Re: Mammogram Rationing
Posted on November 22, 2009
Filed Under Healthcare | Comments Off
So since the congress has voted to take away mammograms for all women (and men) and single out people to choose who gets cancer I’m starting to see the hypocrisy clearer now.
The complaint is that sometime in the future it may be possible for this group of doctors to monetarily control the relationship you have between you and your doctor, and that if you go outside the boundaries of their recommendation your doctor will be forced to charge you for services because the government (obviously in this future the only insurance plan) will not pay him for those services. Now, if their complaint is about money why would they continue to support the current system of allowing patients to pay co-pays? I understand the concepts are a little different but essentially the 2 fees are charged by the same function, it’s a tax on seeing my doctor vs. a tax on what my doctor can preform, either way it’s a bureaucrat getting in between me and my doctor. Anyway, the republican lady on Meet the Press made this claim and I felt it needed clarification, if anything we need a Medicare like option because if one or 2 big for profit health insurance companies change their policies based on this study, well I guess it wouldn’t matter anyway because of their always deny policies right? With this bill women would be promised by the government that they wouldn’t take your mammograms (that I would hope a doctor would recommend?) away, without this bill women would take a chance that private insurance would still cover a procedure that has been found to not be cost effective. If the private markets didn’t lean towards the most cost effective coverage, then there wouldn’t be much point in capitalism right? It’s the entire reason for a public option, so that we don’t focus on cost effective but how much we can help people. Private insurance has proven it will kill people in the name of profit, and without a public option they will have no reason not to.