Someone asked about death panels, never seen them or heard of them. I believe they have them in the USA, HBOs or something they are called?
Death Panels is a stupid idea and but there will always be decisions made about how we spend health dollars and I guess this applies just as much in any system.
At least here we don’t refuse treatment if you don’t have insurance, there may be a delay or small out of pocket but still pretty damn fine.
I have never heard of anyone going bankrupt to pay for medical fees, yes for not being able to work but at least then you can get the dole etc. If you are good employee of a reputable company most will even pay extended sick leave, please note this would only apply to a small precentage of companies and is voluntary.
I ruptured my Achilles tendon during a Sunday afternoon touch game (part of a misguided attempt to get fit and play rugby again at 30). It didn’t feel like much so I figured I’d just sprained my ankle or something. After seeing a doctor on the Monday I went to the A&E after lunch and waited for about 3 hours to be seen, given an ultra sound and put in plaster. As it didn’t knit together on it’s own I had to go in for surgery.
The surgery was scheduled for 9am and so I turned up at 8:30 sans breakfast as instructed. Other things came up I guess so I didn’t get to theatre until about 3. I was pretty hungry (and thirsty) by then but a couple of bags of saline later I was chatting to the doctors as they stitched me back up. A bit inconvenient but nothing too bad. Total cost to me was $15 for the first doctor’s visit.
The six months on crutches was a bit of a drag though. Oh and as I couldn’t be bothered filling in the forms I didn’t get reimbursed for all the taxis I took to work while I couldn’t drive (but that’s not really the system’s fault). Remember folks, after 4 years of inactivity you can’t really side-step like you used too…
I laughed when I first heard of Death Panels. My Grandmother who is in her late 80’s has reoccurring cancer. She gets scanned every three months and when needed cancerous tissue is removed. This has been going on for a few years now.
Oh bad stories…
Hm well when I was in labour I didn’t have any pain medications and a vacuum had to be used. It was a teaching hospital so I was that doctors first vacuum insert, and they did it wrong. It had to be pulled out and inserted again. That hurt more than the baby. But hey a doctors gotta learn somehow, I just wish they would have learned on a woman with pain meds.
Oh and I had way too many ultrasounds. I think by the end of the pregnancy I was up to 6 or so. And this was a normal healthy pregnancy.
Yeah it does vary, the wait here was about 3 months but my son who is type 1 only had to wait a few weeks as they have a dedicated phsych for teen type 1 diabetic patients. He also gets a full health care card from the government as they recognise that he will have major costs for most of his life. Bloody communists!
The worst I’ve got is when I went to my new NHS GP (the doctor of my choice, btw, not foisted on me by the NHS as the right-wing talk radio hosts will have it), he was late because of an on-call emergency. As I was a new patient, he did a quick basic physical but then didn’t have time to attend to my actual problem and I had to go back again a few days later. I was very lucky that my ear wax had not built up to terminal quantities in the meantime.
My mum has cancer. At age 75 she somehow managed to avoid the death panels. She was whisked straight from teh doctor’s office to the hospital by ambulance so that tests could be run immediately. That was followed by months of radiation therapy then chemo. The cancer seems to be under control for now and she has scans every few months to monitor it. All has gone well and didn’t cost a penny.
I hope to get a cushy Death Panel job myself one day. It’s not like they even do any work! My best friend’s mother collapsed on her 70th birthday at midday (Friday) and was immediately taken to the nearest hospital by ambulance. By 2pm tests had ruled out stroke and at 4pm I got word that she had a brain tumour and was going to be transferred to a large metropolitan hospital for treatment. By 6pm she was settling in to her new room after again being transported by ambulance. At 7am Monday morning she had surgery and the tumour was removed, but further tests revealed inoperable tumours on her lungs. On Wednesday she began rehabilitation. On Friday she was moved by ambulance to a specialist hospital for cancer treatment, given radiation therapy to reduce the size of her tumours and prolong her life as long as possible. Her rehabilitation continued. After a few weeks she was transferred - again by ambulance - to her local hospital (a 100 mile journey - she was on vacation at the time of her collapse) where she stayed until she was fit to return home. Total cost to her: $0.00. As a taxpayer, I’m outraged - OUTRAGED! - that the Death Panels didn’t spare us the cost of treating this elderly drain on society who served no useful purpose other than being a cherished wife, mother and grandmother, beloved neighbour and dear friend.
wow, man…you’re weird!..to Americans.
In the interminable debate about health care, I’ve found that Americans simply cannot conceive of life without worrying about it. For them, health insurance is THE major issue which around with you make all your life decisions–where to work, how much money to keep in savings, how many children you can afford to raise,etc.
The best way to compare American health care with other countries isn’t to quote statistics on mortality or waiting times at hospitals…The best way is just to sit around at the family dinner table and notice that the subject of health care rarely comes up for discussion in most countries. Or if it does, the conversation is about health, not insurance. Families share worries and concern for the sick person, not for his bank account.
But with Americans, the subject is constantly in the air; either directly, or as the background to all other life discussions.And the conversation is more about the financial aspects, not the wellbeing of the patient.
Closest to a horror story involved my dentist cutting back on the number of NHS patients seen at the practice. He kept some on his books, but the rest (me included) were given the option of signing up for some dental insurance plan or finding a new dentist.
I opted for the latter and, while it was quite easy to find practices which treated NHS patients, finding one which was accepting new NHS patients took a while.
Disclaimer: I’m as liberal as Americans come so I’m just kind of playing devil’s advocate here.
Re: Death Panels
I think the real question isn’t about killing off Grandma, although that’s what the media picked up on. The real question is more like this: if I get inoperable cancer but find out that there’s an experimental treatment that costs tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of dollars with a, say, 5% chance of prolonging my life, will UHC cover it or will some government bureaucrat decide that the 5% chance isn’t worth the large bill? I guess I could decide to spend my own money for that, but then we’re back to me possibly losing my house in order to fund the treatment. (What is skipped in the above discussion is the fact that right now, no, it isn’t a government bureaucrat making that call, it’s an insurance adjuster. But someone still decides whether or not you get expensive treatment.)
Anyway, my question is, in the countries with UHC, what happens in situations where a very expensive, experimental treatment might help treat a life-threatening illness? Do you get the treatment or does someone in the government (as opposed to the insurance industry) decide that it’s not worth the very big bill for a very small chance of prolonged life?
The concern from Americans seems to be - I’m afraid I’m going to end up paying more to the health care system than I will get out of it. Other people are contribute disproportionately less and use disproportionately more than I am. Therefore I am subsidizing them. I don’t want my earnings going to individuals who have not contributed their fair share, like I have.
In UHC, this is indeed how it works. As a reasonably well off childless person, I’m well aware that A) the provision of health care services is not free and B) I’m almost definitely contributing more tax dollars to support the program than will be spent on me, the health care services consumer.
I’m ok with that.
Because I never have to think about it.
If I have to see a doctor for any reason, I can see one.
If I have an accident and need hospitalization, I will be provided with care.
If I have a serious illness. I will receive treatment without question.
If my friends or family need medical services, they will get it.
I do not live my life concerned about insurance.
I do not worry that I may be denied coverage when I need treatment.
I do not consider my employer to be my ticket to health care services.
I have never seen, nor will I see, nor do I worry about medical bills or bankruptcy due to health care requirements. Neither do my friends or family.
The amount of time I worry about whether health care will be there when I need it is zero. I don’t think about it in terms of employment. I don’t have to fill out forms or submit for reimbursement. I don’t have to go through the process of rejection and appeal of claims. I don’t have to dwell on anything.
And when I die, if I have contributed far more through taxes into the system than I’ve used, I will be ok with that. In fact, I will consider that a win.
Yeah but this would occour in a private or public system. What tends to happen is that “experimental” treatments are not approved to be used, once they have been then there are no issues. But money is always finite.
Heh - I can actually answer this one with first hand knowledge.
My father and mother live in a have-not province (i.e. the provincial coffers are pretty low.)
Dad was told he had condition ‘X’ and had 1 year to live. Period.
He and mom drove to the US and visited the Mayo clinic. They spent $15,000 for a 2nd opinion. In the opinion of the Dr. at the Mayo Clinic, my dad would benefit from therapy ‘Y’ - an expensive somewhat experimental treatment.
The returned to Canada with the report. With report in hand, dad contacted his physician. Based on this new information he received therapy ‘Y’ completely covered by his provincial health insurance - all of it - surgery, drugs, followup treatments, etc.
Then he submitted his bills to Revenue Canada at tax time and was able to write off the entire $15,000 (which was a good thing, given his tax bracket) because the 2nd opinion had resulted in a change of prognosis..
So - I guess it depends on the situation, the individual’s ability to travel for a 2nd opinion, etc. However, even in Canada if a person is given a prognosis they don’t like, they aren’t forced to stick with it. Dad likely could have gotten a similar 2nd opinion elsewhere in Canada (a larger urban center for instance), covered some costs and again got them back at tax time.
I apologize in advance for the potential hijack, but your understanding on the phrase “death panel” is factually incorrect.
If not original to her, it was popularized by Sarah Palin in reference to government funding of periodic consultations between patients and their doctors concerning end-of-life decisions. See, for instance, this ABC News article for a bit more.
When you say “someone in Government”, that is usually pretty scary for most Americans, who visualize some bureaucratic civil servant who is stamping forms, taking breaks and generally being as inefficient as possible.
Here in BC, Canada, the decisions on what medical protocols to follow are developed by the GPAC: Guidelines and Protocols Advisory Committee. This group has representatives from the Ministry of Health Services (MOHS) and the British Columbia Medical Association (BCMA). In practice, the MOHS people are usually senior level doctors, like my uncle, who had practiced medicine, and was at the level of medical director of a large hospital when he moved to MOHS. The BC Medical Association are the doctors in the province.
The protocols are decided on what is the medically best thing to do. Procedures that are very “experimental” may not make the list, if the best current research shows that there is not much hope of the procedure making a difference. This helps eliminate everyone wanting to get the “experimental treatment” to save Grandma’s life that is offered by a charlatan who is simply making money.
It’s possible that someone may miss out on a procedure that costs lots of money that might have prolonged their life by a few months. These decisions are tough to make.
Exceptions are made however, and the protocols are not written in stone.
Bottom line: The treatments that we get in this province are decided upon by a medical body, that looks at the best possible treatment options.
Governments don’t decide anything. A healthcare budget is allocated - usually 9-10% GDP and the professionals make of it as much as they can.
I don’t know how you’re arriving at the cost of the treatment, new machines, new drugs? Fwiw, UHC generally isn’t necessarily this month but it is this year.
