Postby Foxchild » Mon Aug 24, 2009 9:02 pm
Terminally ill could be a few weeks, a few months, or even a few years. Terminally ill simply means that you -will- die from this condition if something else doesn't get to you first, and that you are not able to be cured.
And that's 10 percent of surgeries for the entire fiscal year, 24% of the surgeries remaining in this fiscal year.
Electively necessary would be like the vein surgery needed in one of my legs (assuming the consult I have on Wed. determines what is believed to be the case). I won't die if I don't get this done immediately, but until I do, I can't do any heavy lifting, run, or otherwise raise my blood pressure. This inhibits what I'm allowed and able to do in my workplace, as well as personal life. It may be "electively" necessary, but that means necessary.
Cataracts fall into this category, tonsillitis, restorative plastic surgery (so, burn victims, physical trauma disfigurations, etc). That's acceptable? And telling a terminally ill lung cancer patient estimated to have a year left to live falls and breaks a hip that she can't have the hip replacement needed, and is instead bed-ridden for the last remaining year of her life? She'll lose the will to live before half that has passed under those conditions.
*edit* after further reading, this also includes diagnostic surgery, in that definition. Meaning, something potentially life threatening COULD be found, but would be delayed because of this.
Also, I was mistaken in one line I read initially, which actually makes this worse; the 10% referenced here is actually stating it's 10% of the medically necessary surgeries for the entire fiscal year. If I were told my vascular surgery was going to be pushed back by more than 6 months because my insurance company was going bankrupt for the year, I'd LEAVE THAT INSURANCE COMPANY.
*double-edit* I've just figured this all out; it simply needs to be close to design like any medical care facility; you can't deny service for any reason (the close being non-payment of your premiums), and must provide a flat rate for each level of contract. Having to take on the previously 'uninsurable' will cause the companies to re-negotiate the rates payed for various surgeries, procedures, and the rest of the medical compliment, driving down medical costs. the inability to charge one person more for personal health insurance for the same coverage makes it as easily accessible for everyone. Group discounts that are given to corporations for large numbers of policies would remain the same (potentially reducing the premium payed by the individual employee, depending upon several factors). ... I'd possibly think over something along the lines of the FDIC but for insurance companies specifically related to health and pre-existing conditions, thus ensuring coverage for all health aspects, though this could probably be created more efficiently internally to each company with a federal mandate specifying certain requirements. Perhaps even a federal mandate for a minimum entry level on a plan, specified for ER care and life threatening problems, plus 1 or 2 physicals a year, for a next-to-nothing cost. It would still be on the individual to chose if they were insured or not.
Hell, one other option would be to provide a government loan for care at a rate below inflation. Anything lost because it's below the inflation rate could come from taxes, the rest payed back over however many years needed. If a person goes bankrupt, the cost gets eaten, much as any debt does with bankruptcy. Takes a lot less tax money, and allows uninsurred to get surgery after negotiations with the hospital on price. Plus, that's only if the hospital doesn't offer some other form of uninsured discount and either low or no interest payment plan option as all NOVA facilities do near me.
Last edited by
Foxchild on Mon Aug 24, 2009 9:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If you've done things right, people won't be sure if you've done anything at all.