Anyone choose to not have insurance? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-12-2006, 07:10 AM - Thread Starter
 
Anglyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 2,246
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The main reason I felt I needed it was how expensive vaxes are and how often you need well baby checks. Now we arent vaxing and maybe not well checking. So. We get sick enough to go to a doc...not much. I mean, colds and stomach viruses I can handle. It seems it would be cheaper to pay out of pocket, unless of course something unthinkable happens. But then Ive heard horror stories of people who have paid thier premiums faithfully for years only to be denied coverage when the REALLY needed it.

I spend over $500/mo for my ins.

We dont even go to the doc once a month.

Is it really worth it?

~Me, mama to soapbox boy (1991), photo girl (1997), gadget girl (2003), jungle boy (2005), fan boy (2003) and twirly girl (2011). Twenty years of tree hugging, breastfeeding, cosleeping, unschooling, craziness
Anglyn is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-12-2006, 07:21 AM
 
chelsmm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 922
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I believe that with a child it's very important to have insurance. You never know what might happen. Even something as "little" as a broken arm or an appendicitis could set you back a ton. I suppose if you put the $500 aside each month and dedicated it for a fund just in case, maybe that would be ok. You'd be taking your chances though. I'm not a gambler....If your baby ever had a problem it could ruin you financially.

My father and his family don't have insurance, however, they have enough money to pay for whatever may come their way. I'd never risk it...I can't afford to!

It does kill me to shell out that much money every month for insurance that I barely use though.

-chelsea dust.gif
chelsmm is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 07:30 AM
 
ICU812's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 52
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't have insurance, we,ve thought about needing it but we feel its a waste of money during the time we don't need it and when we need it(which we have, dh broke his hand) we pay payments to the hospital, its worked out good so far and we don't have that $500 a month going out the window every month that we don't need the insurance, just my opinion
ICU812 is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 07:38 AM
 
GalateaDunkel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The difference in care that you get with vs. without an insurance card in your hand is unbelievable. In many cases, they even give different diagnoses to insured and uninsured people with the same problems because they are not able or willing to give the uninsured person the standard treatment for the real diagnosis. So they will water it down and give you band-aid symptom relief while an insured person with the same condition is getting everything they know how to give. Trust me, my family has BTDT and I thank God every day we're not there anymore. Have you seen the movie "John Q" with Denzel Washington? Even with cash in hand - cash doesn't "compute" in the minds of the medical people the way an insurance card does. And you would need to put $500 a month away for many years before you would be able to pay your own way on a course of treatment for a serious disease. Yes, it's unlikely, but that's why it's called insurance. It's not really intended as a discount plan for routine care, although many people use it that way. If you are uncomfortable with your premium, can you maybe look into a catastrophic plan, with a high deductible?

If you pay premiums and they refuse to cover you, you can sue. If you don't pay premiums, you can go to the hospital, put your hand out, and pray they give you charity. Seems like a no-brainer, to me.
GalateaDunkel is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 07:47 AM
 
ICU812's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 52
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't want to sound snarky at all thats not my intent but if they don't give un-insured the same amount of treatment or respect as someone insured you can sue them. Especially if something goes wrong due to their neglect.
ICU812 is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 07:51 AM
 
BurgundyElephant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Growing moss on my North side.
Posts: 1,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ICU812, I don't think people who can't afford insurance are going to be going around suing people for poor care.

People who don't have insurance are charged more for the same service. I know "they" say the insurance company has worked out lower rates with them... that's BS. They should charge everyone the same low rate, regardless of insurance ownership.
BurgundyElephant is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 07:57 AM
 
suschi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the midst
Posts: 2,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anglyn View Post
The main reason I felt I needed it was how expensive vaxes are and how often you need well baby checks. Now we arent vaxing and maybe not well checking. So. We get sick enough to go to a doc...not much. I mean, colds and stomach viruses I can handle. It seems it would be cheaper to pay out of pocket, unless of course something unthinkable happens. But then Ive heard horror stories of people who have paid thier premiums faithfully for years only to be denied coverage when the REALLY needed it.

I spend over $500/mo for my ins.

We dont even go to the doc once a month.

Is it really worth it?
The company DH works for has excellent insurance, and the premiums are quite minimum, probably less than 50 a month for the family. You never know when something will happen that you will wish you had insurance. Our 4th child was born with heart and lung defects, and the surgery/hospital stay was hundreds of thousands of dollars, yet minimal out of pocket for us. Our son spent just a few days shy of a month in the hospital. The insurance also came in handy when our older son was out of town and a golf cart tipped over breaking his ankle, and he also had to have knee surgery for a later injury. If something happens and you try to obtain insurance after the fact, most, if not all, will not cover a pre-existing condition. So although your insurance is quite a bit more than ours, I would still think it would be very helpful to maintain. One major incident could bankrupt you.
suschi is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 09:37 AM
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,669
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We have it through dh's work,and it REALLY annoys me when the medical bills come.It seems like they pay nothing. The fear of major illness/accidents keeps us from canceling.My kids go 1-3 times a year,and they usually never get over the $250 deduct.
mattemma04 is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 10:17 AM
 
chelsmm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 922
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I work at a large teaching hospital in a big city, and my experience has been that the uninsured often get better/ more thorough care than the insured. The floor I work on is a trauma floor/surgical floor, and so many of our patients are uninsured trauma victims. The doctors are able to order all kinds of tests for the uninsured, but they often have to clear the same tests with the insured pt's insurance company. It's ridiculous. Perhaps this is because it's a teaching hospital though.
My big issue with my company is that the insurance company won't pay for my dh's allergy medication. They claim that he could use another (cheaper) medication instead, however, that other med is NOT the same. And my dh has tried it without relief. He is in the process of jumping through hoops to get a specialist to write a letter to the insurance company. It makes me very angry...

-chelsea dust.gif
chelsmm is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 12:40 PM
 
mammom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: oh!
Posts: 1,135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We also pay about $500/month for insurance and I brought up the idea of a catastrophic plan to DH a while back. I haven't looked into it really, just thought about it a little.

Has anyone gone that route? Anyone gotten rid of their "regular" insurance and gone with catastrophic?
mammom is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 01:04 PM
 
granolamomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: In my head, care to join me?
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mammom View Post
Has anyone gone that route? Anyone gotten rid of their "regular" insurance and gone with catastrophic?
That's been my goal for a while, but like pp said, we'd need to have a chunk in an emergency account b/f I'd do it. My issue aside from the monthly cost is the fact that insurance won't cover (or barely, barely) covers the type of health care practicioners I want to see (NDs, chiros etc..). I hate the stupid hoops you have to go through, and though it's only happened once, I have gotten screwed over on a claim they *say* wasn't cleared first, when there is proof I spoke with someone. But apparently the someone I spoke with wasn't fully informed and gave me bad advice (imagine that).:

But yes, someday I plan to give my regular insurance the boot.
granolamomma is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 02:32 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,565
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
A combination of a catastrophic plan with a regular contribution to a savings account for medical expenses can work for some people. Basically, if you have a $5,000 deductible, plus limited coverage for certain other things, you need to figure out what your maximum yearly out of pocket expense is likely to be for doctor visits, alternative practioner visits, remedies and vitamins, and anything else you can think of that the insurance wouldn't cover. Then you need to see if you can come up with that amount of money each year. If you do mostly alternative stuff anyway, you can probably save a good bit of money and get more of the sort of care you want.

Good luck figuring it all out
Deborah is online now  
Old 11-12-2006, 02:35 PM
 
annettemarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the Restricted Section
Posts: 34,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Moving to health and healing.

Flowers, fairies, gardens, and rainbows-- Seasons of Joy: 10 weeks of crafts, handwork, painting, coloring, circle time, fairy tales, and more!
Check out the blog for family fun, homeschooling, books, simple living, and 6 fabulous children, including twin toddlers

annettemarie is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 02:51 PM
 
mamainmotion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bellingham, Washington
Posts: 335
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We have major medical or a catastrophic plan.
It is Lifewise insurance for Washington state residents.
For my family of 3 it's 140.00 a month 2,000 deductible (which we always have in savings) and gives us 3 ND app. each a year or you can see a chiro or Acc 3 times at 25% which usually is about 20-40 out of pocket.
They are changing the plan in Jan too it gets even better but goes up 30 .
i can see chir for 25.00 up to 12 times and see Nd up to 6 times.
We don't vax and rarely see doc's. It works out well for us. I think that it is fairly affordable for what I get.
I have the Essentials 25 plan fyi in WA.
mamainmotion is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 03:40 PM
 
GalateaDunkel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chelsmm View Post
I work at a large teaching hospital in a big city, and my experience has been that the uninsured often get better/ more thorough care than the insured. The floor I work on is a trauma floor/surgical floor, and so many of our patients are uninsured trauma victims. The doctors are able to order all kinds of tests for the uninsured, but they often have to clear the same tests with the insured pt's insurance company. It's ridiculous. Perhaps this is because it's a teaching hospital though.
Yes, probably. Research institutions, even if affiliated with a "private" university, receive a great deal of public funds - NIH research grants and, I'm sure, a large number of other things I don't even know the names of. And they have a mandate to do a lot of stuff on people in order for students to get the needed clinical experiences (although see the stories of many women who have given birth in teaching facilities for how this can backfire on a patient). In less-well-funded settings the story is quite different. You're also not taking into account the many uninsured patients who never make it to your facility because they are too far away, or because they perceive, rightly or wrongly, that it is not accessible to them - or perhaps because the ambulance driver just takes them straight to the county public hospital. All your experience indicates is that, depending on location and circumstances, my "pray for charity" idea doesn't necessarily fail.

Also - hospital care is one thing but the specialized outpatient care which is often needed for serious conditions is another. My husband has a rare, chronic debilitating condition, but one which does not normally require hospitalization. When we were uninsured, he was given painkillers etc for symptom relief and told by multiple specialists in several different states that there was nothing else that could be done because "your condition is so rare, nobody bothers to develop treatments for it."

When we got insurance, his specialist suddenly revealed the existence of a drug therapy which attacks the root causes of his condition, halts the progress of the disease - and costs $25,000/year to administer.

Anyone can walk into an emergency room but you can't force a private doctor to give you an appointment nor a drug company to give you $500/week worth of outpatient meds. In my pediatrician's office there is a sign on the wall that if you do not have insurance you will not be seen unless you pay the full fee up-front. It breaks my heart to see that because I know that sign isn't there because of some imaginary possibility that they dreamed up. People really do show up with sick kids, hoping for a break, and they really do get turned away.
GalateaDunkel is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 03:56 PM
 
BurgundyElephant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Growing moss on my North side.
Posts: 1,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chelsmm View Post
My big issue with my company is that the insurance company won't pay for my dh's allergy medication. They claim that he could use another (cheaper) medication instead, however, that other med is NOT the same.

Don't you LOVE this??? The insurance company is practicing medicine without a licence when they make "change-your-drug" decisions for everyone!
BurgundyElephant is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 04:05 PM
 
shelbean91's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 9,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We have stopped vaxing and very rarely do a well visit (been over a year, at least), but I'd be very, very nervous w/o insurance. Just a few weeks ago, my kids were playing at the mall playground. We do this frequently, it's geared toward little kids, so nothing hard or big. Ds2 fell backward no more than a foot and ended up breaking his elbow. So, we had an ER visit, then a trip to the orthopedic doc, then found out this is a very rare type of break that can have tons of complications, including needing surgery b/c the bone fragment can move even when in a cast. Instead of a cast for 3 weeks, we're looking at 6, with weekly or biweekly xrays. So far, our out of pocket is $140. I shudder to imagine what it would be like otherwise. Ds2 is also sick w/some infection- we're on our 2nd round of antibiotics, this one would have cost me $115 if I didn't have insurance, but only $25 b/c I do.

We also rarely get sick. Maybe 1-2x a year each, if that. But, this has been a rough month.

Michelle -mom to Katlyn 4/00 , Jake 3/02, and Seth 5/04
shelbean91 is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 04:35 PM - Thread Starter
 
Anglyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 2,246
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I wouldnt be dropping my insurance anytime soon anyway. I am pregnant and thats the whole reason I have the HMO instead of PPO plan (more expensive, but covers more, no deductible etc). My ins. covers the birth, as long its with an ob and in a hospital, 100%. If I want a midwife or a birthing center, they dont cover that.

The fear of something catastrophic happening is what keeps me paying those premiums, even when we go months without using it. But yeah, last year ds1 broke his nose and needed surgery.

Of course, Im begining to think half the stuff my ins has paid for has been unnecesary at best. Xrays when ds1 hurt his arm (it wasnt broken). Two barium swallow studies on dd to determine why she wasnt eating, both test pelted her with harmful radiation and told us nothing. I knew she wouldnt cooperate going in. She doenst want to eat at home, why is she going to eat stuff covered with barium in the xray room with strangers watching her? She was so traumitized by the incidents and Im still kicking myself for going through with it. But they wouldnt do feeding therapy without it. Of course, the only thing wrong as it turns out was cavities (yep, her teeth hurt, thats why she stopped eating).

~Me, mama to soapbox boy (1991), photo girl (1997), gadget girl (2003), jungle boy (2005), fan boy (2003) and twirly girl (2011). Twenty years of tree hugging, breastfeeding, cosleeping, unschooling, craziness
Anglyn is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 07:20 PM
 
wallacesmum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 1,308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We carry only major medical in case of a serious emergency or life threatening illness, and we look for medical professionals that provide cash-only care (they are cheaper because they don't process insurance), and offices that give a cash discount. If you don't have coverage, ask what the insurance companies pay for the care you are receiving and say you want to pay that. If they won't discuss it, call the insurance companies and see if they will tell you. Also, in a private practice the doctor (or whatever) is probably the business owner, so you can discuss payment options with them (before care), the same way you might with a lawyer or a chimney sweep. Save aside the amount of the deductible (this might take a few years of socking away). I know you are carrying your insurance for the time being, but for future reference this works for us. Also, with pregnancy, our major medical covered emergency care and we paid cash for a home birth. All the midwives I know are very flexible about payment options, including time-banking and barter. I actually think that not carrying office visit coverage is a good thing, because it discourages visits to the doctors office, which usually result in more negatives than positives, IMO.
wallacesmum is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 07:26 PM
 
North_Of_60's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Beautiful British Columbia
Posts: 7,108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post
So they will water it down and give you band-aid symptom relief while an insured person with the same condition is getting everything they know how to give.
Having been born and raised with socialized medicine and now finding myself having to pay for healthcare, I view what you're describing as the doctors ability to bill out the nose for needless practices, versus doing only what's necessary.

I started out my pregnancy without insurance. When my insurance kicked in I suddenly became "high risk" and had to have to non stress tests 3 times a week, often followed up with ultrasounds. Each procedure cost 350 dollars, but oddly enough, when I didn't have insurance it wasn't necessary. I was furious because it seemed like they all of a sudden were taking advantage of the fact I had insurance.

It's no wonder to me that, as you put it, people with insurance receive "better" care, but I don't think that "better" equals necessary. It seems like they just jump at the opportunity to bill for as many services as possible, and who better to do that with then a person with a good insurance policy? It's disgusting.

Frankenstein never scared me. Marsupials do. Because they're FAST.
North_Of_60 is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 07:58 PM
 
GalateaDunkel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by North_Of_60 View Post
Having been born and raised with socialized medicine and now finding myself having to pay for healthcare, I view what you're describing as the doctors ability to bill out the nose for needless practices, versus doing only what's necessary.

I started out my pregnancy without insurance. When my insurance kicked in I suddenly became "high risk" and had to have to non stress tests 3 times a week, often followed up with ultrasounds. Each procedure cost 350 dollars, but oddly enough, when I didn't have insurance it wasn't necessary. I was furious because it seemed like they all of a sudden were taking advantage of the fact I had insurance.

It's no wonder to me that, as you put it, people with insurance receive "better" care, but I don't think that "better" equals necessary. It seems like they just jump at the opportunity to bill for as many services as possible, and who better to do that with then a person with a good insurance policy? It's disgusting.
Please review my described personal experience with this issue:
Quote:
When we got insurance, his specialist suddenly revealed the existence of a drug therapy which attacks the root causes of his condition, halts the progress of the disease - and costs $25,000/year to administer.
Nice to hear that putting a halt to my spouse's degenerative illness is a "disgusting" and "unnecessary" luxury. I'm sure he'd be so much healthier if he'd had to keep begging for care indefinitely.:

If you knew the tests were wasteful, why'd you accept them? And how dare you then turn around and put that issue off on people with serious health troubles?
GalateaDunkel is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 08:13 PM
 
North_Of_60's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Beautiful British Columbia
Posts: 7,108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post

And how dare you then turn around and put that issue off on people with serious health troubles?
Huh? My husband spent 9 days in ICU this spring for nearly going into an untreated diabetic coma. I have a rare clotting disorder for which there is NO CURE or treatment. I'm very familiar with people who have serious health issues, thank-you.

How did you, in ANY WAY, take what I said as a direct attack on your husbands treatment from your healthcare provider? I have unfortunately been noticing this for years since moving to the states, and it is something that I continue to observe over and over again. I'm sorry if you think my observation between two cultures - private medicine versus socialized medicine - is dismissive of those with serious health issues (which is not at all the case given mine and my husband's health issues!).

I also in NO WAY said that getting treatment for an illness is a disgusting and unnecessary treatment. I was responding to your GENERAL statement about how those with insurance get treated better then those who don't. Having been in both situations, and having come from a country with socialized medicine, I felt it prudent to share my point of view, which is one that I've seen proven over and over again through MY OWN experiences. What I said has NOTHING to do with your husband. And FWIW, my SIL has ankylosing spondylitis, which is also a degenerative condition, and I don't think for a moment that her treatment is "unnecessary" or "disgusting". How dare you make such a generalized assumption about me.

What is "disgusting" is when a generally healthy person, such as myself, is all of a sudden deemed unhealthy so that a health care practitioner can abuse my insurance. Before I had insurance I wasn't offered those treatments, but when I did have insurance I was. I suppose one could argue that I was being treated "better" with insurance then I was without, though I now think in hindsight it was just a way to abuse my insurance and make more money.

Again, that has NOTHING to do with your husband's situation, and I'm NOT implying that your husband's treatment was unecessary.

Frankenstein never scared me. Marsupials do. Because they're FAST.
North_Of_60 is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 08:33 PM
 
jazzharmony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 952
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
The catastrophic insurace sounds like something worth investigating...

We pay $700/mo and it does NOT include dental or prescriptions. It is INSANE.

BUT in the event of a major illness/accident we must be covered or risk losing everything and our families losing everything, to pay hospital bills. I mostly worry about doing that to my family.

My brother in law is uninsured. He just doesn't feel like paying the money every month. I feel that is very unfair and irresponsible considering if something were to happen (he rides a motorcycle, etc) the entire family woud go into financial ruin to help him.
jazzharmony is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 08:46 PM
 
GalateaDunkel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by North_Of_60 View Post
Huh? My husband spent 9 days in ICU this spring for nearly going into an untreated diabetic coma. I have a rare clotting disorder for which there is NO CURE or treatment. I'm very familiar with people who have serious health issues, thank-you.

How did you, in ANY WAY, take what I said as a direct attack on your husbands treatment from your healthcare provider? I have unfortunately been noticing this for years since moving to the states, and it is something that I continue to observe over and over again. I'm sorry if you think my observation between two cultures - private medicine versus socialized medicine - is dismissive of those with serious health issues (which is not at all the case given mine and my husband's health issues!).

I also in NO WAY said that getting treatment for an illness is a disgusting and unnecessary treatment. I was responding to your GENERAL statement about how those with insurance get treated better then those who don't. Having been in both situations, and having come from a country with socialized medicine, I felt it prudent to share my point of view, which is one that I've seen proven over and over again through MY OWN experiences. What I said has NOTHING to do with your husband. And FWIW, my SIL has ankylosing spondylitis, which is also a degenerative condition, and I don't think for a moment that her treatment is "unnecessary" or "disgusting". How dare you make such a generalized assumption about me.

What is "disgusting" is when a generally healthy person, such as myself, is all of a sudden deemed unhealthy so that a health care practitioner can abuse my insurance. Before I had insurance I wasn't offered those treatments, but when I did have insurance I was. I suppose one could argue that I was being treated "better" with insurance then I was without, though I now think in hindsight it was just a way to abuse my insurance and make more money.

Again, that has NOTHING to do with your husband's situation, and I'm NOT implying that your husband's treatment was unecessary.

Well, you might have thought to take some of that into account before jumping on my personal-experience-based reflection on the inaccessibility of care to the uninsured with a long rant about how it's all unnecessary anyway. How was I supposed to mind-read your family's unstated troubles, when you couldn't respond with compassion to the ones I explicitly stated up front?

Sorry though....I have just gotten so jaded from so many MDCers thinking that their good health and uncomplicated births are their reward for making all the correct natural choices, and that those of us who need serious allopathic intervention are either imagining things or must have done something wrong. You came off as one, esp. given that my statements made explicit reference to personal experience.......be careful what you dismiss as unnecessary unless you've actually seen the person's medical file.
GalateaDunkel is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 09:10 PM
 
North_Of_60's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Beautiful British Columbia
Posts: 7,108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post
You came off as one, esp. given that my statements made explicit reference to personal experience.......be careful what you dismiss as unnecessary unless you've actually seen the person's medical file.


I never called anyone's procedures unnecessary but MY OWN. I responded to a general statement, and if I meant to imply anything I wrote was directed toward you or your husband, I would have included that in my original quote.

Wow, I've never felt so.. crapped on. You took my innocent post out of context and twisted it around to sound like something I did NOT mean. I feel like absolute sh!t. Thank-you for lumping me in with everyone else, and thank-you for calling me dismissive and un-compassionate. Feels good.

I guess I'll just go crawl back under my dismissive and un-compassionate rock and wait for the next unsuspecting person that I can "jump on". :

Frankenstein never scared me. Marsupials do. Because they're FAST.
North_Of_60 is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 09:22 PM
 
GalateaDunkel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by North_Of_60 View Post


I never called anyone's procedures unnecessary but MY OWN.
False, you clearly stated that the higher level of care available to those with health coverage is "unnecessary" and "disgusting."

Quote:
I responded to a general statement
No, you responded to me, a human being, who unlike you stated where I was coming from personally on this issue right up front. Ignoring my other statements doesn't magically make them disappear.

Quote:
Wow, I've never felt so.. crapped on.
Seriously? In your whole life this is your most painful interaction ever?

Quote:
Thank-you for lumping me in with everyone else
Like you lumped my ill husband in with the recipients of unnecessary obstetric interventions?

Quote:
I guess I'll just go crawl back under my dismissive and un-compassionate rock and wait for the next unsuspecting person that I can "jump on". :
You mean like the other mama who was sharing her experiences on the "will life revolve around baby" thread that you have been simultaneously trashing for not raising her babe the way you do?
GalateaDunkel is offline  
Old 11-12-2006, 10:42 PM
 
North_Of_60's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Beautiful British Columbia
Posts: 7,108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post
False, you clearly stated that the higher level of care available to those with health coverage is "unnecessary" and "disgusting."
I will explain my post one more time so that hopefully I can put a stop to the misunderstanding. Clearly you have read my post wrong if that's what you think, as that is NOT AT ALL what I mean, and I certainly don't want you, or anyone else thinking that.

What I said was unnecessary was that SOMETIMES (again, not directed at your post.. it was just the general statement you made that made me think of this) procedures and treatments are suggested and billed when they aren't needed. That does NOT mean that people who need health care are receiving unnecessary attention.

"but I don't think that "better" equals necessary."

Perhaps I should have said "better does not always equal necessary". Would that have changed how you took my post? (I'm honestly sorry, I'm dyslexic and often forget words when I post.)

I don't think that "better" always equals necessary. That is not to say that people who have been given poor health care (such as in your case) are not justifiable in their dissatisfaction. I would be too! But I've seen it happen many times when someone gets insurance and all of a sudden their level of care goes "up".. but up to what? A tirade of unnecessary procedures all designed to get more money from the insurance.

If anything, I AGREE with you in that insurance is a nasty game and that doctors and health care practitioners use it to their advantage. I have no doubt that your husband's lack of care was because he didn't have insurance, that's my whole point! But on the other end of the spectrum, there ARE doctors who will then order all sorts of unnecessary things just to scam the insurance. As you and I both know, it's the patient who looses out, as our health is and was not the priority, it was the HCPer's bottom line that was!

And what is disgusting was when MY health care provider abused my insurance and took advantage of a pregnant woman who was scared of a potential health risk (re: my clotting disorder). I NEVER said that receiving care for an illness was disgusting. I said that seeing health care providers take advantage of good insurance was disgusting!

Quote:
Seriously? In your whole life this is your most painful interaction ever?
Now who is being dismissive? I feel like you have honestly taken my post wrong from how I genuinely meant it, and in the process you lumped me into a group of people who, self admittedly, made you jaded, and it hurt my feelings! I have tried to explain over and over again that what you got out of my post was not how I meant it, and I'm sorry, yet you continually want to beat me up over it.

Quote:
Like you lumped my ill husband in with the recipients of unnecessary obstetric interventions?
I did not refer to your husband at all. I was referring to the comment about health care being "better" for those with insurance. My whole point was to point out that in many cases the "better" part is indicative of health care practitioners abusing the patients insurance, which is what ultimately leads to insurance denying coverage of certain procedures. What is disgusting is when doctors do this. My comment was not in ANY way directed toward you or your husband, but was simply sparked by something you said. It was more directed toward those who pay for insurance and have been turned down for certain procedures (which has happened to me) because so many doctors like to bill for frivolous procedures. Abuse of the system results in the system not working, which you and I both know!

Again, I am genuinely sorry if you took my post to mean that your husband was receiving unnecessary care. That is NOT AT ALL what I mean. Not in the least bit.

Frankenstein never scared me. Marsupials do. Because they're FAST.
North_Of_60 is offline  
Old 11-13-2006, 03:14 AM
 
BurgundyElephant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Growing moss on my North side.
Posts: 1,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by North_Of_60 View Post
And FWIW, my SIL has ankylosing spondylitis, which is also a degenerative condition, and I don't think for a moment that her treatment is "unnecessary" or "disgusting".
What treatment is your SIL receiving? I wasn't aware that there are any.
BurgundyElephant is offline  
Old 11-13-2006, 04:57 AM
 
stacyann21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: California
Posts: 1,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
We pay $700/mo and it does NOT include dental or prescriptions. It is INSANE.


I haven't had insurance since I was a child. I currently receive pregnancy only Medi-Cal. Before becoming pregnant I think I went to the doctor once, for food poisoning. Now I go to a MW at a free-standing birth center and Medi-Cal completely covers that. I plan on having insurance for DS but not for me after the pregnancy is over. Little boys get into too much mischief I may look into catastrophic insurance for myself though. I guess I just figured if something catastrophic were to happen to me I would just file bankruptcy or something

Mom to a bright & energetic 6 y.o. boy  blahblah.gif   With my sweetie for 10 years now  blowkiss.gif  Registered nurse  caffix.gif

stacyann21 is offline  
Old 11-13-2006, 10:54 AM
 
North_Of_60's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Beautiful British Columbia
Posts: 7,108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BurgundyElephant View Post
What treatment is your SIL receiving? I wasn't aware that there are any.
Laser/light therapy. (Which is by no means a cure, but it helps with inflamation and pain.)

Frankenstein never scared me. Marsupials do. Because they're FAST.
North_Of_60 is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off