New Gov't mammogram recommendations...STUPID GOV'T!

CheleLyn · Senior Member

New Gov't mammogram recommendations...STUPID GOV'T!

Juanita · Guru

I just said to Kenneth this morning that my oncologist will have a FIT over this. She's already been fussing at me because I didn't have a baseline at 38!!

sbucking · Guru

I'm supposed to have a baseline at 35.

Just another reason the government needs to keep their hands out.

tabatha · Senior Member

insurance hasnt yet decided to not cover the screenings on account of the new recommendations

if your doc can check the boxes stating why you need it (and they can) then it will be covered, regardless of age.

otherwise, if its really important, it should be ok w/that person to pay for it

CoffeeQueen · Guru

tabatha wrote:

insurance hasnt yet decided to not cover the screenings on account of the new recommendations

if your doc can check the boxes stating why you need it (and they can) then it will be covered, regardless of age.

otherwise, if its really important, it should be ok w/that person to pay for it

yeah, I just heard that on the news this morning that cancer society and dr. are not changing any recommendations based on the gov. study. They are not in agreement.

Juanita · Guru

sbucking wrote:

I'm supposed to have a baseline at 35.

Just another reason the government needs to keep their hands out.

EXACTLY right!

happylib · Guru

Government needs to keep their nose out of it. I personally know a woman that is younger than 40 fighting breast cancer, my friend is watching another little girl sometimes for a woman younger than 40 fighting breast cancer, and earlier this year a mom I knew under 40 died from breast cancer. Seems a little silly to make something as simple as a mammogram to be discouraged.

-- Edited by happylib on Tuesday 17th of November 2009 12:19:46 PM

3s_a_crowd · Guru

just an observation. no one here particularly, but people are begging for govt healthcare and then with this saying government should stay out or that there wrong.

FTR I think its ridiculous this reccommendationg though

CoffeeQueen · Guru

3s_a_crowd wrote:

just an observation. no one here particularly, but people are begging for govt healthcare and then with this saying government should stay out or that there wrong.

FTR I think its ridiculous this reccommendationg though

Not that I am in either camp, but I think there is a difference in actual medical guidelines coming from the gov. and people wanting medical reform. It is not that people are begging for gov. health care.

I mean if you look at history people bucked social security back then, medicade, etc. People do not like change and no change is 100% perfect. It is so complex and no easy advice.

supergrover · Guru

3s_a_crowd wrote:

just an observation. no one here particularly, but people are begging for govt healthcare and then with this saying government should stay out or that there wrong.

FTR I think its ridiculous this reccommendationg though

I don't think this is the same.

The study was based out of a bunch of universities (top research universities), not a bunch of government honchos smoking cigars deciding how to screw you over. I personally don't love the recommendation, and it seems counter-intuitive, so I would love to read more research. I just would hate to see this become the soap box of anti- health care reform.

And I am passionate, I own that.

and, people like me are begging for health care reform, not gov't healthcare (though I am in favor of a gov't option). Also not the same thing. A Canadian style heath system (smooches to Sonya) will never happen, even most die hard liberals have come to accept that.

-- Edited by supergrover on Tuesday 17th of November 2009 01:17:57 PM

tabatha · Senior Member

CoffeeQueen wrote:

3s_a_crowd wrote:

just an observation. no one here particularly, but people are begging for govt healthcare and then with this saying government should stay out or that there wrong.

FTR I think its ridiculous this reccommendationg though

Not that I am in either camp, but I think there is a difference in actual medical guidelines coming from the gov. and people wanting medical reform. It is not that people are begging for gov. health care.
I mean if you look at history people bucked social security back then, medicade, etc. People do not like change and no change is 100% perfect. It is so complex and no easy advice.

health care reform mandated by the government = medical guidelines from the government

besides, the government already has their hands in it

medicare sets the standard for what most private insurers pay

who runs medicare?

you can't fix healthcare in the US because the problem is not just the delivery of healthcare, but the consumption of those resources and more importantly, the american attitude of immediate entitlement.

which is really the problem

no matter what they do, it will still be screwed up

Juanita · Guru

tabatha wrote:

CoffeeQueen wrote:

3s_a_crowd wrote:

just an observation. no one here particularly, but people are begging for govt healthcare and then with this saying government should stay out or that there wrong.

FTR I think its ridiculous this reccommendationg though

Not that I am in either camp, but I think there is a difference in actual medical guidelines coming from the gov. and people wanting medical reform. It is not that people are begging for gov. health care.
I mean if you look at history people bucked social security back then, medicade, etc. People do not like change and no change is 100% perfect. It is so complex and no easy advice.

health care reform mandated by the government = medical guidelines from the government
besides, the government already has their hands in it
medicare sets the standard for what most private insurers pay
who runs medicare?
you can't fix healthcare in the US because the problem is not just the delivery of healthcare, but the consumption of those resources and more importantly, the american attitude of immediate entitlement.
which is really the problem
no matter what they do, it will still be screwed up

ita!

CoffeeQueen · Guru

tabatha wrote:

CoffeeQueen wrote:

3s_a_crowd wrote:

just an observation. no one here particularly, but people are begging for govt healthcare and then with this saying government should stay out or that there wrong.

FTR I think its ridiculous this reccommendationg though

Not that I am in either camp, but I think there is a difference in actual medical guidelines coming from the gov. and people wanting medical reform. It is not that people are begging for gov. health care.
I mean if you look at history people bucked social security back then, medicade, etc. People do not like change and no change is 100% perfect. It is so complex and no easy advice.

health care reform mandated by the government = medical guidelines from the government
besides, the government already has their hands in it
medicare sets the standard for what most private insurers pay
who runs medicare?
you can't fix healthcare in the US because the problem is not just the delivery of healthcare, but the consumption of those resources and more importantly, the american attitude of immediate entitlement.
which is really the problem
no matter what they do, it will still be screwed up

I totally agree. I know that medicare is run by gov. I just still am not convinced that this health care that is coming down the pipeline is going to be gov. run. I hope it is not run like medicare.

tabatha · Senior Member

CoffeeQueen wrote:

tabatha wrote:

CoffeeQueen wrote:

3s_a_crowd wrote:

just an observation. no one here particularly, but people are begging for govt healthcare and then with this saying government should stay out or that there wrong.

FTR I think its ridiculous this reccommendationg though

Not that I am in either camp, but I think there is a difference in actual medical guidelines coming from the gov. and people wanting medical reform. It is not that people are begging for gov. health care.
I mean if you look at history people bucked social security back then, medicade, etc. People do not like change and no change is 100% perfect. It is so complex and no easy advice.

health care reform mandated by the government = medical guidelines from the government
besides, the government already has their hands in it
medicare sets the standard for what most private insurers pay
who runs medicare?
you can't fix healthcare in the US because the problem is not just the delivery of healthcare, but the consumption of those resources and more importantly, the american attitude of immediate entitlement.
which is really the problem
no matter what they do, it will still be screwed up

I totally agree. I know that medicare is run by gov. I just still am not convinced that this health care that is coming down the pipeline is going to be gov. run. I hope it is not run like medicare.

but what i'm saying is the system that exists could potentially be solvent or manageable were it not for the consumers of that system and the much larger issue of who "social welfare" gets doled out to.

i, of course, see this type of stuff all the time.

its the people

and they aren't changing.

reform is still not going to help the people that need it most.

military healthcare (TRICARE) is a perfect example of why giving people something for "nothing" only exacerbates the sense of entitlement that creates the waste.

*i would like to say, however, that the subsidized healthcare provided to the military is paid for in lieu of a bigger paycheck.

and i want to say that a better way to do things is to make people responsible for their own healthcare. and if we weren't always catering to the lowest common denominator that might work. and the other problem with that is that you expect people to know something that it isn't their job to know.

ex: i know that getting a flu test to confirm H1N1 in no way changes the tx or expected outcome. it is my job to know this. not yours (necessarily). so is it really fair to expect non-medical people to make decisions about what care they do or dont need?

or you can mandate health care by saying you must have it and if you can't afford it we will give it to you for free. and that still doesn't solve anything because you can't make people keep themselves healthy. and then you still spend $$$ trying to fix something that could have been avoided or dx earlier.

i swear to you that it is the american people that screwed themselves. this culture is afraid of death, wants everything now and thinks its ok to sue someone because they gave you the hot coffee you asked for.

fat people and smokers should have to pay more for insurance! they cost more!

"healthy" people should not have to pay as much- they use less

20yr olds do not need the same coverage as an 80yr old

people do not need to know what doctors and nurses know, but it's your body, your kids, etc and you ultimately have to take *some* ownership for it and proactively work at keeping the life you were given. people don't own a car for a year and never get the oil changed, do they??

CoffeeQueen · Guru

tabatha wrote:

CoffeeQueen wrote:

tabatha wrote:

CoffeeQueen wrote:

3s_a_crowd wrote:

just an observation. no one here particularly, but people are begging for govt healthcare and then with this saying government should stay out or that there wrong.

FTR I think its ridiculous this reccommendationg though

Not that I am in either camp, but I think there is a difference in actual medical guidelines coming from the gov. and people wanting medical reform. It is not that people are begging for gov. health care.
I mean if you look at history people bucked social security back then, medicade, etc. People do not like change and no change is 100% perfect. It is so complex and no easy advice.

health care reform mandated by the government = medical guidelines from the government
besides, the government already has their hands in it
medicare sets the standard for what most private insurers pay
who runs medicare?
you can't fix healthcare in the US because the problem is not just the delivery of healthcare, but the consumption of those resources and more importantly, the american attitude of immediate entitlement.
which is really the problem
no matter what they do, it will still be screwed up

I totally agree. I know that medicare is run by gov. I just still am not convinced that this health care that is coming down the pipeline is going to be gov. run. I hope it is not run like medicare.

but what i'm saying is the system that exists could potentially be solvent or manageable were it not for the consumers of that system and the much larger issue of who "social welfare" gets doled out to.

i, of course, see this type of stuff all the time.

its the people

and they aren't changing.

reform is still not going to help the people that need it most.

military healthcare (TRICARE) is a perfect example of why giving people something for "nothing" only exacerbates the sense of entitlement that creates the waste.

*i would like to say, however, that the subsidized healthcare provided to the military is paid for in lieu of a bigger paycheck.

and i want to say that a better way to do things is to make people responsible for their own healthcare. and if we weren't always catering to the lowest common denominator that might work. and the other problem with that is that you expect people to know something that it isn't their job to know.

ex: i know that getting a flu test to confirm H1N1 in no way changes the tx or expected outcome. it is my job to know this. not yours (necessarily). so is it really fair to expect non-medical people to make decisions about what care they do or dont need?

or you can mandate health care by saying you must have it and if you can't afford it we will give it to you for free. and that still doesn't solve anything because you can't make people keep themselves healthy. and then you still spend $$$ trying to fix something that could have been avoided or dx earlier.

i swear to you that it is the american people that screwed themselves. this culture is afraid of death, wants everything now and thinks its ok to sue someone because they gave you the hot coffee you asked for.

fat people and smokers should have to pay more for insurance! they cost more!

"healthy" people should not have to pay as much- they use less

20yr olds do not need the same coverage as an 80yr old

people do not need to know what doctors and nurses know, but it's your body, your kids, etc and you ultimately have to take *some* ownership for it and proactively work at keeping the life you were given. people don't own a car for a year and never get the oil changed, do they??

Sorry to T/J this

I understand Tab. I really do and from what I have been reading this is not going to be a situation where you are covered by the gov. It will mandate they have the insurance, but it will be in lieu of a lower pay from employer or something of that nature. I really do not even know what will ever become of it.

I think that the US does go to the Dr. for every little thing. I do disagree though on a few things in terms of younger people not needing the same coverage,etc. You never know when you will need that coverage. I would hate to have a system that says you are 20 and therefore you do not need this or that covered.

If I take me for example. I have insurance through my husbands work. HE pays a percentage and his company pays the remainder. Because or rising health care cost the deductible has gone up and I pay more. I mean between 80/20 coverage, 2,000 deductable, 40 co pays, etc. I pay out a lot per year. It would be even more if I had no insurance and I understand that. I am not expecting something for nothing, but I think that what is being charged is out of control too. I think there needs to be some kind of system in place to keep Dr. from taking advantage of the system and vise versa.

I do not think it is entirely the fault of the people.

tabatha · Senior Member

i have a lot to say on this topic.

and for every proposed solution, the biggest problem is the patient(s) and how they screw that up, too.

and i want to be clear that not everyone misuses the system available, or is a ne'er do well, etc.

i am not "healthy" and i know that ppl like me are part of the problem, i am lucky that the system isn't set up so that i pay way more (i do pay a fat tax on my life insurance, LOL). and i know that there are lots of ppl that are trying and struggling and i know what it was like to not have insurance on my kid and pray that nothing really bad happens. i see the good and the bad.

but you have to address the "bad" (lets call them misinformed, shall we) because thats where so much of the problem comes from.

if you can't find a way to prevent those people from sucking the life out of the system, then you can't solve anything.

and then there is the elderly. and when you talk "end of life," you get into issues of cultural and religious beliefs that can't be ignored.

but

at what point do we take a step back and ask what benefit any given intervention will have for that patient? when do we stop thinking with grief and emotion and consider the reality of the situation? i do not think end of life issues should be decided by a random govt entity. its between the physicians and the family. there needs to be a safer way for healthcare providers to be frank with families and refuse tx when they feel its warranted. and families should NOT be allowed to not comply with a DNR order signed by patient. ever.

CoffeeQueen · Guru

tabatha wrote:

i have a lot to say on this topic.

and for every proposed solution, the biggest problem is the patient(s) and how they screw that up, too.

and i want to be clear that not everyone misuses the system available, or is a ne'er do well, etc.

i am not "healthy" and i know that ppl like me are part of the problem, i am lucky that the system isn't set up so that i pay way more (i do pay a fat tax on my life insurance, LOL). and i know that there are lots of ppl that are trying and struggling and i know what it was like to not have insurance on my kid and pray that nothing really bad happens. i see the good and the bad.

but you have to address the "bad" (lets call them misinformed, shall we) because thats where so much of the problem comes from.

if you can't find a way to prevent those people from sucking the life out of the system, then you can't solve anything.

and then there is the elderly. and when you talk "end of life," you get into issues of cultural and religious beliefs that can't be ignored.

but

at what point do we take a step back and ask what benefit any given intervention will have for that patient? when do we stop thinking with grief and emotion and consider the reality of the situation? i do not think end of life issues should be decided by a random govt entity. its between the physicians and the family. there needs to be a safer way for healthcare providers to be frank with families and refuse tx when they feel its warranted. and families should NOT be allowed to not comply with a DNR order signed by patient. ever.

you really think the biggest problem is the patient?

I guess I disagree with that. I know where you are coming from and know what you see. I come from a long line of medical professionals and have heard all sides. I work with a lot of parents who are in private practice and who treat the wealthy and the poor. All I can say it is a broken system and it is not always the fault of the patient. Sure there are uneducated people out there and that will always be the case. That is a problem that has nothing to do with health care.

When you see these people that have not had health care for years and they live on crap for food, etc. There is a bigger issue here that is not just as simple as they are on welfare and expect to be treated for free. Gosh, it is such a crazy cycle and if we turn our backs on these people and just think of the middle class or rich then where are we then?

This is so hard for me to break down. My thoughts are all over with this issue so what I am saying here makes no sense and I realize that. I cannot find the time to write it all out.

I think in the big picture we may agree, but I am not sure I am sold on the fact that we are the problem.

tabatha · Senior Member

CoffeeQueen wrote:

tabatha wrote:

CoffeeQueen wrote:

tabatha wrote:

CoffeeQueen wrote:

3s_a_crowd wrote:

just an observation. no one here particularly, but people are begging for govt healthcare and then with this saying government should stay out or that there wrong.

FTR I think its ridiculous this reccommendationg though

Not that I am in either camp, but I think there is a difference in actual medical guidelines coming from the gov. and people wanting medical reform. It is not that people are begging for gov. health care.
I mean if you look at history people bucked social security back then, medicade, etc. People do not like change and no change is 100% perfect. It is so complex and no easy advice.

health care reform mandated by the government = medical guidelines from the government
besides, the government already has their hands in it
medicare sets the standard for what most private insurers pay
who runs medicare?
you can't fix healthcare in the US because the problem is not just the delivery of healthcare, but the consumption of those resources and more importantly, the american attitude of immediate entitlement.
which is really the problem
no matter what they do, it will still be screwed up

I totally agree. I know that medicare is run by gov. I just still am not convinced that this health care that is coming down the pipeline is going to be gov. run. I hope it is not run like medicare.

but what i'm saying is the system that exists could potentially be solvent or manageable were it not for the consumers of that system and the much larger issue of who "social welfare" gets doled out to.

i, of course, see this type of stuff all the time.

its the people

and they aren't changing.

reform is still not going to help the people that need it most.

military healthcare (TRICARE) is a perfect example of why giving people something for "nothing" only exacerbates the sense of entitlement that creates the waste.

*i would like to say, however, that the subsidized healthcare provided to the military is paid for in lieu of a bigger paycheck.

and i want to say that a better way to do things is to make people responsible for their own healthcare. and if we weren't always catering to the lowest common denominator that might work. and the other problem with that is that you expect people to know something that it isn't their job to know.

ex: i know that getting a flu test to confirm H1N1 in no way changes the tx or expected outcome. it is my job to know this. not yours (necessarily). so is it really fair to expect non-medical people to make decisions about what care they do or dont need?

or you can mandate health care by saying you must have it and if you can't afford it we will give it to you for free. and that still doesn't solve anything because you can't make people keep themselves healthy. and then you still spend $$$ trying to fix something that could have been avoided or dx earlier.

i swear to you that it is the american people that screwed themselves. this culture is afraid of death, wants everything now and thinks its ok to sue someone because they gave you the hot coffee you asked for.

fat people and smokers should have to pay more for insurance! they cost more!

"healthy" people should not have to pay as much- they use less

20yr olds do not need the same coverage as an 80yr old

people do not need to know what doctors and nurses know, but it's your body, your kids, etc and you ultimately have to take *some* ownership for it and proactively work at keeping the life you were given. people don't own a car for a year and never get the oil changed, do they??

Sorry to T/J this

I understand Tab. I really do and from what I have been reading this is not going to be a situation where you are covered by the gov. It will mandate they have the insurance, but it will be in lieu of a lower pay from employer or something of that nature. I really do not even know what will ever become of it.

I think that the US does go to the Dr. for every little thing. I do disagree though on a few things in terms of younger people not needing the same coverage,etc. You never know when you will need that coverage. I would hate to have a system that says you are 20 and therefore you do not need this or that covered.

If I take me for example. I have insurance through my husbands work. HE pays a percentage and his company pays the remainder. Because or rising health care cost the deductible has gone up and I pay more. I mean between 80/20 coverage, 2,000 deductable, 40 co pays, etc. I pay out a lot per year. It would be even more if I had no insurance and I understand that. I am not expecting something for nothing, but I think that what is being charged is out of control too. I think there needs to be some kind of system in place to keep Dr. from taking advantage of the system and vise versa.

I do not think it is entirely the fault of the people.

a 20yr old already can't get things covered that an 80yr old can, unless a doc makes it happen.

but really, why does a 20yr old need to same exact thing as an 80yr old? or even a 50yr old for that matter.

idk exactly how catastrophic coverage works, or how it works/costs but presumably that would be a good option for lots of folks.

i think ppl should go to the doctor when they want. i'm not for limiting access to primary care at all.

i'm not clear on how doctors are taking advantage of the system. especially in primary care or high risk specialties. i know lots of docs these days and not a one of them would say they are banking- especially in relation to the work required. i'd argue that lots of docs are underpaid in the sense that there are things you simply cant place a monetary value on.

and i have never read anything that demonstrates how your run of the mill doc is working the system. even when they do "work the system" its basically their job to do so in order to generate $ for the facility.

and the problem with saying insurance costs too much (to the point of wanting someone else to make it more affordable) is for every action there is a reaction. ok, so your copay is lower. but now you don't get any free annual visits and copays for admissions, meds, etc cost more.

they aren't giving that money up- its going to come back somewhere. like if the insurance companies decide that the new mammogram recommendations are a good idea.

(these are just examples)

you are right, it isn't just the people creating the problem. (the other 2% is something else, like effin JCAHO) but in the discussion of how to fix the problem, the personal responsibility factor is frequently omitted.

tabatha · Senior Member

CoffeeQueen wrote:

tabatha wrote:

i have a lot to say on this topic.

and for every proposed solution, the biggest problem is the patient(s) and how they screw that up, too.

and i want to be clear that not everyone misuses the system available, or is a ne'er do well, etc.

i am not "healthy" and i know that ppl like me are part of the problem, i am lucky that the system isn't set up so that i pay way more (i do pay a fat tax on my life insurance, LOL). and i know that there are lots of ppl that are trying and struggling and i know what it was like to not have insurance on my kid and pray that nothing really bad happens. i see the good and the bad.

but you have to address the "bad" (lets call them misinformed, shall we) because thats where so much of the problem comes from.

if you can't find a way to prevent those people from sucking the life out of the system, then you can't solve anything.

and then there is the elderly. and when you talk "end of life," you get into issues of cultural and religious beliefs that can't be ignored.

but

at what point do we take a step back and ask what benefit any given intervention will have for that patient? when do we stop thinking with grief and emotion and consider the reality of the situation? i do not think end of life issues should be decided by a random govt entity. its between the physicians and the family. there needs to be a safer way for healthcare providers to be frank with families and refuse tx when they feel its warranted. and families should NOT be allowed to not comply with a DNR order signed by patient. ever.

you really think the biggest problem is the patient?

I guess I disagree with that. I know where you are coming from and know what you see. I come from a long line of medical professionals and have heard all sides. I work with a lot of parents who are in private practice and who treat the wealthy and the poor. All I can say it is a broken system and it is not always the fault of the patient. Sure there are uneducated people out there and that will always be the case. That is a problem that has nothing to do with health care.

When you see these people that have not had health care for years and they live on crap for food, etc. There is a bigger issue here that is not just as simple as they are on welfare and expect to be treated for free. Gosh, it is such a crazy cycle and if we turn our backs on these people and just think of the middle class or rich then where are we then?

This is so hard for me to break down. My thoughts are all over with this issue so what I am saying here makes no sense and I realize that. I cannot find the time to write it all out.

I think in the big picture we may agree, but I am not sure I am sold on the fact that we are the problem.

the problem isn't "poor people." it really isn't. i said before that part of the problem with access to care as it relates to cost goes into issues of social welfare. which is not something i care to delve into here, but something that can't be ignored when addressing healthcare.

here's an example of why pts are screwing themselves:

pt with renal failure and multiple other medical issues needs dialysis 3x a week. so, dialysis is not optional for people that need it. pt has dialysis covered by medicaid or something similar. pt decides (not for the first time) to skip dialysis for a week or so, not take their meds, etc. so of course they get sick, start feeling bad, and come to the ER and they (surprise!) need emergency dialysis, you know, so they don't die. they get admitted to the hosp, after multiple whatevers in the ER and we call in the doctor, dialysis nurses, etc. other docs start writing up admission orders and on and on. so, we dialyze this pt. who then refuses their meds. and then, after ALL OF THAT they leave the floor AMA.

big huge bill. that will never be paid. if you leave AMA no insurance company will cover the bill.

this pt will do that several times. a few things could happen here, but no doc wants to get sued for refusing to see a pt, esp if all the other docs in town "fired" that pt and the ER has no choice but to see this pt and the hospital similarly has no choice but to treat them. you can't deny lifesaving care on the basis of nonpayment.

but you should be able to refuse to treat that pt when they are clearly not interested in taking care of themselves. why should the hosp have to pay for your complete lack of caring about your own health.

but lets just say we do that. we say "we are not going to help you today."

i want to say that pt deserves the painful death they keep working towards. but as a person, can i literally do that? refuse to help them? and if i do, am i judging them? because it is my job to not let my perception of my patient affect how i care for them when it comes to stuff like this.

and i honestly do not know the answer to that question. i did not like that lady or what she did, but in my capacity as a nurse, i do not know if i could really refuse to help someone standing right in front of me.

but i also wonder if we said "no more" would she straighten up? would she suddenly be more interested in her LIFE if someone refused to help her? would she then help herself?

and she isn't even an extreme example. but she is an example of how the mess got created. there are LOTS of ppl like her out there. its not the migrant worker that has a massive cellulitis from a wound he tried to take care of himself because he has no insurance. those people come in so sick. and that does cost a lot. but they won't do it over and over.

then there's my job now. you don't have to pay at my ER. you don't have to pay at any, but of course on post, its all subsidized by tricare. ppl bring kid #1 for a cold or whatever, and then sign in kid #2 "just because." um, if you were forking over a copay you def would not do that. and you wouldn't come in to the ER for just anything if you had to pay a copay for it. so we send them home with motrin and tylenol. that they pick up for free downstairs.

so the hosp gives out gallons of this stuff, every day, day after day. we could save a lot of money not doing that, but then the patients (who are frequently considered "clients" as in, a customer) would be unhappy. so we waste all this money to make them happy. the docs get in trouble if the pt is unhappy. and the patients are horrified at the thought of paying for it themselves.

so you see, its this big cycle of waste. something for nothing. right now. and if i don't get it, i'm gonna sue you.

and i have really scratched my brain over all these things...and everytime it comes down to the patients or something indirectly related. like, things hospitals do to make patients happy because JCAHO says it makes patients happy. and JCAHO is how you get accredited, which you need to accept medicare, which runs the universe and -once again- is run by the government. so thats money. the other 2%, lol

no matter how i look at it, thats what i see. how patients screwed themselves.

i'm being completely honest when i say that if there is something i am not considering- i'd like to know.

and thats why, although i have lots of thoughts and passion on the topic of healthcare, the reform issue almost doesn't matter. because i don't see how making it easier is going to fix anything.

Juni · Guru

tabatha wrote:

at what point do we take a step back and ask what benefit any given intervention will have for that patient? when do we stop thinking with grief and emotion and consider the reality of the situation? i do not think end of life issues should be decided by a random govt entity. its between the physicians and the family. there needs to be a safer way for healthcare providers to be frank with families and refuse tx when they feel its warranted. and families should NOT be allowed to not comply with a DNR order signed by patient. ever.

Seriously, I could not agree more. My grandmother went through so much more than she needed to because of this. My uncle had power of attorney (or whatever the title is to allow medical decisions) and her life was extended so much and in such an inhumane way she had a doctor walk out and say he wouldn't treat her because he disagreed with him wanting them to resucitate her by any means necessary.

On the flip side - they did tests to confirm suspicions even when the treatment for it was not something they could do anyway. Why put her through all of that, ya know? Ugh. It's ridiculous.