65
   

IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

 
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 11:41 am
The poverty-sticken derive their health care benefits from the MEDICAID program. Cool
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 11:42 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Well, some very interesting points.

My opinion might be of minor interest, but here every mother/child gets the support by their health insurance - children are either insured by the mother or the father; if only one is employed, by the insurance of that parent (which covers the health care of the other parnt as well).

And every has is been looked by several specialists in 10 different medical examinations, from birth to the age of 68 months, and than again at the age of ten and twelve.

I had thought that such was reducing infant mortality. But thanks for pointing out the race factor.


The RACE factor is part of the CULTURAL factor.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 12:01 pm
okie wrote:
Infant mortality is just one example of health care that clearly demonstrates one of the most important factors in health care, such as infant mortality, is cultural.


I don't follow you here.

You seem to be saying that American society is going to the dogs (assuming that's what you mean by cultural). All of those divorces, single mums, teenage pregnancies, etc. etc.

Still, it doesn't make sense from a statistical point of view. I agree that it is of some concern if you have such a high rate of teenage pregnancies. But statistically, infant mortality should rather be lower when you have younger parents than higher.

So if younger age doesn't account for the increased infant mortality rate, it must be something else - and the bit you quoted seems to confirm that:

okie wrote:
Increasing the risk of infant mortality in teen births is the fact that teens are least likely to access medical care during the first trimester of pregnancy, during the remainder of their pregnancy, and after their baby is born.



So it's not so much the fact that a high percentage of teens get pregnant (what you seem to call cultural), but rather that those teens that do get pregnant don't get sufficient health care.


So I guess I'm not quite sure about the thrust of your argument: are you saying that the health care system in the US is really better than it appears to be from infant mortality rates, because you have to take into account that people simply don't have access to good health care?
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 12:01 pm
Miller wrote:
old europe wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
What about the crack addicts living in the slums that is unemployed. Which insurance covers them and their children?


If they are unemployed they can get unemployment benefits from the state.


Whether or not they qualify for unemployment benifits depends on the reason for their unemployment and whether they were employed in a full or part-time basis.


I assume you're talking about the US?
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 12:09 pm
McGentrix wrote:
So, point A) is that an unemployed crack addict living in an abandoned hovel will get some sort of public assistance, and out of that money, they HAVE to pay for some sort of healthcare insurance, is that right?


Yes. They will have to apply for that, though. The state cannot really force you to accept the money, and things might be difficult if you're dealing with crack addicts.
Street workers would probably have to get involved. Also, if you're talking about an unemployed crack addict living in an abandoned, uhm, house or something, it's not very likely that the children would be in his/her custody.


McGentrix wrote:
Point B) is that there is no way for them to avoid paying that? What if they just want to buy more crack? If they do not wish to spend their unemployment benefits on insurance, there is no out for them?


Right.


McGentrix wrote:
Point C) Doesn't seem clear at all considering point A) and B).


I guess you'll have to look at the two issues involved here - how do you guarantee universal health care, and how do you treat crack addicts - separately.


McGentrix wrote:
Maybe Walter can clear it all up as he has the answers.


Maybe he can. He knows a lot.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 12:48 pm
old europe wrote:
Miller wrote:
old europe wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
What about the crack addicts living in the slums that is unemployed. Which insurance covers them and their children?


If they are unemployed they can get unemployment benefits from the state.


Whether or not they qualify for unemployment benifits depends on the reason for their unemployment and whether they were employed in a full or part-time basis.


I assume you're talking about the US?


Your assumption is correct.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 12:51 pm
Miller wrote:
Quote:
traditional families.


OKIE: With a divorce rate equal or greater than 50%, I'm inclined to believe that "traditional families" are a thing of the past. Sad


If we recognize it as a problem, and then try to correct the problem, we might at least have hope of improvement. Tax policies are just one area that we could use to further encourage traditional families.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 12:51 pm
Quote:
those teens that do get pregnant don't get sufficient health care.


Many of these kids abort the fetus right in the high school bathroom. Others abort at home and toss the fetus out in the trash.

Still others abort in a clinic, after parental signature has been obtained.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 12:54 pm
McGentrix wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Is there a state by state breakdown of infant mortality rates?


Found this, seems the southern states bring down our average a bit.

link


As most Americans know, the Southern states are suffering from a physician shortage, especially in the rural areas.

Remember too, that literacy is minimal in many areas of the deep South.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 01:03 pm
mcg wrote :

Quote:
So, point A) is that an unemployed crack addict living in an abandoned hovel will get some sort of public assistance, and out of that money, they HAVE to pay for some sort of healthcare insurance, is that right?


here in the cold north - aka canada - it works slightly different .
a) the crack addict would get social welfare benefits ,
b) he would be entitled to the benefits under the ontario health benefit plan - just like every other citizen of the province ,
c) since health premiums in ontario are payable at the time income taxes are due AND are based on taxable income , he would only have to pay a health insurance premium if his TAXABLE income is OVER $20,000 ; so he would quite possible not pay a health insurance premium .
hbg
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 01:07 pm
I think in Massachusetts, now the penalty begins at 3X the poverty level ( about $30,000 ). Cool
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 01:22 pm
Miller wrote:
old europe wrote:
Miller wrote:
old europe wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
What about the crack addicts living in the slums that is unemployed. Which insurance covers them and their children?


If they are unemployed they can get unemployment benefits from the state.


Whether or not they qualify for unemployment benifits depends on the reason for their unemployment and whether they were employed in a full or part-time basis.


I assume you're talking about the US?


Your assumption is correct.


I was referring to Germany and Walter's post actually.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 01:26 pm
hamburger wrote:
mcg wrote :

Quote:
So, point A) is that an unemployed crack addict living in an abandoned hovel will get some sort of public assistance, and out of that money, they HAVE to pay for some sort of healthcare insurance, is that right?


here in the cold north - aka canada - it works slightly different .
a) the crack addict would get social welfare benefits ,
b) he would be entitled to the benefits under the ontario health benefit plan - just like every other citizen of the province ,
c) since health premiums in ontario are payable at the time income taxes are due AND are based on taxable income , he would only have to pay a health insurance premium if his TAXABLE income is OVER $20,000 ; so he would quite possible not pay a health insurance premium .
hbg


Ok, that makes sense. So, a young woman, addicted to crack in Toronto uses her body in trade for crack, gets pregnant. How does Canadian health care assure her baby doesn't become a statistic for infant mortality?

I ask this because here in the US, that is not a rare example in New York City, Chicago, Atlanta, L.A., Seattle, Dallas, New Orleans, etc...
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 01:42 pm
Quote:
uses her body in trade for crack, gets pregnant


DSS takes the baby away from the mother and the Judge sentences the mother to jail for prostitution and drug possession.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 02:10 pm
mcg wrote :

Quote:
How does Canadian health care assure her baby doesn't become a statistic for infant mortality?


i don't know that ANY SYSTEM can ASSURE that the baby doesn't become
"a statistic for infant mortality " - i very much doubt NOT providing health care will be of any benefit to the baby or the mother .

recent reports indicate that "fetal alcohol syndrome" seems to be the biggest problem to the newborn - and it seems to strike the babies of the wealthy as much as the babies of the poor , from what i hear .
hbg
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 02:13 pm
Quote:
"fetal alcohol syndrome" seems to be the biggest problem to the newborn - and it seems to strike the babies of the wealthy as much as the babies of the poor

It's also a felony in the USA.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 02:26 pm
just catching up on some magazine reading , i find that BUSINESSWEEK of july 9 , has an article under the heading of THE FRENCH LESSON IN HEALTH CARE .
since BUSINESSWEEK is not a particularly socialist or left-leaning ( Shocked Laughing ) magazine , i thought it might of interest to some of our american friends .
hbg

Quote:
France spends just 10.7% of its gross domestic product on health care, while the U.S. lays out 16%, more than any other nation.

To grasp how the French system works, think about Medicare for the elderly in the U.S., then expand that to encompass the entire population. French medicine is based on a widely held value that the healthy should pay for care of the sick. Everyone has access to the same basic coverage through national insurance funds, to which every employer and employee contributes. The government picks up the tab for the unemployed who cannot gain coverage through a family member.

SAFETY NET
But the french system is much more generous to its entire population than the U.S. is to its seniors. Unlike with Medicare, there are no deductibles, just modest co- payments that are dismissed for the chronically ill. Additionally, almost all French buy supplemental insurance, similar to Medigap, which reduces their out-of-pocket costs and covers extra expenses such as private hospital rooms, eyeglasses, and dental care.

In France, the sicker you get, the less you pay. Chronic diseases, such as diabetes, and critical surgeries, such as a coronary bypass, are reimbursed at 100%. Cancer patients are treated free of charge. Patients suffering from colon cancer, for instance, can receive Genentech Inc.'s (DNA ) Avastin without charge. In the U.S., a patient may pay $48,000 a year.


France particularly excels in prenatal and early childhood care. Since 1945 the country has built a widespread network of thousands of health-care facilities, called Protection Maternelle et Infantile (PMI), to ensure that every mother and child in the country receives basic preventive care. Children are evaluated by a team of private-practice pediatricians, nurses, midwives, psychologists, and social workers. When parents fail to bring their children in for regular checkups, social workers are dispatched to the family home. Mothers even receive a financial incentive for attending their pre- and post-natal visits.

A typical PMI can be found in Goutte d'Or, a poor neighborhood at the foot of Montmartre that has been home for the past 20 years to a swelling population of immigrants from Africa and Southeast Asia. On Rue Cavé, a tidy modern building is given over entirely to caring for expecting mothers, infants, and young children. The place usually is bustling with kids scrambling over toys, while mothers, often immigrants in colorful headdresses and with babies strapped to their backs, talk to their doctors as part of twice-monthly evaluations.

PMI and other such programs are starting to get attention in U.S. health-care circles. "If we really want to ensure that no child is left behind, then the PMI system is a good way to do it," says Daniel J. Pedersen, president of the Buffett Early Childhood Fund. "It's based on the practical idea that high-quality investments made at the start of a child's life will pay huge dividends to both the child and society in the future."


SOURCE :
BUSINESSWEEK : FRENCH LESSON IN HEALTH CARE
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 07:14 pm
More great news about universal health care programs around the world:

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/pol/397029255.html

The following from that link:

"The NHS is suffering from a chronic shortage of specialist beds which means seriously injured patients are having to wait for days in severe pain, according to a leading surgeon.

He said the hospital system was paralysed by red tape and funding disputes, which put thousands of patients waiting for treatment in specialist wards at risk.

In a damning critique of current NHS policy, Martin Bircher, a consultant treating victims of major accidents, said the best efforts of doctors and nurses on the frontline were hampered by layers of managers whose major concern is the budget rather than patient care. "
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Aug, 2007 07:27 pm
Hamburger, that is a great piece. It is significant that it comes from Business Week.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Aug, 2007 02:30 am
okie wrote:
More great news about universal health care programs around the world...



Luckily, we don't have to take the word of some blogger on the internet for it, but can have a look some numbers. The following numbers for the UK and the US are from the OECD Health Data 2007 report...

practising physicians per 1 000 population:

- USA: 2.4
- UK: 2.4

nurses per 1 000 population:

- USA: 7.9
- UK: 9.1

acute care hospital beds per 1 000 population:

- USA: 2.7
- UK: 3.1


And now let's look at this in relation to the total health spending per capita:

- USA: 6,401 USD
- UK: 2,724 USD


(source)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.26 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 10:19:06