Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by USN_Hokie »

User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by awesome guy »

It's sad that college graduates can't comprehend that they're trying to bring that type of state run death panel here to America. Get the treatment while you can Charlie, the brain dead here want our government to choose your death too.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by cwtcr hokie »

awesome guy wrote:It's sad that college graduates can't comprehend that they're trying to bring that type of state run death panel here to America. Get the treatment while you can Charlie, the brain dead here want our government to choose your death too.
the problem I have is from what I have read this is not curable, so take the emotion out all anybody is doing is just prolonging the kids death. I thought the whole argument for the parents was being able to take the kid home do die at home, I support that 100%
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by 133743Hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:It's sad that college graduates can't comprehend that they're trying to bring that type of state run death panel here to America. Get the treatment while you can Charlie, the brain dead here want our government to choose your death too.
the problem I have is from what I have read this is not curable, so take the emotion out all anybody is doing is just prolonging the kids death. I thought the whole argument for the parents was being able to take the kid home do die at home, I support that 100%
The argument is the parents getting to decide what action occurs, period. Whether it is taking him home to die, getting another opinion from US, whatever. It's their choice.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by awesome guy »

133743Hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:It's sad that college graduates can't comprehend that they're trying to bring that type of state run death panel here to America. Get the treatment while you can Charlie, the brain dead here want our government to choose your death too.
the problem I have is from what I have read this is not curable, so take the emotion out all anybody is doing is just prolonging the kids death. I thought the whole argument for the parents was being able to take the kid home do die at home, I support that 100%
The argument is the parents getting to decide what action occurs, period. Whether it is taking him home to die, getting another opinion from US, whatever. It's their choice.
Yep. Their decision
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by cwtcr hokie »

133743Hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:It's sad that college graduates can't comprehend that they're trying to bring that type of state run death panel here to America. Get the treatment while you can Charlie, the brain dead here want our government to choose your death too.
the problem I have is from what I have read this is not curable, so take the emotion out all anybody is doing is just prolonging the kids death. I thought the whole argument for the parents was being able to take the kid home do die at home, I support that 100%
The argument is the parents getting to decide what action occurs, period. Whether it is taking him home to die, getting another opinion from US, whatever. It's their choice.
As I said I agree with that 100%, but it all goes back to when do you stop trying to save someone that is not able to be saved? Its a question alot of us face with our families, I mean I have the living will thing that says if there is no possibility of cure that I be allowed to die, its a financial decision and a realist decision and it is one of the problems in our health care debate. But yes the parents should be allowed to take their kid off life support.

The sticky wicket is when there is a possibility of a cure and the parents will not let it be done.
User avatar
Major Kong
Posts: 15728
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:35 pm
Alma Mater: Ferrum VT ASU
Party: Independent
Location: Somewhere between Marion and Seven Mile Ford

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by Major Kong »

The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.
I only post using 100% recycled electrons.

Image
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by cwtcr hokie »

Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by awesome guy »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by cwtcr hokie »

awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
in this particular case they did a go fund me thing and have the cash, I was addressing Kong's the gov. should not be in the decision but as we all know who is paying matters and we deal with it daily on what insurance will or won't pay for, 99% of us don't have the funds to self fund tho. I agree it is an argument against single payer as the gov is then the payer (as it is now with vet care and medicare/medicaid) but was just pointing some issues this discussion brings up.

As i said, there is nothing easy or simple in health care
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by ip_law-hokie »

awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
Drain on the overall system. And this is not the typical situation.

"Death panels" already exist, have always existed, and will always exist.
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by awesome guy »

ip_law-hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
Drain on the overall system. And this is not the typical situation.

"Death panels" already exist, have always existed, and will always exist.
Nope, it's a creation of single payer.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by USN_Hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
in this particular case they did a go fund me thing and have the cash, I was addressing Kong's the gov. should not be in the decision but as we all know who is paying matters and we deal with it daily on what insurance will or won't pay for, 99% of us don't have the funds to self fund tho. I agree it is an argument against single payer as the gov is then the payer (as it is now with vet care and medicare/medicaid) but was just pointing some issues this discussion brings up.

As i said, there is nothing easy or simple in health care
Ability to pay isn't considered by a hospital before doing a necessary procedure. The distinction is meaningless.

The family might have to choose whether they want to be indebted for the next 30yrs paying for grandpa to live two more months, but it is their choice. In the UK, there is no choice. When the cost to fix you exceeds your worth to the government (not your family) you're written off.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by USN_Hokie »

ip_law-hokie wrote: "Death panels" already exist, have always existed, and will always exist.
Link please.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by cwtcr hokie »

awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
Drain on the overall system. And this is not the typical situation.

"Death panels" already exist, have always existed, and will always exist.
Nope, it's a creation of single payer.
Thats not true though, insurance companies have refused to pay for life extending treatments for a long time.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by cwtcr hokie »

USN_Hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
in this particular case they did a go fund me thing and have the cash, I was addressing Kong's the gov. should not be in the decision but as we all know who is paying matters and we deal with it daily on what insurance will or won't pay for, 99% of us don't have the funds to self fund tho. I agree it is an argument against single payer as the gov is then the payer (as it is now with vet care and medicare/medicaid) but was just pointing some issues this discussion brings up.

As i said, there is nothing easy or simple in health care
Ability to pay isn't considered by a hospital before doing a necessary procedure. The distinction is meaningless.

The family might have to choose whether they want to be indebted for the next 30yrs paying for grandpa to live two more months, but it is their choice. In the UK, there is no choice. When the cost to fix you exceeds your worth to the government (not your family) you're written off.
Thats not true either, yes they have to provide emergency treatment but no they do not have to provide a surgery or specific procedure if there is no way to pay for it. It happens all the time though, this is nothing new. A person can sign a piece of paper to promise to pay and be driven into bankruptcy eventually though.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by USN_Hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
in this particular case they did a go fund me thing and have the cash, I was addressing Kong's the gov. should not be in the decision but as we all know who is paying matters and we deal with it daily on what insurance will or won't pay for, 99% of us don't have the funds to self fund tho. I agree it is an argument against single payer as the gov is then the payer (as it is now with vet care and medicare/medicaid) but was just pointing some issues this discussion brings up.

As i said, there is nothing easy or simple in health care
Ability to pay isn't considered by a hospital before doing a necessary procedure. The distinction is meaningless.

The family might have to choose whether they want to be indebted for the next 30yrs paying for grandpa to live two more months, but it is their choice. In the UK, there is no choice. When the cost to fix you exceeds your worth to the government (not your family) you're written off.
Thats not true either, yes they have to provide emergency treatment but no they do not have to provide a surgery or specific procedure if there is no way to pay for it. It happens all the time though, this is nothing new. A person can sign a piece of paper to promise to pay and be driven into bankruptcy eventually though.
People aren't turned away.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by awesome guy »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
Drain on the overall system. And this is not the typical situation.

"Death panels" already exist, have always existed, and will always exist.
Nope, it's a creation of single payer.
Thats not true though, insurance companies have refused to pay for life extending treatments for a long time.
That's not a death panel, that's a "We're not paying" panel. These are 1 and the same in single payer.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by awesome guy »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
in this particular case they did a go fund me thing and have the cash, I was addressing Kong's the gov. should not be in the decision but as we all know who is paying matters and we deal with it daily on what insurance will or won't pay for, 99% of us don't have the funds to self fund tho. I agree it is an argument against single payer as the gov is then the payer (as it is now with vet care and medicare/medicaid) but was just pointing some issues this discussion brings up.

As i said, there is nothing easy or simple in health care
Ability to pay isn't considered by a hospital before doing a necessary procedure. The distinction is meaningless.

The family might have to choose whether they want to be indebted for the next 30yrs paying for grandpa to live two more months, but it is their choice. In the UK, there is no choice. When the cost to fix you exceeds your worth to the government (not your family) you're written off.
Thats not true either, yes they have to provide emergency treatment but no they do not have to provide a surgery or specific procedure if there is no way to pay for it. It happens all the time though, this is nothing new. A person can sign a piece of paper to promise to pay and be driven into bankruptcy eventually though.
Yep, that's their choice. The bureaucrats make that choice in single payer.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by 133743Hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
Drain on the overall system. And this is not the typical situation.

"Death panels" already exist, have always existed, and will always exist.
Nope, it's a creation of single payer.
Thats not true though, insurance companies have refused to pay for life extending treatments for a long time.
Based upon previously agreed upon contracts between the insurer and the insured.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by 133743Hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
in this particular case they did a go fund me thing and have the cash, I was addressing Kong's the gov. should not be in the decision but as we all know who is paying matters and we deal with it daily on what insurance will or won't pay for, 99% of us don't have the funds to self fund tho. I agree it is an argument against single payer as the gov is then the payer (as it is now with vet care and medicare/medicaid) but was just pointing some issues this discussion brings up.

As i said, there is nothing easy or simple in health care
Ability to pay isn't considered by a hospital before doing a necessary procedure. The distinction is meaningless.

The family might have to choose whether they want to be indebted for the next 30yrs paying for grandpa to live two more months, but it is their choice. In the UK, there is no choice. When the cost to fix you exceeds your worth to the government (not your family) you're written off.
Thats not true either, yes they have to provide emergency treatment but no they do not have to provide a surgery or specific procedure if there is no way to pay for it. It happens all the time though, this is nothing new. A person can sign a piece of paper to promise to pay and be driven into bankruptcy eventually though.
The "driven to bankruptcy" is a great talking point for the left, but is seldom an actual occurrence. It is such a small, small fraction of a percentage of the populace. It should not be a dominant factor in making healthcare/insurance law in the US. We can't deconstruct an entire industry for the many just to help a few.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by cwtcr hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
in this particular case they did a go fund me thing and have the cash, I was addressing Kong's the gov. should not be in the decision but as we all know who is paying matters and we deal with it daily on what insurance will or won't pay for, 99% of us don't have the funds to self fund tho. I agree it is an argument against single payer as the gov is then the payer (as it is now with vet care and medicare/medicaid) but was just pointing some issues this discussion brings up.

As i said, there is nothing easy or simple in health care
Ability to pay isn't considered by a hospital before doing a necessary procedure. The distinction is meaningless.

The family might have to choose whether they want to be indebted for the next 30yrs paying for grandpa to live two more months, but it is their choice. In the UK, there is no choice. When the cost to fix you exceeds your worth to the government (not your family) you're written off.
Thats not true either, yes they have to provide emergency treatment but no they do not have to provide a surgery or specific procedure if there is no way to pay for it. It happens all the time though, this is nothing new. A person can sign a piece of paper to promise to pay and be driven into bankruptcy eventually though.
People aren't turned away.[/quote]

from the emergency room no, you are correct

different story once the patient leaves the emergency room.

I agree healthcare is a complicated mess
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by cwtcr hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:The bottom line is the gubment has no damn business in "healthcare" decisions.

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
in this particular case they did a go fund me thing and have the cash, I was addressing Kong's the gov. should not be in the decision but as we all know who is paying matters and we deal with it daily on what insurance will or won't pay for, 99% of us don't have the funds to self fund tho. I agree it is an argument against single payer as the gov is then the payer (as it is now with vet care and medicare/medicaid) but was just pointing some issues this discussion brings up.

As i said, there is nothing easy or simple in health care
Ability to pay isn't considered by a hospital before doing a necessary procedure. The distinction is meaningless.

The family might have to choose whether they want to be indebted for the next 30yrs paying for grandpa to live two more months, but it is their choice. In the UK, there is no choice. When the cost to fix you exceeds your worth to the government (not your family) you're written off.
Thats not true either, yes they have to provide emergency treatment but no they do not have to provide a surgery or specific procedure if there is no way to pay for it. It happens all the time though, this is nothing new. A person can sign a piece of paper to promise to pay and be driven into bankruptcy eventually though.
The "driven to bankruptcy" is a great talking point for the left, but is seldom an actual occurrence. It is such a small, small fraction of a percentage of the populace. It should not be a dominant factor in making healthcare/insurance law in the US. We can't deconstruct an entire industry for the many just to help a few.[/quote]

I beleive medical bills are the leading factor in personal bankruptcy filings, that is what I have read in the past. A hospital or medical practice is the same as anyone else, they will pursue payment as far as they can, I don't blame them, they have bills to pay also
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by HokieFanDC »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:

Insurance companies do, who is paying? If it is funded from an outside source I agree 100% but don't we all deal with what insurance will pay for and what it won't pay for. I do agree that the parents should be able to make the decision in this particular case as they have outside funding and there is no cure for the kid. But should the gov. step in if there is a cure and the parents won't let it be done as some wierd religious people do?

healthcare is a minefield of issues
The parents and charity will pay. What's the problem?
in this particular case they did a go fund me thing and have the cash, I was addressing Kong's the gov. should not be in the decision but as we all know who is paying matters and we deal with it daily on what insurance will or won't pay for, 99% of us don't have the funds to self fund tho. I agree it is an argument against single payer as the gov is then the payer (as it is now with vet care and medicare/medicaid) but was just pointing some issues this discussion brings up.

As i said, there is nothing easy or simple in health care
Ability to pay isn't considered by a hospital before doing a necessary procedure. The distinction is meaningless.

The family might have to choose whether they want to be indebted for the next 30yrs paying for grandpa to live two more months, but it is their choice. In the UK, there is no choice. When the cost to fix you exceeds your worth to the government (not your family) you're written off.
Thats not true either, yes they have to provide emergency treatment but no they do not have to provide a surgery or specific procedure if there is no way to pay for it. It happens all the time though, this is nothing new. A person can sign a piece of paper to promise to pay and be driven into bankruptcy eventually though.
The "driven to bankruptcy" is a great talking point for the left, but is seldom an actual occurrence. It is such a small, small fraction of a percentage of the populace. It should not be a dominant factor in making healthcare/insurance law in the US. We can't deconstruct an entire industry for the many just to help a few.
I beleive medical bills are the leading factor in personal bankruptcy filings, that is what I have read in the past. A hospital or medical practice is the same as anyone else, they will pursue payment as far as they can, I don't blame them, they have bills to pay also[/quote]

Medical expenses are definitely the leading cause of personal bankruptcy. And I'm pretty sure that number is at least 500k or more per year.
It's also true that most of those people have medical insurance, so it comes from people who have severe conditions and/or surgeries that aren't covered by insurance. As you said, the insurance companies don't cover these extreme circumstances, so it's up to the family to decide how they want to handle it. In the Gard case, they have decided to try to save him, and the gov. won't let him. That's pretty appalling IMO.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Charlie Gard just became a US citizen.

Post by cwtcr hokie »

I beleive medical bills are the leading factor in personal bankruptcy filings, that is what I have read in the past. A hospital or medical practice is the same as anyone else, they will pursue payment as far as they can, I don't blame them, they have bills to pay also[/quote]

Medical expenses are definitely the leading cause of personal bankruptcy. And I'm pretty sure that number is at least 500k or more per year.
It's also true that most of those people have medical insurance, so it comes from people who have severe conditions and/or surgeries that aren't covered by insurance. As you said, the insurance companies don't cover these extreme circumstances, so it's up to the family to decide how they want to handle it. In the Gard case, they have decided to try to save him, and the gov. won't let him. That's pretty appalling IMO.[/quote]

I agree with you on the UK deal, handled very badly.
Post Reply