Parenting Club - Parenting Advice, Parenting Message Boards, Baby Message Boards, Pregnancy Message Boards, TTC Messge Boards
Shop for Baby Items | Parenting & Family Blogs

LOVE the new health insurance changes


coasterqueen wrote: our lovely President has made for us all. dry.gif NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!! growl.gif Megan takes an over-the-counter medicine for her lactase deficiency. She will have to take it for life. It costs about $175 a year. We always used our health savings card to pay for it (pre-tax insurance card). Well now the changes have been made, certain things like her gastro meds and even my allergy meds (like zyrtec) cannot be purchased with the health savings card unless you get a doctors note/prescription. You can't even by tylenol/motrin, etc without a doctors note now. SO I have to make an appointment to go see Megan's pedi gastro doctor (specialist) along with taking Megan out of school to see the doc JUST so I can get a written prescription note. growl.gif growl.gif growl.gif growl.gif I understand why the doc is doing this, they don't want to get sued by anyone by just sending you a note without seeing you. It's absolutely ridiculous, so my health insurance will cover 80% of the visit, but how is this decreasing insurance costs??????? So you can't use a health savings card to go get motrin/or tylenol when your kid is sick, without going to the doc to get the note, or urgent care to get the stupid note.

Am I not seeing something with the logic of all of this??????????

mom21kid2dogs replied: For me, the changes have been nothing but positive so far. Because I have to purchase my own insurance I had a high deductible (which we have never come close to meeting) plan with no prescription benefit. I pay $200 a month for this. It covers Olivia & I. When they sent me my premium renewal, they raised it yet again but this time didn't offer me the option of raising my deductible. When I called them, they said they could do that but under the new laws they would be writing me a new policy. As a result, they would be "forced" to cover routine visits, tests and a portion of our prescriptions. When I said sign me up they said "Well you know your rates will just increase." Well no duh like they haven't every year for the past 8? And I get finally can get some benefit from having a plan? I'm sure some things are more cumbersome for the well insured folks but for us poor schmucks . . .well I'm nothing but thrilled that I can actually go to the doc if I need to and not wait until I have let things escalate to a medical emergency before I seek treatment.

coasterqueen replied:
For us because of the changes we were forced to change from Ryan's insurance we've had for 18 years, to my insurance. Actually it appears my insurance here will be better, but more expensive. The changes to Ryan's insurance was just not good. I pray my job is here to stay for a long time, so I can keep my insurance here. blush.gif After having the same insurance for 18 years, I'm actually really scared about going with this new insurance. I sure hope it IS better.

The changes I explained in my last post is for everyone who used a health savings card. I don't see how forcing people to go to the doctor more for prescriptions on OVER-THE-COUNTER drugs is BETTER for anyone. He may have made some good changes for some, but this change is not good for anyone, IMO.

my2monkeyboys replied: The only effect we've really felt so far is that the insurance we had stopped doing business with small/self-employed/individuals, so we were forced to find a new insurance company. We pay just under $400 a month for pretty good coverage as far as dr. visits, hospital visits, etc. go, we just still don't have RX coverage. We didn't have that with the first one anyway, though. It costs us as much as just paying for them OOP does and it still wouldn't cover DH's meds bc they were pre-existing. So for us the only thing we've felt is the hassle of having to find a new company.
I don't think there will be many people to really feel a positive side to this.

jcc64 replied:

Unless you happen to be one of the many unfortunate people who either have pre-existing, previously uninsurable conditions, or are in danger of maxxing out your plan b/c of a major illness (like my dad did, and he had the absolute best insurance available as a teacher).
Our insurance has gone up astronomically every year for as long as we've had insurance, so honestly, I don't feel at all wistful about the "good old days." I can't tell you how many times over the last 10 yrs my dh's small company had us switch plans in an effort to afford decent coverage for its employees.
I don't know every minute detail of the new order, but I sure know I'm happy to give up the old.

I'm sorry things are so difficult for you, Karen, though for me, I've NEVER been able to get a dr to call in a script over the phone, and I think that has as much to do with malpractice insurance and lawyers as it does the new insurance situation. I don't understand why you need a dr's permission to purchase OTC meds--I've never heard of that. If it's on the shelf, can't anyone buy it, or am I missing something?

My3LilMonkeys replied:
I am not thrilled about this either. This is the only ill effect I personally have felt from the new plan so far, but really, what a PITA!

ETA: Jeanne - yes, anyone can still buy it. But in order to buy it with your Health Savings plan (which is pre-tax dollars in a set amount that, if you don't use by the end of the year, you lose) you now have to have a prescription. In the past if my account were to have, say $30 left to use on Dec. 20th, I'd just buy some cold medicine or allergy pills that I know would get used anyway so I didn't lose the money, but now I would have to get a prescription for them in order to do that.

my2monkeyboys replied: Oh hell, don't think I'm happy with the old system either!! LOL
I think the old system needed a ton of work, but I don't think the govt. taking over was the answer.... it never is in this country. mad.gif

coasterqueen replied:
Yes, what she said, Jeannine. tongue.gif A Health Savings Plan is pre-tax dollars put on a visa type card to be used for deductibles, over-the-counter meds, regular prescriptions, eye glasses, contacts, dental procedures, etc, etc. I can't get my allergy meds or Megan's lactase meds without a written note from the doc now.

I agree on the med-mal, but as in a lot of states and federal, Dems are highly against tort reform. If there was tort reform in that health care legislation that was worth anything, it sure would have made me happier.

And, btw, my daughter IS one of those who now because of the new legislation can NOW get unlimited treatment for her sensory disorder. Before we could only go so many times a year and if we went over we had to pay. I still wouldn't want the change! I, personally have several pre-existing conditions that once was not covered.....I still don't want the new health "plan". A friend of mine met the life time max for having a heart transplant....he still says he'd rather not have the new plan. So it depends on who you talk to. wink.gif

MyBrownEyedBoy replied: With Logan and his heart condition, I like knowing that he will be covered. Regardless of his future choice of job. I worried all the time about his future surgeries not being covered because of a "pre-existing condition". So, yes, for me, I'm for it. And I work in health care for a for-profit hospital. And my insurance premiums this year increased by almost $100/month. I'm ok with it.

Cece00 replied: Our insurance premiums went up, I think by about $70 a month, which included our vision/dental plan no longer being included but an additional cost. So that sucked. So far those are the only changes we've seen, but its early in the year.

coasterqueen replied: I guess a lot of people must not use Health Savings "Plans" (cards). My husband has $2600 a year taken out of his checks pre-taxed to pay for deductibles, etc. Last year we spent all that by July. rolleyes.gif So the last part of the year was rough coming up with all the other health/dental/eye expenses, but we made it, thankfully. I LOVE having the card because that money is put on your card up front, January 1 but is taken out slowly over the entire year. So I don't have to scramble for money up front anymore. I also liked that it was pre-tax. AND I LOVED how it paid for my $50+ a month for zyrtec and Megan's lactase meds. I just don't think it's appropriate what-so-ever that I have to get a written note from my doctor proving that I actually NEED those meds in order for it to be ok to be deducted from my Health Savings Plan card. That's O B S U R D. It's still my money being used. The only difference it's my money pre-taxed and the government is just trying to find MORE ways to get my money first. GRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!But since no one else seems to notice this change, I guess I'm the only one affected by it. happy.gif

MommyToAshley replied:
We have an HSA as well, but being self-employed, we pay into it ourselves -- no employer contributions for us so I suppose it is not as big of an issue. But, I do like the fact that it is pre-tax dollars, that's the only real advantage for us.

As for the new health care laws, I am glad that those that couldn't get coverage can now --especially those with pre-existing conditions, but unfortunately, I think prices will only go up as there is nothing in the bill that encouraged competition. I know a lot of people that work for smaller companies, and these smaller companies are beginning to drop comprehensive health insurance in favor of scaled-down, employee-paid plans.

lesliesmom replied: My husband and I looked into the HSA and for his plan I was not sure if we were issued a card or had to send in a claim form.. never did get an answer so we declined. Glad we did, especially if we now need to get a "script" for OTC meds. That is absurd. Thanks for the heads up!!! Sorry its such a PITA now.. I wonder if you can get something like a 1yr script (or 12 1-month scripts)to just keep with you when you buy it though as opposed to having to go back every month.

ETA: DeeDee, not sure how it works for others, but our HSA would have been funded with pre-tax money out of his paycheck, no employer contributions.. not sure they do that for HSAs but I could be wrong.

coasterqueen replied:
Ours isn't employer contributed either. I mean, it is in the sense that they put the $2600 on the card right away, but it's OUR money paying it back. They don't contribute any other way. So I'm not sure what you mean.

I agree with your second paragraph too. thumb.gif I know our board was so shocked to see how much we spend as a company for our health care here, especially after they had to add my family on this year. I know it will be on the agenda to possibly get rid of soon. sleep.gif

coasterqueen replied: I am going to correct myself on the HSA, the employer does contribute a $5 a month fee for employees to have the actual card. If they didn't we would have to send in claims for everything BUT now that the new health legislation has gone through all OTC meds that you want paid for through your HSA will have to be submitted anyways, so it's not working as well, and IMO a waste to pay the $5 per employee for cards. dry.gif The employer also can pay someone to manage the HSA account, if they wanted, so there would be a cost there for the employer, also if they wanted to have compliance testing done on the account. Otherwise they don't contribute a thing. wink.gif

MommyToAshley replied:
It's not uncommon for people that have HSA's for the employer to contribute a specific amount or matching funds to the employees account each year. For example, my sister's employer contributes $5,000 each year to her plan... well, used to. I think she said they are changing that now. We pay into it ourselves, no matching funds.

msoulz replied: As with every bit of legislation some are benefited and others are not.

My beef with it is that there seems to be no attempt at controlling costs - now how that would be done I do not claim to know, but cutting reimbursements to health care providers doesn't control costs, it just gives doctors incentive to not accept Medicare/Medicaid patients.

Our premiums zoomed up over 20% this year partially due to the new legislation and partially to our experience. My employer chose to still pay for an HMO for employees but the trade off was there will be no 401(k) match or contribution this year.

And Blue Cross is our 3rd highest paid vendor after one of the resin suppliers and another raw material supplier. How crazy is that?!?

Something has to change. I wish I had "the" answer. The recent "Obamacare" is great for some (those with preexisting conditions, young adults with no insurance whose parents can cover them, etc.) but not so great for others. JMHO

ETA the ability to use flexible spending accounts to pay for over the counter drugs is a relatively new thing, only a few years if I am not in a time warp, so I am not surprised that it went away. We just barely got used to it, and many people didn't understand they could do that, so it seems an easy one to make disappear.

jcc64 replied:

Wow, this baffles me. Would he able to just pay for a half million dollar high tech procedure or costly maintenance meds out of pocket?
Catastrophic, uninsured health crises are such a big part of people's economic problems in this country. I just don't get why more people aren't as afraid as I am to become one of those statistics.

coasterqueen replied:
Never heard of matching a FSA, so new to me, but in OUR case....no matching funds here. thumb.gif

MommyToAshley replied:
I guess matching wasn't a goog term, I didn't mean they match dollar for dollar what you put in.... I think employers are required to contribute to all employee's fund equally if they contribute to the fund, not match what the employee put in dollar for dollar, so that wasn't a good term. I forget what the maximum contribution is each year, but it used to be $5K, and I often heard of employers contributing $2500. That's why I said matching, but it really isn't matching because you are not required to contribute the other $2500. I know the max is more than that now though.

coasterqueen replied:
Yeah, never heard of them contributing either. Man, wish ours did that. tongue.gif So is this on top of paying a certain % of an employees health insurance plan, too?

Mommy2Isabella replied: sad.gif Im sorry Karen!

I know when we had health insurance (right now we don't and honestly our premium with 3 kids each month is like $800 to get it) and we had an HSA we had nothing but problems. I HATED IT!

Ya it was great to have that money upfront but, we had to constantly send in claims to verify our spending and send in reciepts and stuff, it was more of a hassel. I honestly think we would have been better off taking $40 a month and putting it on a Visa card each month and no it's not pre-tax but $40 a month pre-tax you don't get that much more money than you would if it were after taxes smile.gif

But at the same time, we don't spend much on OTC med and no one is on prescription meds, and we rarely see the Dr. so for us it wasn't worth it.

coasterqueen replied:
I'm sorry you don't have insurance right now. Sal doesn't get it with his job? Ours is about $800 a month as well for a family of 4. Most insurance companies, it doesn't matter how many kids you have, employer plans are usually "single, married, married with children". So you can 10 or 2, doesn't matter, same premium.

And you'd be amazed at how much money you say taking out $2,600 pretaxed wink.gif For us every dollar is important.

Mommy2Isabella replied: Sal left his job in October to further is Writing Company and it has been GREAT! We wouldn't go back to him working a tradtional job. He is also in school for his Master's. It was a change that needed to be made smile.gif

We were paying $350 for our premium when he was with that company, and well, with me being pregnant charges are THROUGH THE ROOF! But, we are thinking we are going to do that Medi-Share thing, have you ever heard of it?

It's a Christian company that has been around for awhile, it's not insurance but its a medical sharing program. Something that we have been looking into. More for the kids.

This baby will be born at the Birth Center here, and we have already paid their fee out of pocket. Here's to hoping everything goes as planned with this baby. SO far so good!!!

coasterqueen replied:
Wow, congrats! I had no clue you were pregnant! ohmy.gif wub.gif I have not heard of that program, but i hope it works out for you. thumb.gif

Mommy2Isabella replied: LOL !!
Posted on Facebook a few weeks back. I am 11 weeks today. I said Ian was our last but just wasn't done, but we both really feel this is it for us!

Boo&BugsMom replied:
This is my big beef too! When I worked in the medical field I saw first hand what kind of profit they raked in for things. A simple $5 test would cost the patient $300...SO NOT COOL!!! There needs to be some sort of cap on things. If that means certain doctor's aren't going to be raking in the big bucks...oh well!

coasterqueen replied:
Do you know how doctors, etc can control costs? TORT REFORM. tongue.gif Unfortunately Trial Lawyers in MANY states (I know ours is for a fact because we fight them DAILY) have made it so appealing for people to be sue happy that patients are suing docs for anything and everything and for things honestly they shouldn't be suing them for and for EXTREME amounts of money, that honestly is way over what should be given. This has in turn made medical malpractice insurance unattainable at a reasonable expense because insurance companies are paying unbelievable amounts of money for med mal lawsuits. So in order for docs to afford med mal insurance they have to charge unbelievable prices for things. So while I think hospitals and docs should maybe re-evaluate their costs, until we have tort reform they are going to increase their costs. Insurance companies in our state fight every single day with the legislature to bring about tort reform and stop the med mal lawsuits that are just outrageous and legislators fall to the side of the patients. I am just as sympathetic to patients that are wronged by docs/hospitals, etc, but if you heard of even a handful of ridiculous med mal lawsuits, you'd see why this is such a mess.

This was one of my issues with Obama. He didn't give a rats behind about tort reform either. Of course I'm not sure why I was shocked by that because he didn't when he was a legislator in our state. rolleyes.gif dry.gif He was so interested in throwing out legislation to look like a hero he didn't take time to look at a lot of things that could have made this legislation so much better.

jcc64 replied: Totally with you on the tort reform thing, Karen.

msoulz replied: ***Cynicism alert***

Let's see here ... Congress is a bunch of lawyers ... tort reform?? Really?!?

While I agree that would be a great step ... really?!? Something about biting the hand that feeds one comes to mind.

***Cynicism alert done***

coasterqueen replied:
That's the same in a lot of states, is here. We are actually one of the WORST states for this. We fought tort reform and won only to have a judge overturn it as unconstitutional. growl.gif Tort reform WOULD lower premiums. Maybe not to where we'd want them, but they would. People think insurance companies are very bad, but they are the first ones out there on the front line fighting for tort reform because they loose millions/billions every year to this and for things we just should not be paying for.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
While I am totally in argeement with you, I also believe this is not the only reason. Doctors and hospitals have been jacking up the prices of procedures/tests/visits for many years...way before people starting getting sue happy. I am all for tort reform though...anything to help the driving costs from going up and extreme inflation!

jcc64 replied:

They are bad. Profiting from the pain and suffering of others is evil. The less coverage they provide to their customers who diligently pay for the service, the more money they make, and no amount of spinning and marketing can change that very simple fact.
Not a righteous way to make money, and lawyers are just one step behind them.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
As with many other things, the thought of insurance and what it's truly meant for is wonderful. However, when it's actually executed and played out, all the wonderful intentions behind the original plan are long forgotten about and left out because people are more concerned about rolling in money than helping others. *sigh* sleep.gif

coasterqueen replied:
So are funeral homes but no one complains about them. Have you had to bury anyone lately? The cost to say goodbye to someone is OUTRAGEOUS and highway robbery, yet we let them do it. And honestly, everybody dies and everyone has to be buried/cremated too. I don't disagree that insurance companies are not angels, by any means, but they are not the only ones in this world.

coasterqueen replied:
And I completely agree. I think I mentioned, and if I didn't, prices charged are outrageous too. Just tort reform is very important to have IMO, and the majority of people in this world have no clue what tort reform is or how important it really is. They just see hospitals/docs "robbing" them, and it's not completely their fault. And sue happy-ness has been going on forever, it's not a new thing.

jcc64 replied: Hey Karen, why do you think so many people are oblivious to the need for tort reform?

And ita about the vulture-like behavior of lawyers and the funeral business, but I see insurance companies as more insidious b/c lives are at stake, and changing their practices can actually save people, or at the very least, not leave families in financial ruins at the worst possible time (actually, is there ever a good time).
About doctor and hospital fees, you probably know more about this than I do, but I believe that hospitals charge $8 for a single tylenol b/c they are trying to recoup the losses they suffer from treating the uninsured on the backs of those who can/will pay. Am I right about this?

~Roo'sMama~ replied:
I don't know much about the insurance problem.. just that it's not good and it needs to be fixed somehow, but how I don't know! But I just had to jump in and say I hear you on the funeral costs! My FIL passed away two summers ago, and no one in our family could afford the burial costs, so my MIL donated his body to the Mayo clinic in Rochester for science. Not that that's such a bad thing, it was just that it was the only option for her. She couldn't even afford to have him cremated, and I think it's horrible how expensive it is, and how they're taking advantage of grieving families. sad.gif

PrairieMom replied:
This is what I heard when I was working in the hospital

coasterqueen replied:
It is to some degree, especially in hospitals. But it's not always the case, hospitals have to deal with a massive amount of med mal insurance on docs, and on the hospital itself. Yes, they do have to recoup costs from those who don't have the money to pay their bills, but it's not the ONLY reason.

And as far funeral costs, they leave you high and dry at the worst possible times, too.

coasterqueen replied:
Yes, I know. sleep.gif We've been faced with this numerous times over the year, and actually just recently when my grandfather passed away suddenly Christmas day morning. sleep.gif My uncle chose to have him cremated, but put in a plastic box, no showing of the body at all, quick service night before and morning of, no hearse (sp?) and it cost $10,000. That's UNREAL. They even charged us for bottled water!!! I know funeral homes have to make a living, but the cost to die these days is obsurd and hearing the older folks in our family talk about how they want to be buried but won't be because cremation is cheaper. That's sad, too. But that's another subject, I guess, since insurance companies are the only bad people in this world. rolleyes.gif

jcc64 replied:

C'mon, Karen, I'm with you on the lawyers and the funeral business, but like I said upthread, with regard to health insurance companies, lives are literally at stake, and genuine (the operative word here) reform will save lives in more ways than one.
Though lawyers and funeral vultures are indeed evil for also profiting from other people's misery, insurance is a priority in my mind, that's all I'm saying.

~Roo'sMama~ replied:
hug.gif I'm sorry! That really is ridiculous. dry.gif And it is sad to think that we might not be able to bury our parents the way they want to be. I've always hated the thought of being cremated too, but unless things change drastically by that time or my family has gotten rich, that's probably going to have to be what happens.

But the sub-plot of this thread has gotten a little bit morbid... maybe we should go back to complaining about insurance! tongue.gif Like I said in my other thread, we haven't had any insurance for 2 1/2 years since Dh quit his job to go back to school. The insurance we had through his job then was pretty pointless... basically the only good it did us was give us the provider discount. I don't know what the benefit's are like for teachers, but the way things have gone in the past two years, I'm a little afraid to find out what kind of insurance we're going to have when Dh gets a job!

youngmomofone replied: our insurance seems cheap to a lot of people. We pay $400 a month for self, spouse + family. So, even with 19 kids, it will only be $400. Anyway, turns out the insurance isn't as good as hoped. We are now in more debt medical bill wise than we have ever been in our entire lives (including times when we didn't have any!! think about that one!). They offered us the card to put pre-tax money on it and I'm so glad that we opted out because I would be angry to have to spend $40 to see my doctor or the pedi to get a script saying that I can use OUR $$ on stuff like Tylenol. mad.gif

As far as funeral goes, my grandmother died in 2006 and she had already bought the plot I believe. Even with that it still cost $8000 to bury her so my mom had to take out a loan for her share of the money. One of my uncles had that much room on his credit card to get it paid for before my mom was able to hand him over the money. If not, then Idk how they would have worked it out because I think only one uncle had his share of the cost that day to hand over to the funeral home people.

PrairieMom replied: As far as funeral costs go, This one one of the reasons we are supposed to be carrying life insurance. When we were 25 DH and I both went in , had wills drawn up, advanced directives, and got life insurance. We are set. It gives me great peace of mind to know that my family will be ok and won't have financial hard ship if something should happen to me. IMO, Carrying life insurance is a responsibility, as is carrying health insurance. The stakes are just to high.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
However, a lot of life insurance policies don't cover you if you die of 'old age'. At least around here, it's hard to find a life insurance policy that will cover you past a certain age. 65 is the norm.

coasterqueen replied:
Exactly. This is how most are. Why? Because policies to carry you into your 80's etc is too expensive and at that time debt isn't *supposed* to be so much so you usually care just a small policy enough to cover a funeral.

What you may not know Tara, is that a lot of times you can't get that policy fast enough to pay for the funeral up front. Then you have to come up with the $10+ grand yourself until then. My grandfather had not seen a doctor for over 30 days so the coroner couldn't release a death certificate right away. We are STILL waiting on the certificate and he passed away Christmas Day. So we just pay the interest on the credit card that we charged his funeral on in the mean time. We have NO clue if the policy will even cover the funeral. Then policies at his age, well they don't cover all the bills he had on hand, so it's out of our pocket. So you may think you have everything taken care of, but you better go through that with someone again. yes, you are taken care of now in the event of something while you are young..........but I doubt it when you are old (higher than 60/65) wink.gif My grandfather had a will, he had a life insurance policy, but still does that mean it should cost $10,000 just to be cremated in a plastic box? NO!

And if carrying life insurance is a responsibility as carrying health insurance, then it shouldn't be the responsibility of the government it should be of the people. I'm sure all the people who can't get health insurance aren't more than likely to be able to carry life insurance either, so they are sticking it to their kids later in life. Sad.

mummy2girls replied: Im not sure what to think of this all. Ive lived all my live where I can walk into a medi centre or hospital with my kids or by myself knowing we will be cared for and I wont have to worry about paying and that was expecially when I was a single mom and sometimes had no more money to my name until payday. Where Jordan was taken care of in the nicu picu and peds ward and the only thing i had to worry about was him surving and not worrying about how im goign to pay for this care. taking breanna to see a neurologist and not have to worry where will i get the money for that care. Yes we do have to pay for this like meds and dentist and othert things like that but marcus I must say has excellent coverage. he has 80 percent coverage for almost everything but all meds is 100 covered.

Is it because you dont want to be controlled on medical? the wait times? i wouldnt give up mine BUT that being said im sure you dont want to give up what you had because you both worked so hard to get what you have or had. i guess i would be cheezed too if what i was getting now was flipped around and i get so much less or worse....

jcc64 replied: I think what you have sounds AWESOME Shelley, but we've been brainwashed by the marketing machine of the insurance industry to believe everyone in Canada is completely miserable with the one payer system.
And just like Karen's grandfather thought he had everything covered with his life insurance, when push comes to shove, a lot of us are a lot less covered than we think we are.


coasterqueen replied:
Speak for yourself Jeanne wink.gif . I'm not brainwashed. I know MANY Canadians who don't like their healthcare system. Many who came to the states to work for the company my husband works for JUST TO GET GOOD HEALTHCARE AND NOT WAIT for surgeries they feel are important. I don't want a government determining anything for me when it comes to my health. So you may be brainwashed. I'm not. thumb.gif Please don't speak for all Americans on this. If you think the media has brainwashed people to think differently than you, have you ever thought the media might be brainwashing you?

Again, I am only pointing out the stupidity of some of the changes being made by Obama to our healthcare system, like making it harder to get over-the-counter meds with a pre-tax card. Plain stupidity. But actually it's probably not, because the man who campaigned not to be in line with pharmaseutical companies probably made that deal on the pre-tax card with those particular companies. rolleyes.gif

mummy2girls replied:
yes some canadians HATE the sytem here and some LOVE it... it just depends on the experience they have had. I have liked the system BUT the one thing I found quite annoying is when Jenna needed surgery to remover her adenoids and tonsils and then the second surgey to widen her nose airway... The wait was unreal. And thats because she was not noted as someone that needed the surgery so when a child came in they bumped up the waitibg list whch made her bump down. It was annoying to go 6 months and not hear a word and then I got fed up and called the hospital and pretty much deanded some date and they actually called me back that day and gave me one...LOL. I needed emergency surgery and got it... My cousin needed a surgery and he wasnt labeled as someone that needed it right away and he was in such pain ( i think it was leg or knee surgery) and he gave up on the waitinga nd being told no that other people needed it more so my aunt and uncle paid for him to go to the states and pay for the surgery there... so i guess it just depends on each person...

jcc64 replied:

Yeah, that's it, I'm brainwashed. That's what's been wrong with me all these years...

Contrary to your assertion, Karen, I don't mind when people disagree with me, providing they're well-informed.

Believe what you want to believe. I just ask that you consider the minute sense of frustration you felt over the changes you described regarding your debit card at the beginning of this thread, and imagine how it might feel if instead of a small inconvenience like that, you were unable to access care for a terminally ill child b/c of pre-existing condition or lifetime spending cap.
The insurance industry cannot be trusted to protect our best interests, and that's all I was trying to say. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go for my afternoon brainwashing session with NPR...

ZandersMama replied: As crappy as the Canadian wait times can be, I wouldn't have it any other way. Zav was in hospital 2 months after his birth, numerous blood transfusions, was in an incubator for a little over a month, gtube feedings, on insulin for a few weeks, ect ect ect.
I never got any kind of bill for any of it. In fact, when we left the hospital, I was given diapers because he didn't fit in any you can buy around here smile.gif (he was so so tiny)

The wait times do get annoying yes, but on another board there is another preemie mom I talk to, whose daughter was in less time then Zavs and had less interventions, and her care was just over a million dollars. That's scary. I would hate to second guess taking the kids to the doc because I couldn't afford it, and that happens. From what I hear of obamas changes from relatives in the US, none of them are to impressed.

mummy2girls replied:
i agree... Jordan was in the NIC for just over 7 days and had biopsies and blood tranfusions and tests and needles and iv's and surgeries. then in teh peds ward and then in teh picu. surgeries again, ivs' tests, blood tranfusions, catscans, etc etc etc and I didnt see one bill for that.I also left the NICU with him and they gave me 50 bottles of premade formuula to no cost to me... And being a single mom with jenna she has had surgeries, speech therapies, occupational therapies, physical therapy, ABC head start. breanna withy her neuurologist appt's, and so on and i saw no bill.

yes the wait time is insane at times BUT its nice to know my child will get the care needed and i will aswell and will marcus. not worry about this bill and that bill.

And to know jst because jenna has asthma she will not be turned down for any treatment involved with that ill ness.

my2monkeyboys replied: I know there has to be some kind of middle ground in all of this....
I don't understand how your country isn't going bankrupt covering everyone for everything when you only pay in so much in taxes to go for that.... our country would be bankrupt in less than 5 years I am sure. Heck, and that's only assuming they actually used the collected taxes for the medical care, unlike the situation with Social Security! I trust our government to do NOTHING correct or right... cynical, sure, but pretty on target I suspect. dry.gif The less they are involved in my life, the better I feel about things.

coasterqueen replied:
Agreed. Just like it depends on which American you talk to on our health system and how it is. It all depends on the person. thumb.gif

coasterqueen replied:
Hey, I was only commenting on your feelings that "we've been brainwashed", when not all of us have.

I feel frustration all the time with the system, Jeanne. I had to fight a year for Megan's occupational therapy to be covered and that entire year she was not getting the therapy she needed. No, it's not life threatening, but it was still unneeded frustration. I'm frustrated every year I have to determine exactly how many appointments the ins. company will pay for and figure out which ones to miss since they won't pay for those. Now we don't have to do that with the new changes to insurance laws, but still I'd rather have it the old way because the benefits outweighed the negatives for me.

I will not comment any more on why I don't like the new system. There is just no need. God help us all when we let the government decide what is right for us and let them have control of everything. When we become of state of Hitler times, don't come knocking on my door complaining.

coasterqueen replied:
thumb.gif

Boo&BugsMom replied: I would really like to know the comparison in the amount of hospitals and doctors in Canada verses the US. I often wonder if 'part' of the waiting issue in Canada is because their amount of hospitals and doctors are significantly less than ours. I dunno. Again...just curious... I know there is far more to the waiting game other than that, but I wonder if that is a factor.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
I don't know about that. On one hand, I totally agree. However, I'd bet that Canadian doctors don't get to set their own rates for visits and procedures like in the US since it's government ran...meaning they don't make more of a profit than the next one. I don't know if I'm right...but I would think the doctors would have to put some sort of cap on what they charge so the gov. doesn't end up paying through the nose (like we do now!) for visits and procedures. I'm also curious to know if Canada has the same problem we do with malpractice suites. There are a lot of factors to look at, I think, before throwing the idea out the window.

I think I have talked about this before...but, when Troy was unemployed we were on Badgercare...which is our states branch of Medicaid. Let me tell you...it was the best insurance we have EVER been on. I miss it, actually. Never owed a single cent for a visit or anything else, prescription co-pays were no more than a couple dollars, etc. We paid $20 a month for our family to be on it. The thing with insurances through the government is this: when a hospital or doctor accepts a patient under that insurance, they can only legally charge so much for that procedure, visit, etc. because the gov. insurance will only pay so much for it. The doctor signs a waiver that they will not charge a patient over what Badgercare pays, etc. Does it hurt the doctors? Kind of. So, instead of a doctor bringing hom $150,000 a year, they are bringing in $100,000 a year...woopie! Doctors still make a dang good living...and they should...but not at the expense of people digging themselves into a financial grave.

The boys doctor is one of few pediatricians in the area who take the gov. insurance...thank GOD because when we switched to it for that short time I was terrified of switching the boys doctor because he's such a GREAT doctor. He says that his 'profit' is lower due to it, but he is still able to take care of his 5 kids, wife, his large mortage, etc. wink.gif

I am probably one of few very conservative people who are for a government ran health program. Would it be ran like our Badgercare? I don't know...but if it were, I would have no problems whatsoever!

I should also point out that our state taxes and lower than most other states...so...something to consider...

mummy2girls replied:
over 1200

my2monkeyboys replied: According to a quick Google search, there are over 800,00 doctors and over 5,000 hospitals in the USA.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
1200 doctors? Hospitals...??? Is that 1200 within one area, or the entire country?

How is that compared to the US?

Also would need to know how large these hospitals are, etc. As well as the specialities of each doctor, surgeon,...

There needs to be a fair and thorough comparison. wink.gif

mummy2girls replied:
sorry i was jst answering how many hospitals in canada.... ill look into it and let yo know... I was just trying to answer:(

Our Lil' Family replied: wiki says 1365 hospitals in Canada and 63,000 physicians.

191,577 physicians in US and 5815 hospitals

mummy2girls replied:
I looked it po and from what i have read... over 6500 in the states and over 1300 in canada. All of canada.
Some of them are HUGE, some are only for rehabilitation, some are childrens hospitals some are for seniors, etc etc etc.

Here in edmonton there is a cancer institute for only cancer patients. There is an University hopsital that has the stollery( childrens hoispital) in it, heart institute in it, and many many diff specialties... Alot of people are sent there becase of the major specialties there and some of the doctors moved from teh states to live here to just work at the hospital. Its an enormuos facility! over 7000 physicians work there of many types...and over 400 different facilities. Acute care, cancer treatment centres, community health centres, mental health to name just a few

There is small hospitals as well... i dont know about the other provinces and hospitals because I dont live there that something you have to look up.

PrairieMom replied:
ok, but how many hospitals are there per capita? Doesn't the US have a way higher population than canada?

Our Lil' Family replied:
Yes, surely. That was just a quick google. I didn't do per capita.

Our Lil' Family replied: Huh...this site says that Canada actually has more beds per capita....that's interesting.
LINKY

PrairieMom replied: I'm no expert, but I am under the impression that we aren't copying Canada's program anyway. I Thought we were taking bits and pieces from a bunch of European countries, as well as Japan and Canada and meshing them all into a unique policy? So I don't know that it is entirely fair to compare to just Canada.

MommyToAshley replied: Since we are comparing the two, I think it is important to remember that Canadian health insurance isn't free.

A little quick research on the Canadian tax system revealed:

Canada total tax and non-tax revenue for every level of government equals about 39.4% of GDP, compared to the U.S. rate of 28.2%. In addition, Canada has a national goods and services tax of 5% on most purchases, while the U.S. federal government does not. In addition to the 5% GST levied on most purchases, Canadians also pay a provincial sales tax at a rate that varies by province and can be as high as 10%. In Ontario, for example, where the provincial sales tax (PST) is 8%, consumers must pay a total of 13% sales tax on top of the purchase price. (In the US, most states impose a sales tax that realistically average at about 6-8%. Five U.S. states do not have any sales tax imposed). Therefore, Canadian citizens still pay for healthcare in the form of taxes instead of premiums.

Canadian healthcare system is 70% government-funded, the US system is just under 50% government-funded (mostly via Medicare and Medicaid). Canada's income tax system is more heavily biased against the highest income earners, thus while Canada's income tax rate is higher on average, the bottom fifty percent of the population is roughly taxed the same on income as in the United States. So, basically, the wealthier individuals in Canada pay for the health care.... which is good if you're middle and lower income brackets, then you probably like the health care system in Canada.

Those in the US that like the new health care system should keep this in mind when their taxes go up and spending for other gov't programs is cut. It has to be paid for somehow, taxes will go up and other programs will be cut -- unfortunately education programs are usually among the first. I do work for many Universities that are already preparing for their budgets to be cut -- I know this because it means we (our business) will probably not get some of those contracts renewed that are grant funded... some of these we've had for over 10 years.

I am not saying that the US health care system doesn't need revamping, but I am just saying that we can't just assume universal health care will resolve all the problems and we won't have to "pay" for it. We'll still have to pay for it... in fact, our premiums have already gone up and I am sure taxes will go up too.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
No it's not fair, but since that is what the conversation was leaning towards...the US and Canada, that is why I asked the question. wink.gif I was also asking because of the point brought up about people from Canada going to the US for procedures. Nothing was said about other countries. wink.gif It was strickly a question about why there is a longer waiting period in Canada and trying to understand why.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
I know dear. No worries. It's just hard to get a correct comparison though when there is a lot of other important info needed, is all. smile.gif

PrairieMom replied:
I didn't mean you specifically, I was meaning the argument in general.

MommyToAshley replied:
While I am no expert on the system, I think it is because they treat so many people, they don't have the budget to cover all procedure, even some of the routine procedures. For example, I read that their health care accounts for 43 percent, or 42.6 billion Canadian dollars, of provincial government spending in Ontario alone. So, just like everythign else, it comes back to money.

I read the following:

“I’m somebody who’s in favor of public health insurance and think we do better than the U.S.,” said Michael Rachlis, a physician, healthy policy consultant and adjunct professor at the University of Toronto. “But I won’t deny the problems we have in our system with waits and delays and chronic disease management.”

The most common complaint regarding the Canadian system are the long lines and waiting periods that have appeared for minor and non-life threatening procedures over the last 15 years, since the introduction of widespread cuts to public funding. Separately, a number of medical tests and screenings are not covered (or due to increasing costs, are no longer covered) by the Canadian health system, forcing patients to pay for these services out of their own pockets. For these reasons, some relatively wealthy Canadians undergo treatment at private healthcare facilities at their own expense, either in Canada, in India, or in other nations[14] to avoid waiting for medical treatment, joining "medical tourists" from many nations, including the US.


This may be the number you are looking for:

During the 1990s, several provincial governments attempted to rein in health care spending. One result that can be at least partially attributed to those cuts is that Canada has 12.7 C.T. scanners for every million people compared with 34.3 in the United States. There is also a gap when it comes to physicians. In 2007, Canada had 2.18 practicing doctors for every thousand people, according to the O.E.C.D., compared with 2.43 in the United States.

Again, I am not saying our system is better, but the grass isn't always greener on the other side either.

Boo&BugsMom replied:
That makes sense. cool.gif

jcc64 replied:

Wow, just, wow. So, I guess the roads you drive on are impassable? The mail never gets to your door? There's nowhere for your kid to get an education? No one will come to your aid in the case of a fire/crime/emergency?
Maybe I have low standards, but I'd say there's plenty to be thankful for in this country. Have you ever been to a third world country?

cameragirl21 replied:
I want no part of the healthcare debate, mainly because I don't have enough information to stake any claims but I'm going to second Jeanne's sentiment here.
I was born in the former USSR and even though I came here as a toddler, I do remember...standing in line to get food, being afraid of the KGB...things like that you don't forget, even if you are still sucking on your fingers and clutching a teddy bear for most of your waking hours.
I also live 90 miles from Cuba and am around people who fled Cuba all the time...SO grateful to be an American, we have MUCH to be thankful for.

my2monkeyboys replied: You are both absolutely right... I was not thinking about those types of things when I was typing that. I absolutely think the USA is the best country I could possibly live in.
But while I do so appreciate the roads, the mail, the emergency services, etc., I do believe private companies would do an even better job in all of these areas. I think that a true free market promotes greater competition and, in the end, a better job done.
And when it comes to social programs our govt. just sucks. They all have been run in the ground... going bankrupt, being handled in horrible ways... just makes me want them to keep their mitts off everything else.


CommunityNewsResources | Entertainment | Link To Us |Terms of Use | Privacy PolicyAdvertising
©2024 Parenting Club.com All Rights Reserved