Wednesday, September 09, 2009

I agree

I agree that there is a rush for health care reform. The reason there is a rush is because there has been nothing real on the table for 20 years or more (after medicare) and when something does come forward it is shouted down- sometimes by the very people the plan could help. Even more often it is shouted down by people who are covered by medicare (the ultimate socialized medicine)! What would happen if we decided to rid ourselves of THAT corrupt system?

What is an alternative the plan? One critic of mine suggests tort reform. What does the legal side of the house say? Without judicial review drug companies and hospitals get away with murder. You can scream poor treatment ( but without the power to sue, little will be done in current society. Do we take away that power to sue in malpractice? I live with that now. You cannot sue the military. They settled my husband's case with a board and inquiry. Socialized. Works for me. How about my brother in law's misdiagnosis? Nothing there (except the fear of suing and LOADS of bills). He had great insurance. He worked until his end days so he could keep his insurance.

"All lawyers are left winged democrats!" I don't know any malpractice lawyers. How about a chime in from some of the people who work for lawyers or have lawyer husbands on this stance.

"We don't want socialized medicine!" My meds are generic. I understand there is a compromise between military health and drug companies to keep the costs down. I can get the "real thing" if it is the best thing.
My nurse practitioner knows me better than the last HMO provider did in Arizona. We have friends who have chose to get private insurance even though they are fully covered by the military. We will probably do that if we leave this area. We can afford it and have no pre existing conditions. Are you in a HMO? You are in socialized medicine.

"We don't want to be like Canada." Personally I do not know any Canadians, but my cancer ridden brother in law sat in emergency rooms for hours because there were so many uninsured who used the emergency room as a clinic.
The reality is we have lines now. Ask anyone who has tried to get in to a specialist in the last 12 months. We have denial of coverage now. Ask anyone who has been laid off and has a preexisting problem.
We have people who need help now. Just because it is not you- is that the reason to deny that it is a problem?

I have not read the bill. I do support a compromise of the stances. I don't know what that looks like. I fear we will NEVER GET THERE! The bruhaha seems like the argument of cafeteria Catholics. "I want this- but not that- especially if it is painful to me- personally. I don't need _______ (you fill in the blank). " The problem is that society is a package deal- just like the Church. You cannot ignore the part you think could go away - someday.

Higher taxes? Heck no. I don't want higher taxes either. Really, I would rather NOT pay for the illegals or the uninsured- they can get jobs and pay for it themselves. I would rather not pay for the person who gets in a car accident and has no insurance. Please tell me that I do not have to pay for them. I don't want to pay for elderly medical pills when they can afford it themselves. You mean they don't have to use their own money? Because why?
Maybe I am arguing so much BECAUSE I would much rather be on this side of the argument? I'd rather not pay. I'd rather not care.

The reality is I DO PAY. We ALL do. This IS a Christian issue! I am compelled to care.
There has to be a way to control how many "go go chairs" are out there.....

1 comment:

Janette said...

Just to let you know. The only comments I do not print are those in which the writer includes mudslinging. Mudslinging is a old debate tool- and a pretty negative way of parenting or writing or debating. It is all about trying to throw mud on the perosn instead of discussing the issue.
If you have something to add to the discussion- I will put it out there. If you don't, it won't get published here.