defiantbadgirl
Posts: 2988
Joined: 11/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: icandothis
Ok for those of you who have no clue what it is to have a child with serious medical condition...this is how the system works. If you have insurance you pay for your medical care until you reach your cap and then guess what the government steps in and pays the rest of it. Now you might have to get divorced and live in poverty to qualify for medicare but your kid isn't going to die. My child has had 50 operations, in places like China to this day children born with his birth defect are put in orphanages and left to die. Here in the United States he got the best care possible and while he is still disabled he is thriving and contributing to society.
No politician of any party is going to be for killing sick kids, that just simple beat the drums silliness. My husband and I were broke with great health insurance, we lost our home, with great health insurance, our car, with great health insurance, our middle class life, with great health insurance and eventually he lost his job, with great health insurance. We filed for divorce, we filed for bankruptcy and not once did my child get turned down for the life saving care he needed. That is not going to change.
What needs to change is the way they do business. Don't wait until families have lost everything and can no longer contribute to their local economy or pay taxes before you help catastrophic illness cases. Instead when a child is born with such a condition make medicaid mandatory for them but require them to keep a job and health care. As it is now, the government expects you to lose it all and then they will step in and carry the load. Only problem there is that they force entire families to live on the system until their child reaches the age of 18. At which point the child gets the help and the family can return to being productive members of society. If families recieved medicaid to cover what insurance does not they could continue to pay their taxes and be contributors. As it is now the government pays much more because they not only pay for the child they pay for the entire family. They pay for the bankruptcy, the food stamps, the SSI, the medicaid and more. If the government allowed families to maintain a middle class life and still receive medicaid the cost would be reduced dramatically. The family would pay for itself, and the medical bills would not drown them to the point of becoming and entire family on the public dole.
All the bleeding heart liberals have no idea what it is like to be forced to live in poverty in order for your child to receive medical care...I for one have resented it greatly. I would rather work, pay bills, pay taxes, and help my local economy.
If no politician of any party is for killing sick kids, why does the republican party want spending caps on medicaid? As for the rest of your post, I agree that it makes no sense for the government to require divorce and a family to lose everything to qualify for medicaid. Your experience is a perfect example of why the US needs single-payer health care.
< Message edited by defiantbadgirl -- 4/5/2011 7:40:53 PM >
_____________________________
Only in the United States is the health of the people secondary to making money. If this is what "capitalism" is about, I'll take socialism any day of the week.
Collared by MartinSpankalot May 13 2008
|
RE: Republicans for death panels? WTF??? - 
Profile
). 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread