Quantcast

83% of Doctors Considered Quitting Over Obamacare: Scary?

Fef 2012/07/10 00:35:23
You!
Add Photos & Videos
President Obama's Affordable Care Act (aka "Obamacare") has some doctors reconsidering if they will continue practicing medicine. The non-partisan Doctor Patient Medical Association survey of 699 doctors nationwide found that 83% considered quitting over the legislation.

Sally Nelson reports in Daily Caller that America will face a shortage of 90,000 doctors in eight years regardless if current doctors quit. The problem quickly increases to a shortage of 130,000 doctors by 2025 according to Len Marquez, the director of government relations at the American Association of Medical Colleges.

DAILYCALLER.COM reports:
Association of Medical Colleges: Even if doctors do not quit, massive shortage coming because of law


dailycaller reports association medical colleges doctors quit massive shortage law

Read More: http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/09/report-83-percen...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Daryl 2012/07/10 00:54:04
    Yes
    Daryl
    +13
    We can replace them with doctors from Bangladesh and Syria.

    What could possibly go wrong?

    scotland terrorism airport

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • ruralntex Dana 2012/07/15 13:32:59
    ruralntex
    GOP govornors have done the math and see that their states are going to end up paying enough for these benefits that their budgets will be blown. States, unlike the District of Criminals must balance budgets. DC doesn't even seem to think it needs to even make a budget.

    Your comments regarding over use of the ER's are relevant, for sure. If the patients are on Medicaid, then the hospitals and the ambulance services are going to get their money. If not, they still may get federal funds to cover at least some of the costs as the federal government doesn't want the hopitals to go broke because of things like this. Looks like the federal government might do well to tie funding to demonstrated efforts to avoid such ambulance rides and ER visits. That is a federal government SNAFU and has nothing to do with what you call whacked GOP govornors. In the non-medicaid cases, we are talking about hospital districts NOT state governments. In Medicaid funded ambulance rides, I would suggest a co-pay to end such foolishness. However, I have no doubt that some Democrat somewhere just soiled themselves at the very suggestion of a copay. Draconian, ya know?
  • Dana ruralntex 2012/07/15 15:42:13
    Dana
    1/ Massachusetts implemented almost the very same plan and it save their state and residents a fortune. Premiums went down, waste was cut, and almost everyone is insured.

    2/ The government is funding the expansion of medcaid the the GOP governors are refusing the $$$ to expand this. They will lose in the end, because it saves money.

    3/ If someone can see a primary care doctor to get an RX filled instead of going to the ER in the middle of the night... that SAVES money. A LOT of money!

    This program helps save money across the board. I know, you hate it because you think someone else will get medical care who you would rather just die. But, in the long run for those who do live, this saves money, period.

    My daughter was denied insurance when we looked for a private policy for her, because of pre existing condition. Now because of this bill, she can not be denied. AND the premiums went way down too! Her's was over $500 a month just through her dads work. Now I can get her a private policy for anywhere from $109 to $163... I have them on a spread sheet right here.
  • ruralntex Dana 2012/07/15 19:22:22
    ruralntex
    Medicaid is only partially funded by federal funds. Each state has a matching responsibility. The idea is a noble one, but anything run from far away Washington DC is going to be a fiasco. Look at all the doctors talking about geting out of the doctor business. If there are no doctors, there will be no improvement. Also, not ALL premiums are going to be reduced. There is that sector of society who would have chosen not to buy insurance and therefore would have paid no premiums. Their premiums are certainly NOT reduced. The entire scheme is not workable without their FORCED participation.
  • Dana ruralntex 2012/07/15 19:38:03
    Dana
    read the article I posted.

    And then ask yourself... did all of these things happen in MA? Did doctors leave? state go bankrupt? People die? Premiums rise? None of the above happened. they just plain improved their health care system in that state.

    Bottom line, it worked.
  • ruralntex Dana 2012/07/16 13:49:22
    ruralntex
    The link is incomplete and non-functional
  • Dana ruralntex 2012/07/16 16:10:35
    Dana
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/k...

    If this does not work, google Romneycare massachusetts health care reform

    Very good article.
  • ruralntex Dana 2012/07/17 14:36:21
    ruralntex
    Looks like Kenneth Rapoza, who is a resident of Massachusettes has some issues with the story. However, as I said, less expensive health care is and always was a noble idea. My main concern is that the medical people were not at the table when the Obamacare details were hammered out. I cannot say that about Romneycare, because I just don't know. But here again, I might be for a state sponsored, state administered plan. The say in these matters should be as close to the voters as possible, NOT in WASHINGTON FRIGGIN DC.
  • Dana ruralntex 2012/07/17 17:05:14 (edited)
    Dana
    Here is what is interesting... same plan, nearly .... and when it was implemented in MA, there were hardly any complaints at all. Maybe because the complainers are the republicans and since a GOP Gov implemented this, they did not feel reason to cry? But a dem president does this, and they all scream bloody murder? Can you not see the idiocy and ludicrousy of this? What you have fallen for is the crap Fixed news has shoved out, via the GOP in congress, paid for in full by the insurance lobbiests. Think about it.
  • ruralntex Dana 2012/07/18 02:41:18
    ruralntex
    Maybe, or maybe its Dem hogwash. Perhaps they are painting the pig. At any rate, if they want that and gay marriage in Ma, no skin off my Texas butt. What irks me is the federal government hoisting this mutt upon us. Texas should be allowed to do a Texas version, not be forced to swallow Ma's version.
  • Dana ruralntex 2012/07/19 03:36:14
    Dana
    tx is known for most teen pregnancies, huge numbr f people in poverty, and many w. no health care at all. YOu can have those stupid ideals, but they do not help anyone.
  • ruralntex Dana 2012/07/19 15:55:28
    ruralntex
    You worry about Oregon, and let Texans worry about Texas.
  • Dana ruralntex 2012/07/20 01:33:11
    Dana
    glad to
  • Dana ruralntex 2012/07/15 15:43:23
    Dana
    Read this... they SAVED money...http://www.forbes.com...
  • Sioux 2012/07/11 06:00:51
    Yes
    Sioux
    Scary as hell! I have a daughter with MS and according to Cass Sunstein, she is a useless eater and therefore is not entitled to a long productive life. Research his ideas about Value of Life and see what these crazy people plan for our lives.
  • Dana Sioux 2012/07/15 19:40:58
    Dana
    Without this bill your daughter could very likely either be dropped from her insurance at any time, or be denied all together. (as my daughter was w/ a pre existing condition). This bill forces the insurance companies to cover them and not penalize those w/ pre exisiting conditions. If your daughter is still a child, she can be covered now.... and not charged a dime more than any other child who has no pre existing conditions.
  • Sioux Dana 2012/07/16 16:11:26
    Sioux
    Not if she has state paid for healthcare. Thanks for the concern though. Obamacare will destroy that as well. State funded medical programs unless the states decide to bow out now before this monstrosity starts.
  • Dana Sioux 2012/07/17 01:50:19
    Dana
    I may be misunderstanding you... so if so, I apologize in advance. But are you saying your daughter is already on medicaid? So she is on a Govt program for her health care? The only changes to this are some GOP governors are saying they will refuse to expand medicaid to those poorest who can not afford insurance but were previously not on medicaid. So, if your daughter is already on medicaid, she is fine.

    This whole deal was implemented in Massachussets in 2006.... no one died, no doctors ran away and quit, they did not have less people covered, but more instead and the state saved a lot of money... also insurance premiums went way down too.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/k...
  • Sioux Dana 2012/07/19 15:50:03 (edited)
    Sioux
    No she is not on Medicaid. Thanks for asking. My husband's insurance has paid for her treatment. However, she has in the past been on a state paid Medical plan, but not now. When Obamacare ruins insurance companies and requires the states to discontinue their own medical services what recourse do we have? Obamacare is also very invasive. This will allow the government to have access to your bank account and they can take money from your account as well. The IRS is hiring thousands of new workers to go after people for money, and there will be untrained medical personnel, unions, to administer care. Now, if that doesn't scare you, I don't know what will! Read the bill!
  • Dana Sioux 2012/07/20 01:41:07
    Dana
    check out what happened in MA when they instituted Romney care which is almost identical. Nothing bad happened at all.

    Here is a reality. Your daughter MUST have insurance., as mine. They must have it or else. If the insurance companies were allowed to continue, they could drop our daughters at will any time, put caps on their coverage... and dump them for any reason. Our daughters were lucky, they were not dropped, but w/out this bill in place they very well could be.

    I had an accident 2 days ago. I had to see a doctor, I am uninsured, denied for prexisting condition. Can not get insurance until 2014. I could not get in anywhere, no doctors offices, no "free clinics", no low income clinics, no where... none. Today, finally was able to get a ride into the ER, my only last resort. The doctor could not believe I was not in there 2 days ago, but reality is, no insurance, unable to even walk, let alone drive, been crawling to get to the bathroom, and no, have not even eaten. But had to do the damn ER thing. I am home, bandaged up, crutches and will have a whopping bill to try and find the $$ to pay.

    Now, If I was not "denied" I could have insurance... my retirement will even pay for it, but I am denied just because of that pre existing condition.

    Your daughter and mine can not aff...
    check out what happened in MA when they instituted Romney care which is almost identical. Nothing bad happened at all.

    Here is a reality. Your daughter MUST have insurance., as mine. They must have it or else. If the insurance companies were allowed to continue, they could drop our daughters at will any time, put caps on their coverage... and dump them for any reason. Our daughters were lucky, they were not dropped, but w/out this bill in place they very well could be.

    I had an accident 2 days ago. I had to see a doctor, I am uninsured, denied for prexisting condition. Can not get insurance until 2014. I could not get in anywhere, no doctors offices, no "free clinics", no low income clinics, no where... none. Today, finally was able to get a ride into the ER, my only last resort. The doctor could not believe I was not in there 2 days ago, but reality is, no insurance, unable to even walk, let alone drive, been crawling to get to the bathroom, and no, have not even eaten. But had to do the damn ER thing. I am home, bandaged up, crutches and will have a whopping bill to try and find the $$ to pay.

    Now, If I was not "denied" I could have insurance... my retirement will even pay for it, but I am denied just because of that pre existing condition.

    Your daughter and mine can not afford to take the chance of having no insurance... they can not. This bill, the ACA, prevents them from ever being dropped from coverage. and in 2014, 30 milllion more of us will be able to buy insurance and not be denied.
    (more)
  • findthelight2000 2012/07/11 05:45:49 (edited)
    No
    findthelight2000
    +1
    Why? Because it is not true! All lies! You should be ashamed of yourself, Fef!
  • scart molotov 2012/07/11 02:34:49
    No
    scart molotov
    It's not scary, its a lie
  • TheBorg 2012/07/11 02:30:19
    No
    TheBorg
    +2
    The Daily Caller is a news and opinion website founded by Tucker Carlson and politician Neil Patel, former adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney. The Daily Caller is part of the ring-wing lying propaganda machine and is no different than Faux News.

    Fox News  Faux
  • Sioux TheBorg 2012/07/11 06:01:32
    Sioux
    MSNBC tells the truth?
    LOL
  • TheBorg Sioux 2012/07/12 00:52:22
    TheBorg
    +1
    Study Confirms That Fox News Makes You Stupid
    A new survey of American voters shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources.
    http://www.alternet.org/story...

    Even the conservative "Business Insider" prints articles about how people who watch Fox News are stupider than the rest of the news viewing audience.
    STUDY: Watching FOX News Makes You Stupid
    http://articles.businessinsid...
    news viewing audience study watching fox news stupid httparticles businessinsid
  • Sioux TheBorg 2012/07/12 03:06:57
    Sioux
    Wow that's funny. I don't watch TV!
  • TheBorg Sioux 2012/07/13 02:57:12
    TheBorg
    LOL ~ I don't even own a TV!
    If you looked at the study, it shows that all media sources appear to misrepresent the truth, Fox News just happens to be the absolute worst.
  • Sioux TheBorg 2012/07/13 06:25:39
    Sioux
    Why do you keep talking to me about Fox News as if that is going to bother me? I really don't care. Get it? If you want to attack my beliefs you better have proof to back it up. I research many things, then make up my own mind. I am willing to bet that many Obama supporters don't even pay attention to the intentions of his policies, nor did they research his past!
  • Dana Sioux 2012/07/15 19:47:13
    Dana
    +1
    did you even read the article? I bet not.
  • Sioux Dana 2012/07/16 16:12:44
    Sioux
    No and I don't have to.
  • Dana Sioux 2012/07/17 01:51:52
    Dana
    LMAO!!!!!!!!!!! This is why you are so stupid! IF you want to learn the truth, you may have to actually read the truth! try it sometime...

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/k...
  • Dana TheBorg 2012/07/15 19:46:45
    Dana
    +1
    Great article, I saved it, thanks!!
  • Studied 2012/07/11 01:11:14
    Yes
    Studied
    My doctor has already told me if this does not get changed he is going to retire. As of right now he has decided to not take any more patients.
  • Lee Studied 2012/07/11 02:23:08
    Lee
    LIAR
  • jim 2012/07/11 00:36:18
    Yes
    jim
    +1
    Scary, yes. Predictable, absolutely.
    Obamacare will destroy this country's highly advanced medical system and make it like that of Canada and Britain where a cancer patient will wait seven months for chemotherapy.
    Those over 65 will feel it first as Obama is cutting $500 billion from Medicare. If anyone over 65 voted to reelect him, he/she is a fool.
  • Dana jim 2012/07/11 01:52:52 (edited)
    Dana
    +2
    That is not true what you stated about Canada and Britain. Simply is not true. I have a lot of friends in Canada, living in different provinces and s few friends in the UK and all of them are sick and tired of Americans lying about their health care systems. Not a one of them says they would trade what they have for what we have in the USA, not a single one of them.
  • findthe... Dana 2012/07/11 05:42:09
    findthelight2000
    +3
    You are absolutely correct about that. My Mother and I called my Stepfather's cousin in Canada today to ask if he could come to see his cousin as he probably will not live out the year. He informed us that he can no longer come to America because he has a heart condition, and he cannot afford the American hospitals if he needed help. At home in Canada he can be seen at a moment's notice and he doesn't have to pay anything.
  • jim Dana 2012/07/11 09:54:11
    jim
    Unfortunately, you are misinformed. There is a huge problem with access to specialty care and a seven week wait for chemo is not unusual.
    Case in point: the drug Herceptin is very effective in treating certain types of breast cancer and has been available in USA for years. For many years while it was available in the US, it was not available in Britain. Women were dying there while the same drug was readily available here.
    Finally, a dying woman sued the British bureaucracy and won. Now the drug is finally available but that's what it took and one can only wonder how many families lost loved ones as a result of the bureaucracy.
    Your friends are right about one thing- if you need simple care like an emergency room or routine office visit there's not a big problem.
    The Canadian and British systems are fine-- until you get a serious condition.
    If you are really interested in the facts, Google two things:
    1. the history of Herceptin availability in Britain
    2. the finding of the Supreme Court of Quebec in a suit to allow private insurance where it was noted that people were dying because of long waits for care.
    Those are facts, not anecdotal comments by friends.
  • Dana jim 2012/07/11 15:52:17 (edited)
    Dana
    +1
    I will look those up, thank you.

    My friend down the street was denied further care for her cancer, because her insurance wanted to play games. She had to fight non stop to get any treatment at all, and then they just dumped her. Was not until the ACA was in place, that she was able to resume care again. And they said she had no chance of survival before, that is why they dumped her. I talked to her 2 days ago, she is still going strong, she gets care now, and all thanks to this bill Obama wanted pout through. and if it is any consolation to you, she hates Obama probably more than you do. But that bill saved her life.

    I have a friend who visited TX from Canada. They were in a very bad car crash. Her husband had a broken pelvis, internal injuries, etc. They stabilized him only, then put him in a wheel chair and dumped him on the sidewalk to find his own way home. They could not get back to Canada fast enough, so he COULD get care.

    My friend who lives in AZ, they had a private insurance policy, to cover everything, even if they could not work due to illness or injury. Heard about it on Limbaughs program so they signed up. Hubby in a serious accident, broke his neck. after 3 days in the ICU, trying to stabilize him for surgery, he was put in a wheel chair and put out on the sidewa...

    I will look those up, thank you.

    My friend down the street was denied further care for her cancer, because her insurance wanted to play games. She had to fight non stop to get any treatment at all, and then they just dumped her. Was not until the ACA was in place, that she was able to resume care again. And they said she had no chance of survival before, that is why they dumped her. I talked to her 2 days ago, she is still going strong, she gets care now, and all thanks to this bill Obama wanted pout through. and if it is any consolation to you, she hates Obama probably more than you do. But that bill saved her life.

    I have a friend who visited TX from Canada. They were in a very bad car crash. Her husband had a broken pelvis, internal injuries, etc. They stabilized him only, then put him in a wheel chair and dumped him on the sidewalk to find his own way home. They could not get back to Canada fast enough, so he COULD get care.

    My friend who lives in AZ, they had a private insurance policy, to cover everything, even if they could not work due to illness or injury. Heard about it on Limbaughs program so they signed up. Hubby in a serious accident, broke his neck. after 3 days in the ICU, trying to stabilize him for surgery, he was put in a wheel chair and put out on the sidewalk for his wife to take him home. He was partially paralyzed, she had to get him into her truck by herself, and try and do all his care at home herself. Insurance had decided to deny his care, just for the hell of it, so hospital tossed him out. Wife spent months trying to care for her invalid husband on her own, and fighting w/ the insurance company and attorneys, because the hospital was suing them for the 3 days in the ICU, that insurance decided to deny.

    This is America, and this is ok with you? I think it is despicable.
    (more)
  • findthe... Dana 2012/07/11 15:58:55
    findthelight2000
    +1
    I agree.
  • jim Dana 2012/07/11 23:06:02
    jim
    With all due respect, the examples you cite are anecdotal. While I have no doubt they may have occurred, one can find in any system examples where things have not worked well. Further, I will acknowledge that the American system is not perfect.

    The issue is the system itself, not individual examples. I can give you examples, as recently as this past weekend when I was told by a young guy from Toronto how his mother came down with cancer and was told she would have to wait seven weeks for chemotherapy. They took out a mortgage on the family farm that has been in their family for five generations and went to Detroit (Henry Ford Hospital) to get chemo. He was understandably very bitter. Again, anecdotal.

    From a systemic standpoint, the landmark case in Canada is Chaolli v. Quebec. This involved a man who had waited in pain for over a year (in the US the wait is about 2-3 weeks) for a hip replacement and wanted to buy private insurance so he could jump over the line. The Quebec government said he could not, so he sued.
    The court found for Chaolli and said two significant things:
    1. It came right out and said that people in Canada were actually dying while waiting for care;
    2. It noted that "access to a waiting list is not access to health care".
    That is precisely where we ...









    With all due respect, the examples you cite are anecdotal. While I have no doubt they may have occurred, one can find in any system examples where things have not worked well. Further, I will acknowledge that the American system is not perfect.

    The issue is the system itself, not individual examples. I can give you examples, as recently as this past weekend when I was told by a young guy from Toronto how his mother came down with cancer and was told she would have to wait seven weeks for chemotherapy. They took out a mortgage on the family farm that has been in their family for five generations and went to Detroit (Henry Ford Hospital) to get chemo. He was understandably very bitter. Again, anecdotal.

    From a systemic standpoint, the landmark case in Canada is Chaolli v. Quebec. This involved a man who had waited in pain for over a year (in the US the wait is about 2-3 weeks) for a hip replacement and wanted to buy private insurance so he could jump over the line. The Quebec government said he could not, so he sued.
    The court found for Chaolli and said two significant things:
    1. It came right out and said that people in Canada were actually dying while waiting for care;
    2. It noted that "access to a waiting list is not access to health care".
    That is precisely where we are headed under Obamacare along with huge taxes. You will be taxed if you do not have health insurance and you will also pay an additional 3.8% tax when you sell your house. (Remember when he promised if you "earned under $250,000 your taxes would not go up a dime". That is an outright lie)

    The experience of your friends is terrible. However, the solution is not Obamacare.
    Do some simple math if you still doubt the coming waiting lists.
    1. Arguably, the law will result in 30 million new people having health insurance.
    2. The law does nothing to expand the capacity of the health care system (although it does provide for the hiring of 140,000 additional IRS agents).
    Waiting lists are inescapable
    At the same time, the law calls for cutting another $500 Billion from Medicare. Those cuts will be in the form of reduced payments to doctors and hospitals for people over 65 at a time when that segment of the population is about to explode.
    If you are a doctor or hospital, who will you put at the end of the line- someone for whom you are going to be paid even less than you are now or someone who has private insurance.

    The simple math is inescapable.
    (more)

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/21 16:44:09

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals