OT Breast Cancer Rant

In article zlnui.16734$J13.1088@trnddc02, Taria
wrote:

Thanks Patti, I am just curious how it all works. The grass is always
greener, you know. Last mammogram I had (we personally have insurance
through employment) was in a hospital and the made me sign a paper
that informed me if I couldn't pay they would help connect me with a
program that would. They had to offer it to me. We are HMO in a
somewhat remote location (medically that is) which means many of our
doctors are sub par. I have had to make the decision to go to a doctor
of choice for cash. It wasn't easy financially at that
time but when it comes to good health not a lot is more important.
Nationalized health care is coming here. I just don't like the idea
of not having choices. There isn't much the government does well,
any government.
Taria

Just trivia here - in FL, a GP can specialize in any field. If a
"regular everyday GP" wants to practice brain surgery, they can. :/





Patti wrote:
No, Taria. It is not a choice for everyone. Medical insurance has
become more common as an employment perq., and now more individuals are
taking it out themselves - it is quite flexible and you can choose what
elements can be covered. On the other hand, if you are prepared to pay
the full amount yourselves, it is open to 'everyone' - all who can
afford it, anyway. But, the theoretical choice is there for everyone.

Having the National Health Service, as it is called, is a great boon to
the vast majority of the population. Very few people pay privately for
their family doctor; people over a certain age, or with a life-dependant
medication, receive free prescriptions. Children and seniors receive
free eye tests. Children receive free dental treatment, on the whole -
though some dentists' practices are now 'private only' (there has been
quite a bit of trouble about dentists' contract terms).
Mostly, you can opt to see a specialist privately, as it is normally
quicker. However, if you have an accident on the road (or anywhere) you
are taken straight to the nearest hospital in a free ambulance, and you
are treated free.
Some specialisms have awfully long waiting lists; and there are
certainly problems. Some medications are not funded by all Health
Authorities (eg some of the Alzheimer's and cancer treatments which are
very expensive). In those situations, you could opt to pay for it, if
you can afford it.

Just a summary - apologies if I have omitted 'stuff'.
.



--
Happy quilting & quilty hugs!!
Connie

I've started a FREE eZine ... and I've posted *LOTS* of free applique patterns!
Check it out!
http://sewverycreative.blogspot.com/ ----- It's BACK!! AND they APOLOGIZED!
LOL!

And there are the people like DH and myself. We are currently (since
June) without health insurance. It was costing us more than our mortgage
payment. We tried to keep up the insurance, and let the mortgage go, now
we are out on both... sigh.
Insurance costs for us is over $1000 a month. We are currently trying to
get AHCCCS (the Arizona "Medicaid") but not sure we will either qualify
or be able to afford that. sigh.
So we are going without meds, and trying to cope. It isn't easy and
makes us both wish there were at least basic National health coverage
for everyone here in the states.

Pati, in Phx
http://community.webshots.com/user/PatiCooks



Connie wrote:
In article , Anne Rogers
wrote:

Now, what I'm wondering is how it would handled in Europe? Hubby, on
his trip, just sprained his knee and had to go to a local hospital - he
said UK's healthcare system REALLY kicks our butt (in fact, he's
talking about either running for office and changing things or moving
there - but then, he IS on pain-killers). Will anyone from the UK pipe
up and let us know??
My mum had a lumpectomy, not a mastectomy, she was in hospital 8 days!!!
This was a private hospital, rather than NHS hospital in the UK, she'd
still have been in 4+ days on the NHS.

As with everything, somethings are better in the UK, some are worse,
I've lived 27 years in the UK, and only 1 in the US, with various
problems I've had at this particular time, the US system has treated me
well, we do have very good insurance, but even with less good insurance,
I likely still could have done pretty well, due to the element of
choice, something that in practice you don't get in the UK, or at least
don't get in some areas (both geographical and medical!).

On the other hand, whilst pregnancy and postnatal is underfunded and
understaffed, I'd still far rather be pregnant and have a baby in the UK
, I have American friends who've done both and prefer the UK system!

Cheers
Anne

Yea, I guess that would be the case - each system having it's pros and
cons. But still, no one in your system gets left out, right? I mean,
the single mom who barely keeps ends at arm's length will STILL have
healthcare, right? Her baby has less chance of dying of some childhood
illness merely because she couldn't afford vaccinations, right?

My point is, I guess, that with your system, even though the choices
are limited, everyone's covered. No one's left out. I used to volunteer
at local food kitchens and you'd be surprised at how many people are
left without healthcare ... more than you think. Most are kids.

What's most important to me - and I guess, because I DO have good
insurance and choices I might be skewed in my priorities - is that
single moms who can barely afford day care, much less food, can still
get healthcare for their babies. Little old ladies can still get
adequate healthcare - and not just dumped on a sidewalk after a
dangerous (and traumatizing) procedure.

Depending on the insurance coverage, having this type of surgery done
on an out-patient basis and then being sent home once you are out of
recovery *IS* standard. Not to be mean to the men here but it's men who
run the insurance companies and those particular men obviously don't
think women need better post-operative health care! If just one of
those insurance company executives had to be treated like this after
having a breast removed (yes, men can get breast cancer), you can be
sure that the coverage would be different!
Too many insurance companies have tried to reduce coverage for
things like hysterectomies, pregnancy and other female specific health
issues only to find that the cost for treating the woman after the
complications started was much more expensive. Fortunately, yearly
mammograms are 100% by most insurance companies. They finally learned
that old adage about an ounce of prevention! Don't fool yourselves,
it's the insurance companies who rule the world, NOT the politicians!!
CiaoMeow ^;;^

PAX, Tia Mary ^;;^ (RCTQ Queen of Kitties)
Angels can't show their wings on earth but nothing was ever said about
their whiskers!
Visit my Photo albums at http://community.webshots.com/user/tiamary

steve wrote:
Hello All

Well, I am on a rant today, let me tell you. A former student of mine, whom
I think very highly of, is at home this evening caring for his mother who
had a complete left breast mastectomy today. That is not even half of what
irritates me. She arrived at the hospital at 6:00 am and was discharged at
12:30 pm. 6 1/2 HOURS LATER!!!!!!!!!! What are insurance companies and
Doctors thinking? Obviously not about the patient. Is this the norm?
Please tell me it isn't. I did find this link for a petition to back a bill
before congress.

http://www.lifetimetv.com/breastcanc...gnpetition.php

I have went to it and so has Bert. I am sure that most of you have already
been to such a site already. I am simply outraged over this. I'll probably
email my three congressional delegates but doubt if anything will come of
it. All three are under investigation for corruption.

Thanks for letting me vent.

Steve
Alaska




--
ÐÏࡱá

In message , Anne Rogers
writes

Yea, I guess that would be the case - each system having it's pros and
cons. But still, no one in your system gets left out, right? I mean,
the single mom who barely keeps ends at arm's length will STILL have
healthcare, right? Her baby has less chance of dying of some childhood
illness merely because she couldn't afford vaccinations, right?

Absolutely! The problem is, I can't see the NHS staying entirely free
for long, dental treatment for years has always had small fees attached
(current problems with dentists in the UK are a whole other story!) and
I can see things like that coming in in other areas. However childhood
vaccines are going to be near last on the list for having a charge
attached to them, as would anything relating to children - there is no
payment for anything relating to children and anything that could
potentially have a charge has numerous clauses giving it free to
certain people, so women get things free whilst pregnant and upto a
year after the birth.

Though it seems great that it's basically free, when you dig deeper
there are a lot of issues, physical therapy is often restricted in the
number of sessions, they also seem to use a restricted number of
techniques. If you have a rare condition that isn't life threatening,
you often can't see a specialist as if they are not in your area, your
GP has to apply for funding for you to see someone out of area, which
you won't get in many areas if it's not life threatening.

It's complex, I don't think there is any right answer, if you go to
nationalised health care, you are almost certainly going to have a
private system running along side it, because there always are people
who will pay.

Cheers
Anne
Actually NHS is not free. We pay for it all our working lives by a
deduction from our wages. It used to be by stamp that employers put on
cards for us. They were called National Insurance stamps.
Shirley
--
Shirley Shone

http://www.allcrafts.org.uk

Very good point Shirley. I completely forgot to mention that.
..
In message , Shirley Shone
writes
Actually NHS is not free. We pay for it all our working lives by a
deduction from our wages. It used to be by stamp that employers put on
cards for us. They were called National Insurance stamps.
Shirley

--
Best Regards
pat on the hill

In article , Tia Mary
wrote:

Depending on the insurance coverage, having this type of surgery done
on an out-patient basis and then being sent home once you are out of
recovery *IS* standard. Not to be mean to the men here but it's men who
run the insurance companies and those particular men obviously don't
think women need better post-operative health care! If just one of
those insurance company executives had to be treated like this after
having a breast removed (yes, men can get breast cancer), you can be
sure that the coverage would be different!
Too many insurance companies have tried to reduce coverage for
things like hysterectomies, pregnancy and other female specific health
issues only to find that the cost for treating the woman after the
complications started was much more expensive. Fortunately, yearly
mammograms are 100% by most insurance companies. They finally learned
that old adage about an ounce of prevention! Don't fool yourselves,
it's the insurance companies who rule the world, NOT the politicians!!

Now, that's true ... but it's the politicians who control the insurance
companies. They pass the laws and regs that ins companies have to
adhere to.

For example, after YEARS of being pushed, Jeb Bush (FL) changed the
Medicare law in FL to allow people who need major transplants to be
"grandfathered in" if they were on the list prior to turning 21 (that
credit goes to my SIL who pushed Jeb so hard and all the wonderful
people who supported her).

So politicians CAN affect regs and laws when it comes to healthcare.
Otherwise, what's the point of e-mailing our congressman and pitching a
blue fit over how poorly people are being treated by the ins companies?

However, AFAIK, when the laws are changed and ins companies DO have to
allow more coverage, we all pay for it. That's why insurance is so
ungodly expensive.


But then, that's how it is with ALL kinds of insurance. Because FL
lawmakers put more pressure on home insurers (rental and "home") to
give better Flood coverage to policy holders IF they offer that
coverage AND because of all the crappy weather we had (hurricanes,
tornadoes, flooding, etc) last year, many ins companies have eliminated
flood insurance here.

We've had USAA for the past 12 years (if not longer) and we've been
covered under their Flood policy for the past four years(?) - but
they've stopped offering Flood ins in Fl (many companies have). But we
were "grandfathered in" since we already had the policies to start
with. Anyone just moving to Fl is outta luck, though.

But believe me, our rates went UP. We're paying nearly twice what we
paid last year.

CiaoMeow ^;;^

PAX, Tia Mary ^;;^ (RCTQ Queen of Kitties)
Angels can't show their wings on earth but nothing was ever said about
their whiskers!
Visit my Photo albums at http://community.webshots.com/user/tiamary

steve wrote:
Hello All

Well, I am on a rant today, let me tell you. A former student of mine,
whom
I think very highly of, is at home this evening caring for his mother who
had a complete left breast mastectomy today. That is not even half of what
irritates me. She arrived at the hospital at 6:00 am and was discharged at
12:30 pm. 6 1/2 HOURS LATER!!!!!!!!!! What are insurance companies and
Doctors thinking? Obviously not about the patient. Is this the norm?
Please tell me it isn't. I did find this link for a petition to back a
bill
before congress.

http://www.lifetimetv.com/breastcanc...gnpetition.php

I have went to it and so has Bert. I am sure that most of you have already
been to such a site already. I am simply outraged over this. I'll
probably
email my three congressional delegates but doubt if anything will come of
it. All three are under investigation for corruption.

Thanks for letting me vent.

Steve
Alaska



--
Happy quilting & quilty hugs!!
Connie

I've started a FREE eZine ... and I've posted *LOTS* of free applique patterns!
Check it out!
http://sewverycreative.blogspot.com/ ----- It's BACK!! AND they APOLOGIZED!
LOL!

Actually NHS is not free. We pay for it all our working lives by a
deduction from our wages. It used to be by stamp that employers put on
cards for us. They were called National Insurance stamps.

well yes, but typing "free at the point of use" every time was a bit too
much, if the government is paying for it, then it must come from tax
some way or other!

Cheers
Anne

Its is very hard to imagine that this would happen, my mom who five years
ago had a lumpectomy stayed over night in the hospital, but mind you it was
to have only been a day surgery thing as well. Her operation was to have
been at 11:30am, had to be at the hospital at 6am, she didn't have the
operation until 6pm. Because the operation was so late and only done at the
insistence of her Doctor at the time, ( the hospital it self wanted to
postpone the operation) that was the reason why she was able to stay over
night but none the less was out at 7am the next day.
Turns out that the type of cancer my mom had was the most aggressive and
deadly.Hers was thankfully at a barely stage one and no lymph nodes
involved. She is now 5 years cancer free. Steve I hope that your friends
mother has enough love and support behind her as my mom did. It does help.
It is horrid that a human being can be treated like this with out fear of
consequences. Health care no matter where you are is suffering because of
the bottom line. Its sad to know that a human life is not as equal to a
dollar any more. Should be the other way around in my books, life is more
important then the dollar but as "They" say money makes the world go round.

By the way who are "They" "Them"?

Dawn in Alberta
When life gets you Down Get up and Mambo

"steve" wrote in message
...
Hello All

Well, I am on a rant today, let me tell you. A former student of mine,
whom
I think very highly of, is at home this evening caring for his mother who
had a complete left breast mastectomy today. That is not even half of
what
irritates me. She arrived at the hospital at 6:00 am and was discharged
at
12:30 pm. 6 1/2 HOURS LATER!!!!!!!!!! What are insurance companies and
Doctors thinking? Obviously not about the patient. Is this the norm?
Please tell me it isn't. I did find this link for a petition to back a
bill
before congress.

http://www.lifetimetv.com/breastcanc...gnpetition.php

I have went to it and so has Bert. I am sure that most of you have
already
been to such a site already. I am simply outraged over this. I'll
probably
email my three congressional delegates but doubt if anything will come of
it. All three are under investigation for corruption.

Thanks for letting me vent.

Steve
Alaska

Pati C. wrote:
And there are the people like DH and myself. We are currently (since
June) without health insurance. It was costing us more than our mortgage
payment. We tried to keep up the insurance, and let the mortgage go, now
we are out on both... sigh.
Insurance costs for us is over $1000 a month. We are currently trying to
get AHCCCS (the Arizona "Medicaid") but not sure we will either qualify
or be able to afford that. sigh.
So we are going without meds, and trying to cope. It isn't easy and
makes us both wish there were at least basic National health coverage
for everyone here in the states.

As a none American, I'm hazy on things here, isn't medicaid supposed to
step in in situations like this, or is that something that varies from
state to state? Here (WA), I see quite a lot of adverts for various drug
plans relating to this, the monthly charges seem very reasonable.

We're very lucky in that we have outstanding medical cover, no copays,
no deductible and it seems to cover absolutely everything - but of
course this is a worry in the long term, there is no guarantee DH will
have this job for ever, my understanding is that in the USA, if we move
to another insurer, they have to still cover anything, but not if there
is any gap in coverage, but we wouldn't have the same situation if we
moved over to private insurance in the UK, I'd have a lot of things
excluded, but having a non life threatening genetic disorder, at times
I'd struggle to get the stuff I need on the NHS.

Cheers
Anne

In article , Pati C. wrote:

And there are the people like DH and myself. We are currently (since
June) without health insurance. It was costing us more than our mortgage
payment. We tried to keep up the insurance, and let the mortgage go, now
we are out on both... sigh.

I'm so sorry, Patti!!! I know it's not much at all when it comes down
to it, but you're in my prayers - and I'm sending all the good vibes
and thoughts possible.

Insurance costs for us is over $1000 a month. We are currently trying to
get AHCCCS (the Arizona "Medicaid") but not sure we will either qualify
or be able to afford that. sigh.
So we are going without meds, and trying to cope. It isn't easy and
makes us both wish there were at least basic National health coverage
for everyone here in the states.

Pati, in Phx
http://community.webshots.com/user/PatiCooks

See, I think there oughta be a law that caps premiums ... it's not fair
that a circumstance of fate or life would cost you so dearly - not in a
country that's supposedly so wonderful to live in.



Connie wrote:
In article , Anne Rogers
wrote:

Now, what I'm wondering is how it would handled in Europe? Hubby, on
his trip, just sprained his knee and had to go to a local hospital - he
said UK's healthcare system REALLY kicks our butt (in fact, he's
talking about either running for office and changing things or moving
there - but then, he IS on pain-killers). Will anyone from the UK pipe
up and let us know??
My mum had a lumpectomy, not a mastectomy, she was in hospital 8 days!!!
This was a private hospital, rather than NHS hospital in the UK, she'd
still have been in 4+ days on the NHS.

As with everything, somethings are better in the UK, some are worse,
I've lived 27 years in the UK, and only 1 in the US, with various
problems I've had at this particular time, the US system has treated me
well, we do have very good insurance, but even with less good insurance,
I likely still could have done pretty well, due to the element of
choice, something that in practice you don't get in the UK, or at least
don't get in some areas (both geographical and medical!).

On the other hand, whilst pregnancy and postnatal is underfunded and
understaffed, I'd still far rather be pregnant and have a baby in the UK
, I have American friends who've done both and prefer the UK system!

Cheers
Anne

Yea, I guess that would be the case - each system having it's pros and
cons. But still, no one in your system gets left out, right? I mean,
the single mom who barely keeps ends at arm's length will STILL have
healthcare, right? Her baby has less chance of dying of some childhood
illness merely because she couldn't afford vaccinations, right?

My point is, I guess, that with your system, even though the choices
are limited, everyone's covered. No one's left out. I used to volunteer
at local food kitchens and you'd be surprised at how many people are
left without healthcare ... more than you think. Most are kids.

What's most important to me - and I guess, because I DO have good
insurance and choices I might be skewed in my priorities - is that
single moms who can barely afford day care, much less food, can still
get healthcare for their babies. Little old ladies can still get
adequate healthcare - and not just dumped on a sidewalk after a
dangerous (and traumatizing) procedure.


--
Happy quilting & quilty hugs!!
Connie

I've started a FREE eZine ... and I've posted *LOTS* of free applique patterns!
Check it out!
http://sewverycreative.blogspot.com/ ----- It's BACK!! AND they APOLOGIZED!
LOL!