Comments on: Health Care Reform Hit Parade: Senate Mix

By: health_wellness_tips

health_wellness_tips — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 10:16:00 +0000

I'm so love this blog, already bookmarked it! Thanks.

By: MKirschMD

MKirschMD — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:13:00 +0000

I don't think that caps are ideal also. I supported them in Ohio as there was no other remedy available to us. They worked. We need an effective filter to prevent innocent physicians from being ensnared into the legal system in the first place. No physician wants to protect rogue colleagues. We just want the innocent ones, which are the majority who are sued, to be left alone. www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com

By: Karoli

Karoli — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:08:06 +0000

I have, in fact, heard of it and agree. One breakthrough leads to the next. I also understand that single payer advocates see the public option as that breakthrough. In some ways, I do, too. I had hoped that Medicare would be expanded as a purchase option for those of us in the 50-64 bubble who are being hammered (even when healthy) for health insurance costs. It looks as though that's not a possibility, despite the fact that it would solve problems on a couple of levels (cash flow and relief for some of us).

Given the resistance to change we've seen over the past 100 years, I will be eternally grateful if this reform package passes with the elimination of pre-existing conditions, and rescissions, alongside the pilot programs and other ways to possibly bend the cost curve.

By: Karoli

Karoli — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:04:52 +0000

The reason I don't emphasize tort reform as a component of health care reform is because it is as large a task as health care reform. How Louisiana treats lawsuits and how California treats lawsuits are two separate and completely distinct things.

Further, I have some real reservations about taking away anyone's right to sue for damages they've suffered and haven't seen any appreciable cost savings in states that have implemented tort reform. Texas is often used as the benchmark example for tort reform. Yet costs in Texas are extraordinarily high, still. There does not appear to be a direct corollary between the two.

By: MKirschMD

MKirschMD — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:36:30 +0000

Your comment: "And yes, there is a nod to tort reform, which is such a comprehensive topic it should not be contained in a bill about health care reform" A 'nod' to tort reform? How about a crude gesture? I'm perplexed why, in your view, tort reform is not integral to comprehensive health care reform. It directly affects the doctor-patient relationship and is tied to billions of dollars of defensive medicine being practiced each year. Every day, CAT scans and consultations are ordered more to protect the doctor than the patient. This costs a fortune of health care dollars and exposes patients to risks of complications. Tort reform would address these serious deficits. Respectfully, you missed the target here. See www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com under Legal Quality.

By: TomDegan

TomDegan — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:19:48 +0000

I don't know what kind of health care reform will come out of this session, but I strongly suspect it won't be much. There is, however a silver lining behind this very dark cloud. I am reminded of the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Don't be embarrassed if you've never heard of it, there really isn't a hell of a lot to remember about it; a mere pittance, really - a scrap of leftovers tossed out to "American Negros" (in the parlance of the age) in order to appease them. But it made the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 - the one we remember - all-the-more easier seven years later.

We'll live to fight another day.

http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY