for payment and they have no insurance because of pre existing conditions.
And as to end of life counseling, that should be mandatory. People are in such denial about life. No one lives forever. They call 911 and we show up to find a person in a hospital bed in the living room that weighs half of what they should has not eaten in a week not spoken in three days, has liver cancer for two years that has spread into the lungs and bones. The family says that the Doctors gave grandfather 6 months and that was two years ago. The Doctor has not seen him in 6 months because he says there is nothing he can do. This patient is so septic his kidneys and other organs are shutting down. The family now wants me to save them. We start an IV give fluids and oxygen and take him to the emergency room, where he expires two days later and the hospital then gives them a bill for 10k for there work. People need to talk, doctors need to talk to the patient and family they need "END OF LIFE COUNCELING' family need to discuss what a DNR is "do not resuscitate" This needs to be done before I get there. By the way a DNR does not mean we will not treat, it means we will treat up until there is no heart beat or breathing, then we stop and do not proceed with CPR or try to resuscitate, and the form has to be completely filled out! Oh and the few that have a living will, That's for the patient and the Doctor. It means nothing to me. You called and that was a request for help and that is what we will do. I dont know who you are and I dont know what your relationship is with the patient, maybe you want them dead. I cant remember how many people are yelling that they have a "LIVING WILL" and cant produce anything because its in the "safe deposit Box"
So health insurance has to be provided some how. The health plans are in it for the money. If there was no profit they would not be in it. Hospice should be a right. End of life plans need to be made well in advance of calling 911
I know TV shows all car wrecks exploding and every one that calls 911 survives, but that is a movie. If you have an out of hospital cardiac arrest and no one does CPR and waits for the paramedics to arrive the final out come is just a large hospital bill. You Need to talk, you need information, you need counseling. You need to make your wishes known.You need to do it now no matter what the government does. Do it for your family, Do it now. IMOHO

[RichH]

As also a paramedic for well over 30 years .... there is nothing wrong with the current healthcare system .... except for the penultimate need for tort reform.
Simply ask yourself **WHY** the costs of healthcare have so catastrophically escalated:
1. The cost of malpractice insurance
2. The cost of liability protection
3. the cost of multiple and overlapping 'defensive medicine' ... tests on top of tests on top of needless tests - enhanced risk protection.
4. Being within 'any' entity or activity deemed to be 'deep pockets' by the PIRATICAL TRIAL ATTORNEYS.

Its obvious for WHOM the current healthcare reform benefits are being targeted: an enhancement of the welfare of LAWYERS. ...

EVERYONE who PAYS for healthcare has to bear the massive added costs that result from this 'pursuit of deep pockets'.

Then, ask yourself WHY any tort reform was omitted from the HB3200.

The OBVIOUS problem is ..... LAWYER GREED.

[US27inKS]

If you want a shining example of government healthcare, you need to look no further than the VA.

I have a friend who was injured during a training exercise in the Marine Corps. He healed up fine, but uses the VA for his medical needs. A few weeks ago he tore 3 ligaments (they think) in his right knee riding 4 wheelers. 2 weeks after it happened, I asked him how his surgery went. He hadn't even had an MRI yet. The MRI was scheduled for the following week, and the surgeon who was going to do the surgery wouldn't be in town for another 3 weeks. It seems that the Doctor travels between VA hospitals. So my friend is out of work, and on crutches for 6 weeks before the doctor will even see him. He should have had surgery and been completely healed in that amount of time.

Is this really the best we can do?

[TropicCat]

Originally Posted by US27inKS

Is this really the best we can do?

You know, it is possible to get so locked into a position, that you lose perspective. To answer your question. Waiting for care, although not acceptable, is a whole lot better than what 50 million people without any kind of health insurance can expect.

Now isn't it?

What we have now is too expensive and provides an unacceptable level of care. What is proposed is very confusing and made even more confusing by people who show up at town meetings shouting everyone down.

If you don't mind, I'd like to hear the other side, and figure out for myself if what they are proposing is in fact better than what we have now.

That's Democracy

[US27inKS]

This is why I've been reading the bill. I'll admit though, I haven't spent much time on it lately, and I'm only a hundred pages or so into it. The bill is written in typical legalese that isn't meant for the average person to read or be able to understand. Throw in a few references to other laws and it makes it almost complete gibberish.

The main complaint that I have is that the first sections of the bill are clearly aimed at phasing out private health insurance, leaving us with only the "public option", which is no option at all. When I get back into reading the rest of it, I'm sure there will be other things that bother me.

The Democratic party line is that this will save money and make our health care system more efficient. Just for a little perspective, I looked up the budget for the VA (government run) health care system. The VA serves 5.8 million patients, for the low, low price of only 86.75 Billion Dollars. A little quick math shows us that it costs $14,956.90 each for our veterans health care every year. And for this, my friend has to wait weeks for his knee to be looked at. Source: FY ’08 Landmark VA Budget Request Highlights - Public and Intergovernmental Affairs

So again I ask, is this really the best we can do?

BTW the 50 million people without health insurance is not a valid number. That number includes illegal aliens (which the dems say would not be covered under HR 3200), and people who could afford health insurance but choose not to. Additionally, many if not most uninsured people use our emergency rooms to get health care for free. I don't agree with them using expensive emergency rooms for non emergency care, but saying that they have no access to health care is inaccurate. Instead lets talk about people who are citizens of this country, or are in this country legally, but can not afford to purchase health insurance. The number of people who fit this description is far less and can be helped without overhauling the entire health care system.

Originally Posted by TropicCat

You know, it is possible to get so locked into a position, that you lose perspective. To answer your question. Waiting for care, although not acceptable, is a whole lot better than what 50 million people without any kind of health insurance can expect.

Now isn't it?

What we have now is too expensive and provides an unacceptable level of care. What is proposed is very confusing and made even more confusing by people who show up at town meetings shouting everyone down.

If you don't mind, I'd like to hear the other side, and figure out for myself if what they are proposing is in fact better than what we have now.

That's Democracy

[ssneade]

Originally Posted by TropicCat

That's Democracy

the problem with that is, the United States Of America is a republic, not a democracy....

i have trouble enough dealing with my own family's health care, i damn sure don't wanna have to pay for yours and others who believe government has all the answers. i'm not paying them to give you or anyone else a free ride. if you can't afford it, get another job. damn right we'll shout down those socialist bastards!...

we don't need health care reform, we need tort reform. the government you seem to think is so great cannot even see what the main reason for the high cost of health care is....

lobbyists and lawyers have bought our governments soul, and all that they have left fur us is a mere shell of its former self. and if you are so naive to not see that, i feel sorry for you....

a country is great because of its people, not its government....

here, have some...

[TropicCat]

Originally Posted by ssneade

the problem with that is, the United States Of America is a republic, not a democracy....

Pointless statement not relevant to this discussion. Frankly I normally don't respond to [edit]such comments [edit] but I'm up early this morning and am bored.

Just to educate you there are two principles that any definition of democracy includes, equality and freedom. These principles are reflected by all citizens being equal before the law, and have equal access to power. Additionally, all citizens are able to enjoy legitimized freedoms and liberties, which are protected by the bill of rights and the constitution. If you don't care to participate in our democracy, I invite you to relocate. I'm certain you can find an African Nation with a dictator where you'll feel more comfortable. This is almost a direct quote from wikipedia. If you don't know what wikipedia is... google it. If you can't google, if I were you I wouldn't bother to reply to this post

Originally Posted by ssneade

i have trouble enough dealing with my own family's health care, i damn sure don't wanna have to pay for yours and others who believe government has all the answers.

So here we have another misinformed poster. One who advocates the elimination of Medicare? Also the termination of veteran benefits? Why not get rid of Social Security while you're at it? We have the worst health care of developed Nations and are now ranked 37th in medical care. People like yourself must be proud of this? Of course not, your sponsers just didn't bother to tell you and none of you guys bothered to look it up

Government is of course the answer. We are the only Western country without a national health care plan. Why? You said it yourself later in your very own post. Lobbyists. The Insurance, Pharmaceutical and health care companies are making so much money off the backs of American's health problems, they can afford to buy every Senator and Congressman they want. This is public record as are all "campaign contributions. Look it up.

The problem is the uninformed don't bother to check. If they did, they wouldn't have anything to talk about. Then again this would require research and education. Two things closed minded , ignorant people don't believe in. But back to my point, these "bought and paid for" Senators and Congressman get you ignorant people all cranked up about socialism and convince you to argue yourselves out of health care for your very own families. (Isn't this a definition of insanity?) They sit back, count their money and laugh at people like you as you just screwed yourself out of health care. Here's something else you didn't bother to check, the profit margin insurance carriers, drug companies and health care companies make. Go look it up. Of course a government progam is cheaper and better. it's why these companies are fighting it.

Originally Posted by ssneade

I'm not paying them to give you or anyone else a free ride. if you can't afford it, get another job. damn right we'll shout down those socialist bastards!...

You're free to think anything you like. This is the great advantage we Americans have. Our Bill of rights guarantee free speech...unless of course in the process you violate my constitutional rights. It's the reason why it's illegal in this country to yell 'Fire' in a theater. And that's exactly what shouting down other points of view is when the goal is to stop any kind of civil dialogue. It's unAmerican.

You don't repect our constitution, you don't want constitutional rights for all Americans. Well, Americans don't tolerate unAmerican activities, so you must be some kind of foreigner here. Either that or you dropped out of high school before they gave you a Civics class.

When you answer this, please let us know what tax bracket you're in. I'm willing to bet that you aren't going to pay for any of this. Hell, looking at your sentence structure and misspelling I'm surprised you can operate a computer let alone tell us what's good for us or our country. I'll also bet you think our President was born in Kenya, believe in UFO's, and think you should be able to bring guns to a Presidential press conference.

We need civil discussion not a bunch of ignorant knee jerk conservatitives preventing discussion. This is America, not Nazi Germany.