Get E-Mail Updates

Health-Care Bankruptcies Hurt All of Us

A bankruptcy office was not on my dream list of places to work after college. The legal realm seemed opaque and impersonal. I expected a job in a law office to consist of filing court papers and researching statutes -- not interacting with people.

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

I certainly didn't expect that a bankruptcy office could double as an intimate classroom for learning about human experience.

It's hard to ignore the humanity of bankruptcy clients while photocopying towering stacks of their medical bills. Often, clients would receive so many bills that they'd just stop opening them. In those cases, the legal assistants and clients would crowd around a conference table together and attack the piles of envelopes with letter-openers. During these times, stories started coming out.

One young couple who visited our office had an infant in tow whose rare illness left the family financially devastated. The child -- whose head was slightly enlarged and misshapen from a string of surgeries -- was perched on his petite mother's lap as she tried to list all of her creditors. The child's father had started his own construction business and was having trouble soliciting jobs during a recession. Without employer-provided health benefits, the family budget wouldn't allow for an expensive insurance policy.

By the time they filed for bankruptcy, this young family had already experienced their share of stress and fear; the endless tests and procedures listed on the medical bills could attest to that. Unfortunately, however, the trials didn't end when the treatments were finished. The couple also had to deal with the stigma associated with filing for bankruptcy (bankruptcies are published in local newspapers -- a fact many clients dread). Add to that the personal shame many people feel when they can't pay the medical professionals who cared for them. And don't forget about ruined credit scores and surrendered homes.

Admittedly, plenty of the folks who file for bankruptcy have created their own problems. They've financed cars they can't afford, or they've grown addicted to the easy swipe of credit cards. But many of those who darkened our office door weren't irresponsible; they were hard-working people who lacked the safety nets that many of us enjoy. We regularly filed cases for small businesspeople -- masons, electricians, hairdressers -- who had barely managed to make ends meet until a medical emergency pushed them past their limit.

Even if compassion for the uninsured doesn't move you to support health-care reform, there's a legitimate self-interest argument to make here, too. The uninsured are not the sole victims of medical bankruptcies. The lack of universal health insurance is already dealing a blow to our nation's economy. When people file for bankruptcy, medical providers aren't the only companies taking a financial hit; the debtors' other creditors lose money as well. This hurts all of us.

To suggest that health-care reform will bankrupt our nation, as Bill O'Reilly did on his show in August, ignores the casualties of our current system -- on both the individual and the national level. In fact, to people who've had to liquidate their assets after enduring a life-threatening illness, such a suggestion might feel more like an insult.

Amy Barger is an editorial assistant for Sojourners.

+Click here to tell Bill O'Reilly that Americans are already going bankrupt from health-care costs

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: Faydine

09-16-2009 @ 4:22pm

I must say, in this great debate on health care...my friend gave birth to a baby with a previously undetected diaphragmtic hernia. They flew her and her baby to a hospital that was maybe 20 minutes away by car. The baby stayed in the hospital for about 4 weeks, recieving great care, and fully recovered.

At that same time, her husband was diagnosed with colon cancer at the age of 22. That was treated and taken care of. Then cancer spread to several other parts of his lower G.I. areas and they keep fighting and so far he keeps winning. He's in the prison system, so he doesn't pay for any of it. At least not yet. I wonder if he'll get a bill if he's ever released.

Similarly, the baby that was flown to the hospital that specializes in diaphragmatic hernias, is a medicaide baby. So while our system doesn't work in so many ways, I for one, am encouraged that these two individuals, who probably shouldn't have gotten this kind of treatment, were able to get remarkably good care.

by: socialmaker

09-23-2009 @ 9:57am

I think people need a more personal approach when it comes to doctors. I know i have a doctor which takes care of my problems(vigrx) and he is so nice. He always knows me by name, he's friendly and i gladly attent every meeting.

by: SisterMarie

09-16-2009 @ 5:41pm

Questions for JohnH54 and lumens:

Do you guys actually have jobs in which you perform some service in exchange for pay? Or do you sit by your home computer all day waiting for the latest post here so you can crap all over it?

Are you the same person or are you two different persons? And if you are two different persons, I'd advise whoever is out front not to stop suddenly to avoid a great embarrassment for the guy who is trailing.

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 6:59pm

"Do you guys actually have jobs in which you perform some service in exchange for pay?"

Yep.

"Or do you sit by your home computer all day waiting for the latest post here so you can crap all over it?"

Nope. Also, you post here plenty, so you're being a bit of a hypocrite.

"Are you the same person or are you two different persons?"

We are two different persons.

"And if you are two different persons, I'd advise whoever is out front not to stop suddenly to avoid a great embarrassment for the guy who is trailing."

It's funny how the liberals here never even bother to defend the logic of the posts. I wouldn't want to take on that burden either, but still...

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 1:16pm

The alternative to individual bankruptcies seems to be bankrupting the country.

How is that better?

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 1:41pm

"To suggest that health-care reform will bankrupt our nation, as Bill O'Reilly did on his show in August, ignores the casualties of our current system - on both the individual and the national level. "

No it doesn't. There are ways to reform the system that would curb individual bankruptcies WITHOUT a large outlay from the federal government.

by: cmpnwtr

09-16-2009 @ 3:09pm

My sister in law, facing life threatening cancer, now told her insurance will not cover further cancer treatment, is looking at medical bankruptcy in addition to the prospects of losing her life. There is a moral and a financial price we all pay for abandonment and constructing a social order based on social darwinism. Yes, we all pay for every bankruptcy, we all pay for a medical system that is constructed to feed corporate profits, and mostly we all pay for abandoning "the least of these." We lose our soul.

by: WaveTossed

09-16-2009 @ 4:22pm

There are ways to help people with insurance and medical bills. There are regulations that would prevent insurance companies from refusing to cover those with pre-existing conditions and would prevent them from cutting off people because they get sick.

Sen. Baucus's bill provides for non-profit co-ops to provide affordable insurance. This sounds like a reasonable course of action.

Some people would state that the government cannot even afford this care. I don't believe it -- is this truly a 3rd world country where people are left to die in the streets? One way that health care reform could be made affordable is if the government would stop all of the foreign military ventures.

by: kansasmennonite

09-16-2009 @ 10:03pm

John, are you admitting that there is so much medical care needed here that it would backrupt the country if we tried to prevent that? We are in a world of hurt aren't we?

by: Faydine

09-16-2009 @ 4:22pm

I must say, in this great debate on health care...my friend gave birth to a baby with a previously undetected diaphragmtic hernia. They flew her and her baby to a hospital that was maybe 20 minutes away by car. The baby stayed in the hospital for about 4 weeks, recieving great care, and fully recovered.

At that same time, her husband was diagnosed with colon cancer at the age of 22. That was treated and taken care of. Then cancer spread to several other parts of his lower G.I. areas and they keep fighting and so far he keeps winning. He's in the prison system, so he doesn't pay for any of it. At least not yet. I wonder if he'll get a bill if he's ever released.

Similarly, the baby that was flown to the hospital that specializes in diaphragmatic hernias, is a medicaide baby. So while our system doesn't work in so many ways, I for one, am encouraged that these two individuals, who probably shouldn't have gotten this kind of treatment, were able to get remarkably good care.

by: kansasmennonite

09-16-2009 @ 10:09pm

A guy (that works with deomocrats and republ.) on NPR the other day said that the republicans are in a hard spot. Their plan won't do a thing because the pre-exisisting problem will never be picked up by insurance comp. unless everyone is mandated to get covered and that means money to help the poorer people get covered which the Republicans don't want no part of. Does my wording make sense? In other words, the republicans at this time aren't doing a thing to fix the problem. They might as well go home and sit untill a plan is passed.

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 11:15pm

Your wording makes sense, but I don't think it puts Republicans in a hard spot, politically. Republicans are happy to make it easy to purchase health insurance at a young age, and most people think that some measure of personal responsibility should be built into the system.

For most people, the "problem" is not the number of uninsured, but the volatility and expense associated with our current system. The Democrats are nominally addressing the volatility issue, but are making the system more expensive in exchange.

And yes, the opposition party often sits on its hands when the majority passes a bill. Nothing new.

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 11:39pm

What I'm saying is that they way the Democrats are approaching this will bankrupt the country. There are other ways to approach this, but Obama's pie in the sky promises to cover everything at lower cost is just not realistic or financially viable.

by: SisterMarie

09-16-2009 @ 5:41pm

Questions for JohnH54 and lumens:

Do you guys actually have jobs in which you perform some service in exchange for pay? Or do you sit by your home computer all day waiting for the latest post here so you can crap all over it?

Are you the same person or are you two different persons? And if you are two different persons, I'd advise whoever is out front not to stop suddenly to avoid a great embarrassment for the guy who is trailing.

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 11:40pm

Typical. You never respond substantively to anything. You are capable of rational thought, aren't you?

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 6:59pm

"Do you guys actually have jobs in which you perform some service in exchange for pay?"

Yep.

"Or do you sit by your home computer all day waiting for the latest post here so you can crap all over it?"

Nope. Also, you post here plenty, so you're being a bit of a hypocrite.

"Are you the same person or are you two different persons?"

We are two different persons.

"And if you are two different persons, I'd advise whoever is out front not to stop suddenly to avoid a great embarrassment for the guy who is trailing."

It's funny how the liberals here never even bother to defend the logic of the posts. I wouldn't want to take on that burden either, but still...

by: kansasmennonite

09-16-2009 @ 10:03pm

John, are you admitting that there is so much medical care needed here that it would backrupt the country if we tried to prevent that? We are in a world of hurt aren't we?

by: kansasmennonite

09-16-2009 @ 10:09pm

A guy (that works with deomocrats and republ.) on NPR the other day said that the republicans are in a hard spot. Their plan won't do a thing because the pre-exisisting problem will never be picked up by insurance comp. unless everyone is mandated to get covered and that means money to help the poorer people get covered which the Republicans don't want no part of. Does my wording make sense? In other words, the republicans at this time aren't doing a thing to fix the problem. They might as well go home and sit untill a plan is passed.

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 11:15pm

Your wording makes sense, but I don't think it puts Republicans in a hard spot, politically. Republicans are happy to make it easy to purchase health insurance at a young age, and most people think that some measure of personal responsibility should be built into the system.

For most people, the "problem" is not the number of uninsured, but the volatility and expense associated with our current system. The Democrats are nominally addressing the volatility issue, but are making the system more expensive in exchange.

And yes, the opposition party often sits on its hands when the majority passes a bill. Nothing new.

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 11:39pm

What I'm saying is that they way the Democrats are approaching this will bankrupt the country. There are other ways to approach this, but Obama's pie in the sky promises to cover everything at lower cost is just not realistic or financially viable.

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 11:40pm

Typical. You never respond substantively to anything. You are capable of rational thought, aren't you?

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:12pm

Tell us about ways to reform the system that would curb individual bankruptcies WITHOUT a large outlay from the federal government.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:13pm

Let's hear about other ways to approach this, John.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:15pm

Sen. Baucus's bill provides for non-profit co-ops to provide affordable insurance. This sounds like a reasonable course of action.

Co ops won't work, WT.
That's why the insurance industry is promoting them.

by: JohnH54

09-17-2009 @ 12:34pm

There has to be some element of personal responsibility put into place, just like there is in other areas of insurance. I do not have coverage for maintenance and minor repairs to my car. If I did, if everyone did, it would open the doors to abuse.

So, I would like to see a form of medical savings accounts where you are allowed a set amount per family which you are free to spend or not. It would be pre-tax dollars, and taxable only if you do not spend it. It might be $2,500-5,000 per family. You choose how that is spent. Insurance coverage would be for catastrophic or long-term chronic conditions.

That's a start. It's been proposed, but rejected, in part because it will put a burden on individuals to manage their own care.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:12pm

Tell us about ways to reform the system that would curb individual bankruptcies WITHOUT a large outlay from the federal government.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:13pm

Let's hear about other ways to approach this, John.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:15pm

Sen. Baucus's bill provides for non-profit co-ops to provide affordable insurance. This sounds like a reasonable course of action.

Co ops won't work, WT.
That's why the insurance industry is promoting them.

by: JohnH54

09-17-2009 @ 12:34pm

There has to be some element of personal responsibility put into place, just like there is in other areas of insurance. I do not have coverage for maintenance and minor repairs to my car. If I did, if everyone did, it would open the doors to abuse.

So, I would like to see a form of medical savings accounts where you are allowed a set amount per family which you are free to spend or not. It would be pre-tax dollars, and taxable only if you do not spend it. It might be $2,500-5,000 per family. You choose how that is spent. Insurance coverage would be for catastrophic or long-term chronic conditions.

That's a start. It's been proposed, but rejected, in part because it will put a burden on individuals to manage their own care.

by: JohnH54

09-17-2009 @ 7:12pm

Why don't you go ask the Democrats who are approaching Republicans about the Repulicans' plan.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/new...

There have always been alternative plans out there that are more fiscally responsible, but I understand that it is sometimes difficult to hear in that echo chamber you live in. :)

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 8:39pm

I've opened up a communications channel just for you, John.
Let's hear your favorite plan.
If you have one.

by: kansasmennonite

09-17-2009 @ 11:09pm

Where does the money come from? If from one's own savings that's exactly the plan I have and I don't wish it on anyone that doesn't have the money for basic dr. visits, etc. Currently I'm not getting some personal things done because it's coming out of my pocket and I probably couldn't even find out what the procedure would cost because of our messed up health coverage in this country.

I wrote about the replubicans plan in another column and a person who was interview on NPR about it. He said that the repub are in a hard spot becasue they want to eliminate pre-existing condtions but for the insurance comp. to accept that it will require a mandate to cover everyone and that means subsidies for the poor and that takes money from somewhere.

Your plan is basically in effect now and won't do a thing for current problems. What about pre-existing conditions? How about people who live from pay check to paycheck in low income jobs? What about a continuing preexisting cond. that requires thousands of dollars everyyear and not just a one time deal?

by: justintime

09-18-2009 @ 12:19pm

You're talking about Health Savings Accounts -- HSA's.
McCain's HSA proposal was inadequate to cover normal insurance premiums
and would have been a step backward.
However, HSA's may have a place in a reformed health care reform bill.
See Atlantic Monthly article, "How American Health Care Killed My
Father", in which the author makes a proposal for a health care system
including HSA's, catastrophic insurance and other features -- a good
article.

by: JohnH54

09-17-2009 @ 7:12pm

Why don't you go ask the Democrats who are approaching Republicans about the Repulicans' plan.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/new...

There have always been alternative plans out there that are more fiscally responsible, but I understand that it is sometimes difficult to hear in that echo chamber you live in. :)

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 12:57pm

Yes that is the name now. I had an insurance company client whose CEO was a big advocate of them back in the 80s. MSA is what we called them then and it is what has gotten written to my internal hard drive.

These are certainly not perfect or a comprehensive solution but would help get some market forces back in the picture but the party in power is unlikely to consider them.

OT: if there is waste and fraud (and I assume that there is with every govt program), why don't they demonstrate to us all the savings they can achieve over the next year and then come back with their comprehensive proposal? Otherwise, it looks like a takeover.

At some point individuals have to take responsibility for themselves and their families. I suppose that it's easier for me to say this now because I'm now considered "rich" by the left but I felt that way when I was only driving one day per week and eating soup and PBJ for months because it was all we could afford. But now, FCOL, I give a bunch to charity (usually 15% of gross) and pay about 50% of adjusted gross in taxes at all levels and pay my own medical (about $10K per year for the two of us). When is enough enough? These bills will cost me more money. Frankly I have had it. I really object to people like Jim Wallis who want to take more from what I earn and pat themselves on the back for how charitable they are.

I also own a small business that is in the not making any money stage. I can guarantee you that if any of the current proposals pass the likelihood that we will hire anyone is very, very slim.

Heard this recently: the bigger the govt, the smaller the people.

by: socialmaker

09-23-2009 @ 7:57am

I think people need a more personal approach when it comes to doctors. I know i have a doctor which takes care of my problems(vigrx) and he is so nice. He always knows me by name, he's friendly and i gladly attent every meeting.

by: Miami Health Insurance

09-20-2009 @ 6:00am

Healthcare is a major concern in the U.S. these days. With strong arguments on both sides, and heated debates, I'm certain this will be a major aspect of Obama's presidency. I don't think anyone believes in allowing others to suffer, but that's what's happening right now with everyone who's uninsured. You can't just turn a blind eye--we're all connected. And as the author stated, we're all paying for it, one way or another. So why aren't we moving in a direction of our own choosing? Just because something is doesn't mean it should be.

by: justintime

09-19-2009 @ 1:15pm

Better than nothing, Kevin.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 8:39pm

I've opened up a communications channel just for you, John.
Let's hear your favorite plan.
If you have one.

by: kansasmennonite

09-17-2009 @ 11:09pm

Where does the money come from? If from one's own savings that's exactly the plan I have and I don't wish it on anyone that doesn't have the money for basic dr. visits, etc. Currently I'm not getting some personal things done because it's coming out of my pocket and I probably couldn't even find out what the procedure would cost because of our messed up health coverage in this country.

I wrote about the replubicans plan in another column and a person who was interview on NPR about it. He said that the repub are in a hard spot becasue they want to eliminate pre-existing condtions but for the insurance comp. to accept that it will require a mandate to cover everyone and that means subsidies for the poor and that takes money from somewhere.

Your plan is basically in effect now and won't do a thing for current problems. What about pre-existing conditions? How about people who live from pay check to paycheck in low income jobs? What about a continuing preexisting cond. that requires thousands of dollars everyyear and not just a one time deal?

by: socialmaker

09-23-2009 @ 9:57am

I think people need a more personal approach when it comes to doctors. I know i have a doctor which takes care of my problems(vigrx) and he is so nice. He always knows me by name, he's friendly and i gladly attent every meeting.

by: justintime

09-18-2009 @ 12:19pm

You're talking about Health Savings Accounts -- HSA's.
McCain's HSA proposal was inadequate to cover normal insurance premiums
and would have been a step backward.
However, HSA's may have a place in a reformed health care reform bill.
See Atlantic Monthly article, "How American Health Care Killed My
Father", in which the author makes a proposal for a health care system
including HSA's, catastrophic insurance and other features -- a good
article.

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 12:57pm

Yes that is the name now. I had an insurance company client whose CEO was a big advocate of them back in the 80s. MSA is what we called them then and it is what has gotten written to my internal hard drive.

These are certainly not perfect or a comprehensive solution but would help get some market forces back in the picture but the party in power is unlikely to consider them.

OT: if there is waste and fraud (and I assume that there is with every govt program), why don't they demonstrate to us all the savings they can achieve over the next year and then come back with their comprehensive proposal? Otherwise, it looks like a takeover.

At some point individuals have to take responsibility for themselves and their families. I suppose that it's easier for me to say this now because I'm now considered "rich" by the left but I felt that way when I was only driving one day per week and eating soup and PBJ for months because it was all we could afford. But now, FCOL, I give a bunch to charity (usually 15% of gross) and pay about 50% of adjusted gross in taxes at all levels and pay my own medical (about $10K per year for the two of us). When is enough enough? These bills will cost me more money. Frankly I have had it. I really object to people like Jim Wallis who want to take more from what I earn and pat themselves on the back for how charitable they are.

I also own a small business that is in the not making any money stage. I can guarantee you that if any of the current proposals pass the likelihood that we will hire anyone is very, very slim.

Heard this recently: the bigger the govt, the smaller the people.

by: BelovedFollower

09-18-2009 @ 5:43pm

We are the only industrialized nation that doesnt provide all of its citizens with healthcare, but we still spend more per capita on it than anyone else. Are all of the other countries bankrupt? If not how do they do it if we cant?

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 8:05pm

The ultimate issue is how much freedom do you want to give up? Personally, I
say enough.

And, as time goes by, you are already starting to see many of those
countries begin to scale back their social safety nets.

And if you do not think that we will end up with rationing, at best you're
naïve.

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 8:07pm

How is the govt that has made a mess of medicare going to handle all of it?

by: BelovedFollower

09-18-2009 @ 5:43pm

We are the only industrialized nation that doesnt provide all of its citizens with healthcare, but we still spend more per capita on it than anyone else. Are all of the other countries bankrupt? If not how do they do it if we cant?

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 8:05pm

The ultimate issue is how much freedom do you want to give up? Personally, I
say enough.

And, as time goes by, you are already starting to see many of those
countries begin to scale back their social safety nets.

And if you do not think that we will end up with rationing, at best you're
naïve.

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 8:07pm

How is the govt that has made a mess of medicare going to handle all of it?

by: socialmaker

09-23-2009 @ 7:57am

I think people need a more personal approach when it comes to doctors. I know i have a doctor which takes care of my problems(vigrx) and he is so nice. He always knows me by name, he's friendly and i gladly attent every meeting.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 1:16pm

The alternative to individual bankruptcies seems to be bankrupting the country.

How is that better?

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 1:16pm

The alternative to individual bankruptcies seems to be bankrupting the country.

How is that better?

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 1:41pm

"To suggest that health-care reform will bankrupt our nation, as Bill O'Reilly did on his show in August, ignores the casualties of our current system - on both the individual and the national level. "

No it doesn't. There are ways to reform the system that would curb individual bankruptcies WITHOUT a large outlay from the federal government.

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 1:41pm

"To suggest that health-care reform will bankrupt our nation, as Bill O'Reilly did on his show in August, ignores the casualties of our current system - on both the individual and the national level. "

No it doesn't. There are ways to reform the system that would curb individual bankruptcies WITHOUT a large outlay from the federal government.

by: cmpnwtr

09-16-2009 @ 3:09pm

My sister in law, facing life threatening cancer, now told her insurance will not cover further cancer treatment, is looking at medical bankruptcy in addition to the prospects of losing her life. There is a moral and a financial price we all pay for abandonment and constructing a social order based on social darwinism. Yes, we all pay for every bankruptcy, we all pay for a medical system that is constructed to feed corporate profits, and mostly we all pay for abandoning "the least of these." We lose our soul.

by: cmpnwtr

09-16-2009 @ 3:09pm

My sister in law, facing life threatening cancer, now told her insurance will not cover further cancer treatment, is looking at medical bankruptcy in addition to the prospects of losing her life. There is a moral and a financial price we all pay for abandonment and constructing a social order based on social darwinism. Yes, we all pay for every bankruptcy, we all pay for a medical system that is constructed to feed corporate profits, and mostly we all pay for abandoning "the least of these." We lose our soul.

by: WaveTossed

09-16-2009 @ 4:22pm

There are ways to help people with insurance and medical bills. There are regulations that would prevent insurance companies from refusing to cover those with pre-existing conditions and would prevent them from cutting off people because they get sick.

Sen. Baucus's bill provides for non-profit co-ops to provide affordable insurance. This sounds like a reasonable course of action.

Some people would state that the government cannot even afford this care. I don't believe it -- is this truly a 3rd world country where people are left to die in the streets? One way that health care reform could be made affordable is if the government would stop all of the foreign military ventures.

by: WaveTossed

09-16-2009 @ 4:22pm

There are ways to help people with insurance and medical bills. There are regulations that would prevent insurance companies from refusing to cover those with pre-existing conditions and would prevent them from cutting off people because they get sick.

Sen. Baucus's bill provides for non-profit co-ops to provide affordable insurance. This sounds like a reasonable course of action.

Some people would state that the government cannot even afford this care. I don't believe it -- is this truly a 3rd world country where people are left to die in the streets? One way that health care reform could be made affordable is if the government would stop all of the foreign military ventures.

by: Faydine

09-16-2009 @ 4:22pm

I must say, in this great debate on health care...my friend gave birth to a baby with a previously undetected diaphragmtic hernia. They flew her and her baby to a hospital that was maybe 20 minutes away by car. The baby stayed in the hospital for about 4 weeks, recieving great care, and fully recovered.

At that same time, her husband was diagnosed with colon cancer at the age of 22. That was treated and taken care of. Then cancer spread to several other parts of his lower G.I. areas and they keep fighting and so far he keeps winning. He's in the prison system, so he doesn't pay for any of it. At least not yet. I wonder if he'll get a bill if he's ever released.

Similarly, the baby that was flown to the hospital that specializes in diaphragmatic hernias, is a medicaide baby. So while our system doesn't work in so many ways, I for one, am encouraged that these two individuals, who probably shouldn't have gotten this kind of treatment, were able to get remarkably good care.

by: Faydine

09-16-2009 @ 4:22pm

I must say, in this great debate on health care...my friend gave birth to a baby with a previously undetected diaphragmtic hernia. They flew her and her baby to a hospital that was maybe 20 minutes away by car. The baby stayed in the hospital for about 4 weeks, recieving great care, and fully recovered.

At that same time, her husband was diagnosed with colon cancer at the age of 22. That was treated and taken care of. Then cancer spread to several other parts of his lower G.I. areas and they keep fighting and so far he keeps winning. He's in the prison system, so he doesn't pay for any of it. At least not yet. I wonder if he'll get a bill if he's ever released.

Similarly, the baby that was flown to the hospital that specializes in diaphragmatic hernias, is a medicaide baby. So while our system doesn't work in so many ways, I for one, am encouraged that these two individuals, who probably shouldn't have gotten this kind of treatment, were able to get remarkably good care.

by: SisterMarie

09-16-2009 @ 5:41pm

Questions for JohnH54 and lumens:

Do you guys actually have jobs in which you perform some service in exchange for pay? Or do you sit by your home computer all day waiting for the latest post here so you can crap all over it?

Are you the same person or are you two different persons? And if you are two different persons, I'd advise whoever is out front not to stop suddenly to avoid a great embarrassment for the guy who is trailing.

by: SisterMarie

09-16-2009 @ 5:41pm

Questions for JohnH54 and lumens:

Do you guys actually have jobs in which you perform some service in exchange for pay? Or do you sit by your home computer all day waiting for the latest post here so you can crap all over it?

Are you the same person or are you two different persons? And if you are two different persons, I'd advise whoever is out front not to stop suddenly to avoid a great embarrassment for the guy who is trailing.

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 6:59pm

"Do you guys actually have jobs in which you perform some service in exchange for pay?"

Yep.

"Or do you sit by your home computer all day waiting for the latest post here so you can crap all over it?"

Nope. Also, you post here plenty, so you're being a bit of a hypocrite.

"Are you the same person or are you two different persons?"

We are two different persons.

"And if you are two different persons, I'd advise whoever is out front not to stop suddenly to avoid a great embarrassment for the guy who is trailing."

It's funny how the liberals here never even bother to defend the logic of the posts. I wouldn't want to take on that burden either, but still...

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 6:59pm

"Do you guys actually have jobs in which you perform some service in exchange for pay?"

Yep.

"Or do you sit by your home computer all day waiting for the latest post here so you can crap all over it?"

Nope. Also, you post here plenty, so you're being a bit of a hypocrite.

"Are you the same person or are you two different persons?"

We are two different persons.

"And if you are two different persons, I'd advise whoever is out front not to stop suddenly to avoid a great embarrassment for the guy who is trailing."

It's funny how the liberals here never even bother to defend the logic of the posts. I wouldn't want to take on that burden either, but still...

by: kansasmennonite

09-16-2009 @ 10:03pm

John, are you admitting that there is so much medical care needed here that it would backrupt the country if we tried to prevent that? We are in a world of hurt aren't we?

by: kansasmennonite

09-16-2009 @ 10:03pm

John, are you admitting that there is so much medical care needed here that it would backrupt the country if we tried to prevent that? We are in a world of hurt aren't we?

by: kansasmennonite

09-16-2009 @ 10:09pm

A guy (that works with deomocrats and republ.) on NPR the other day said that the republicans are in a hard spot. Their plan won't do a thing because the pre-exisisting problem will never be picked up by insurance comp. unless everyone is mandated to get covered and that means money to help the poorer people get covered which the Republicans don't want no part of. Does my wording make sense? In other words, the republicans at this time aren't doing a thing to fix the problem. They might as well go home and sit untill a plan is passed.

by: kansasmennonite

09-16-2009 @ 10:09pm

A guy (that works with deomocrats and republ.) on NPR the other day said that the republicans are in a hard spot. Their plan won't do a thing because the pre-exisisting problem will never be picked up by insurance comp. unless everyone is mandated to get covered and that means money to help the poorer people get covered which the Republicans don't want no part of. Does my wording make sense? In other words, the republicans at this time aren't doing a thing to fix the problem. They might as well go home and sit untill a plan is passed.

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 11:15pm

Your wording makes sense, but I don't think it puts Republicans in a hard spot, politically. Republicans are happy to make it easy to purchase health insurance at a young age, and most people think that some measure of personal responsibility should be built into the system.

For most people, the "problem" is not the number of uninsured, but the volatility and expense associated with our current system. The Democrats are nominally addressing the volatility issue, but are making the system more expensive in exchange.

And yes, the opposition party often sits on its hands when the majority passes a bill. Nothing new.

by: lumens

09-16-2009 @ 11:15pm

Your wording makes sense, but I don't think it puts Republicans in a hard spot, politically. Republicans are happy to make it easy to purchase health insurance at a young age, and most people think that some measure of personal responsibility should be built into the system.

For most people, the "problem" is not the number of uninsured, but the volatility and expense associated with our current system. The Democrats are nominally addressing the volatility issue, but are making the system more expensive in exchange.

And yes, the opposition party often sits on its hands when the majority passes a bill. Nothing new.

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 11:39pm

What I'm saying is that they way the Democrats are approaching this will bankrupt the country. There are other ways to approach this, but Obama's pie in the sky promises to cover everything at lower cost is just not realistic or financially viable.

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 11:39pm

What I'm saying is that they way the Democrats are approaching this will bankrupt the country. There are other ways to approach this, but Obama's pie in the sky promises to cover everything at lower cost is just not realistic or financially viable.

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 11:40pm

Typical. You never respond substantively to anything. You are capable of rational thought, aren't you?

by: JohnH54

09-16-2009 @ 11:40pm

Typical. You never respond substantively to anything. You are capable of rational thought, aren't you?

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:12pm

Tell us about ways to reform the system that would curb individual bankruptcies WITHOUT a large outlay from the federal government.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:12pm

Tell us about ways to reform the system that would curb individual bankruptcies WITHOUT a large outlay from the federal government.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:13pm

Let's hear about other ways to approach this, John.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:13pm

Let's hear about other ways to approach this, John.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:15pm

Sen. Baucus's bill provides for non-profit co-ops to provide affordable insurance. This sounds like a reasonable course of action.

Co ops won't work, WT.
That's why the insurance industry is promoting them.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 12:15pm

Sen. Baucus's bill provides for non-profit co-ops to provide affordable insurance. This sounds like a reasonable course of action.

Co ops won't work, WT.
That's why the insurance industry is promoting them.

by: JohnH54

09-17-2009 @ 12:34pm

There has to be some element of personal responsibility put into place, just like there is in other areas of insurance. I do not have coverage for maintenance and minor repairs to my car. If I did, if everyone did, it would open the doors to abuse.

So, I would like to see a form of medical savings accounts where you are allowed a set amount per family which you are free to spend or not. It would be pre-tax dollars, and taxable only if you do not spend it. It might be $2,500-5,000 per family. You choose how that is spent. Insurance coverage would be for catastrophic or long-term chronic conditions.

That's a start. It's been proposed, but rejected, in part because it will put a burden on individuals to manage their own care.

by: JohnH54

09-17-2009 @ 12:34pm

There has to be some element of personal responsibility put into place, just like there is in other areas of insurance. I do not have coverage for maintenance and minor repairs to my car. If I did, if everyone did, it would open the doors to abuse.

So, I would like to see a form of medical savings accounts where you are allowed a set amount per family which you are free to spend or not. It would be pre-tax dollars, and taxable only if you do not spend it. It might be $2,500-5,000 per family. You choose how that is spent. Insurance coverage would be for catastrophic or long-term chronic conditions.

That's a start. It's been proposed, but rejected, in part because it will put a burden on individuals to manage their own care.

by: JohnH54

09-17-2009 @ 7:12pm

Why don't you go ask the Democrats who are approaching Republicans about the Repulicans' plan.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/new...

There have always been alternative plans out there that are more fiscally responsible, but I understand that it is sometimes difficult to hear in that echo chamber you live in. :)

by: JohnH54

09-17-2009 @ 7:12pm

Why don't you go ask the Democrats who are approaching Republicans about the Repulicans' plan.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/new...

There have always been alternative plans out there that are more fiscally responsible, but I understand that it is sometimes difficult to hear in that echo chamber you live in. :)

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 8:39pm

I've opened up a communications channel just for you, John.
Let's hear your favorite plan.
If you have one.

by: justintime

09-17-2009 @ 8:39pm

I've opened up a communications channel just for you, John.
Let's hear your favorite plan.
If you have one.

by: kansasmennonite

09-17-2009 @ 11:09pm

Where does the money come from? If from one's own savings that's exactly the plan I have and I don't wish it on anyone that doesn't have the money for basic dr. visits, etc. Currently I'm not getting some personal things done because it's coming out of my pocket and I probably couldn't even find out what the procedure would cost because of our messed up health coverage in this country.

I wrote about the replubicans plan in another column and a person who was interview on NPR about it. He said that the repub are in a hard spot becasue they want to eliminate pre-existing condtions but for the insurance comp. to accept that it will require a mandate to cover everyone and that means subsidies for the poor and that takes money from somewhere.

Your plan is basically in effect now and won't do a thing for current problems. What about pre-existing conditions? How about people who live from pay check to paycheck in low income jobs? What about a continuing preexisting cond. that requires thousands of dollars everyyear and not just a one time deal?

by: kansasmennonite

09-17-2009 @ 11:09pm

Where does the money come from? If from one's own savings that's exactly the plan I have and I don't wish it on anyone that doesn't have the money for basic dr. visits, etc. Currently I'm not getting some personal things done because it's coming out of my pocket and I probably couldn't even find out what the procedure would cost because of our messed up health coverage in this country.

I wrote about the replubicans plan in another column and a person who was interview on NPR about it. He said that the repub are in a hard spot becasue they want to eliminate pre-existing condtions but for the insurance comp. to accept that it will require a mandate to cover everyone and that means subsidies for the poor and that takes money from somewhere.

Your plan is basically in effect now and won't do a thing for current problems. What about pre-existing conditions? How about people who live from pay check to paycheck in low income jobs? What about a continuing preexisting cond. that requires thousands of dollars everyyear and not just a one time deal?

by: justintime

09-18-2009 @ 12:19pm

You're talking about Health Savings Accounts -- HSA's.
McCain's HSA proposal was inadequate to cover normal insurance premiums
and would have been a step backward.
However, HSA's may have a place in a reformed health care reform bill.
See Atlantic Monthly article, "How American Health Care Killed My
Father", in which the author makes a proposal for a health care system
including HSA's, catastrophic insurance and other features -- a good
article.

by: justintime

09-18-2009 @ 12:19pm

You're talking about Health Savings Accounts -- HSA's.
McCain's HSA proposal was inadequate to cover normal insurance premiums
and would have been a step backward.
However, HSA's may have a place in a reformed health care reform bill.
See Atlantic Monthly article, "How American Health Care Killed My
Father", in which the author makes a proposal for a health care system
including HSA's, catastrophic insurance and other features -- a good
article.

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 12:57pm

Yes that is the name now. I had an insurance company client whose CEO was a big advocate of them back in the 80s. MSA is what we called them then and it is what has gotten written to my internal hard drive.

These are certainly not perfect or a comprehensive solution but would help get some market forces back in the picture but the party in power is unlikely to consider them.

OT: if there is waste and fraud (and I assume that there is with every govt program), why don't they demonstrate to us all the savings they can achieve over the next year and then come back with their comprehensive proposal? Otherwise, it looks like a takeover.

At some point individuals have to take responsibility for themselves and their families. I suppose that it's easier for me to say this now because I'm now considered "rich" by the left but I felt that way when I was only driving one day per week and eating soup and PBJ for months because it was all we could afford. But now, FCOL, I give a bunch to charity (usually 15% of gross) and pay about 50% of adjusted gross in taxes at all levels and pay my own medical (about $10K per year for the two of us). When is enough enough? These bills will cost me more money. Frankly I have had it. I really object to people like Jim Wallis who want to take more from what I earn and pat themselves on the back for how charitable they are.

I also own a small business that is in the not making any money stage. I can guarantee you that if any of the current proposals pass the likelihood that we will hire anyone is very, very slim.

Heard this recently: the bigger the govt, the smaller the people.

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 12:57pm

Yes that is the name now. I had an insurance company client whose CEO was a big advocate of them back in the 80s. MSA is what we called them then and it is what has gotten written to my internal hard drive.

These are certainly not perfect or a comprehensive solution but would help get some market forces back in the picture but the party in power is unlikely to consider them.

OT: if there is waste and fraud (and I assume that there is with every govt program), why don't they demonstrate to us all the savings they can achieve over the next year and then come back with their comprehensive proposal? Otherwise, it looks like a takeover.

At some point individuals have to take responsibility for themselves and their families. I suppose that it's easier for me to say this now because I'm now considered "rich" by the left but I felt that way when I was only driving one day per week and eating soup and PBJ for months because it was all we could afford. But now, FCOL, I give a bunch to charity (usually 15% of gross) and pay about 50% of adjusted gross in taxes at all levels and pay my own medical (about $10K per year for the two of us). When is enough enough? These bills will cost me more money. Frankly I have had it. I really object to people like Jim Wallis who want to take more from what I earn and pat themselves on the back for how charitable they are.

I also own a small business that is in the not making any money stage. I can guarantee you that if any of the current proposals pass the likelihood that we will hire anyone is very, very slim.

Heard this recently: the bigger the govt, the smaller the people.

by: BelovedFollower

09-18-2009 @ 5:43pm

We are the only industrialized nation that doesnt provide all of its citizens with healthcare, but we still spend more per capita on it than anyone else. Are all of the other countries bankrupt? If not how do they do it if we cant?

by: BelovedFollower

09-18-2009 @ 5:43pm

We are the only industrialized nation that doesnt provide all of its citizens with healthcare, but we still spend more per capita on it than anyone else. Are all of the other countries bankrupt? If not how do they do it if we cant?

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 8:05pm

The ultimate issue is how much freedom do you want to give up? Personally, I
say enough.

And, as time goes by, you are already starting to see many of those
countries begin to scale back their social safety nets.

And if you do not think that we will end up with rationing, at best you're
naïve.

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 8:05pm

The ultimate issue is how much freedom do you want to give up? Personally, I
say enough.

And, as time goes by, you are already starting to see many of those
countries begin to scale back their social safety nets.

And if you do not think that we will end up with rationing, at best you're
naïve.

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 8:07pm

How is the govt that has made a mess of medicare going to handle all of it?

by: JohnH54

09-18-2009 @ 8:07pm

How is the govt that has made a mess of medicare going to handle all of it?

by: justintime

09-19-2009 @ 1:15pm

Better than nothing, Kevin.

by: justintime

09-19-2009 @ 1:15pm

Better than nothing, Kevin.