83% of doctors have considered quitting their practices because of "ObamaCare." Would you want to be a doctor under "ObamaCare"?
JenSemPa
2012/07/12 14:41:29
|
|
|||||
|
9 votes
|
|
60% | |||
|
0 votes
|
|
0% | |||
|
6 votes
|
|
40% | |||
The post says 83% of doctors will quit. What is does not mention is that survey included less than 700 doctors while there are many thousands in the USA . For decades, Big Pharma and Big Insurance have been entrenched in the Lincoln Bedroom. Get rid of that and watch things improve for everyone.
And to your point, if you go to the results of the study itself, you find that of those surveyed: "Most are in solo or small group practice (81%) and office-based (89%) versus hospital-based (11%)" http://www.doctorsandpatients...
They also gave answers such as: “The best chance for controlling cost is limiting government interference and increasing patient responsibility for cost. If the patient pays at time of service and files an insurance claim on their own, it reduces the likelihood of superfluous utilization, AND reduces insurance company denials since the patient is following up on their own claim. Also, removing insurance purchasing from employers makes insurers responsible to policy holder, not employers.”
Am I the only one that this sounds wrong to? I'm to pay up front and then appeal to my insurance for reimbursement? How precisely would that work in a situation such as the spinal surgery I had a couple years back? I should have ponied up over $100,000 while experiencing the worst, most debilitating pain of my life, and then spent my recovery time dealing with insurance claim forms and making phone call after phone call to follow up and hope they'd pay me back ...
And to your point, if you go to the results of the study itself, you find that of those surveyed: "Most are in solo or small group practice (81%) and office-based (89%) versus hospital-based (11%)" http://www.doctorsandpatients...
They also gave answers such as: “The best chance for controlling cost is limiting government interference and increasing patient responsibility for cost. If the patient pays at time of service and files an insurance claim on their own, it reduces the likelihood of superfluous utilization, AND reduces insurance company denials since the patient is following up on their own claim. Also, removing insurance purchasing from employers makes insurers responsible to policy holder, not employers.”
Am I the only one that this sounds wrong to? I'm to pay up front and then appeal to my insurance for reimbursement? How precisely would that work in a situation such as the spinal surgery I had a couple years back? I should have ponied up over $100,000 while experiencing the worst, most debilitating pain of my life, and then spent my recovery time dealing with insurance claim forms and making phone call after phone call to follow up and hope they'd pay me back when I have no point of reference to work from or established organization to back me up? Sorry, but that sounds like an awful idea.
Thanks for the "Other" :D
I consider not having to deal with it the only good thing about my own recent retirement from the healthcare profession (nurse).
I'm sorry, but I am not a social Darwinist. Before I'd leave millions of people without medical care, I would take a look at eliminating the for-profit system altogether. Certainly I would, at minimum, support efforts to help these additional 90,000 doctors into the practice in the next eight years, if that is indeed what's needed: government grants, subsidies, tax breaks... we have a lot of tools at our disposal. It almost sounds though like conservatives are not interested in bettering or maintaining the current quality of care for those who already have coverage by any other means than continuing to deny it to those who don't.
Excuse the cliche, but money doesn't grow on trees.
And conservatives are not "denying coverage to those who don't have it."
I'm getting tired of the liberal "conservatives don't care" arguments. They're tired. They're old. They're mean-spirited and hateful. And most of all, they're wrong.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/in...
As for “a significant part of the population is not covered.” In the US no one can be turn a way from an emergency room by law and that is the way it’s been for many years. Most of this “population” you are talking about decided not to have coverage by choice. Many of us pay as we go along. Now I am forced to pay through Obamacare. What, then, became of my freedom and the freedom of those healthcare professionals through the dictate of government?