Dr. Kevin Weiland takes to the pages of the Rapid City Journal to tell those bristling at the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate to get over themselves and start looking out for their friends, family, and country:
...[C]hoosing not to obtain health insurance is risky business. Besides the tax (or fine) that will be levied against you, you put your own health care at risk. Because it is not “if” you get sick or injured, but “when” you get sick or injured.
Without the safety net of health insurance, you will eventually amass medical debt, putting your family at risk for bankruptcy. With this medical debt, you or your loved ones are less likely than those without debt to fill a prescription, see a specialist when needed, or visit a doctor or clinic when you are sick. Additionally, you and your loved ones are more likely to skip a needed test, procedure, or treatment as a result of medical debt. Not following through with your doctor not only puts your health at risk, but puts the doctor and their clinic at risk in caring for you.
When you do get sick or injured, the only access you might have will be the emergency room, where, by law, you cannot be denied care. The expenses, if not paid by you, will be passed on to other health insurers, resulting in higher premiums for those law abiding citizens with health insurance [Kevin Weiland, "Having Health Insurance about Responsibility," Rapid City Journal, 2013.10.12].
The Republicans holding the U.S. budget and the world economy hostage to the individual mandate they once favored and the rest of the Affordable Care Act exemplify this selfishness. They don't care about the consequences to anyone but themselves and maybe their rich campaign donors who think their money absolves them of community responsibility.
Take the doctor's advice: don't be selfish. Take responsibility for yourself, your neighbors, and your country.
Dr. Weiland is correct about this. In this land of ours to see chili feeds and raffles for our neighbors and friends that have had accidents or sickness, is no way to run a country. Get yourselves covered and be independent, this is your time to protect yourself and your family.
I appreciate the neighborliness of folks willing to raise funds for sick neighbors. But seriously: if a sickness or injury is bad enough to get publicity and motivate a fundraiser, what percentage of the total hospital bill do you think a chili feed will cover? Has anyone ever studied the cold numbers on such events?
I get confused when I hear my conservative friends go on a rant about the mandate. Isn't his what the Republicans and conservatives want? Don't they want people to take personal responsibility? And if not, force them too? Isn't the ACA patterned after a plan from the Heritage Foundation and then implemented by Mitt Romney in Massachusetts?
So why do they hate it? Hmmmmm!!
I think owen just nailed it. I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how exactly do you or anyone else for that matter pursue life, liberty and happiness without your health.
Vincent, I agree with you. Even with medicare/medicaid, at my age and with the health problems I have, there are days I am so tired I have change doctor's appointments, because of having to wait for rides to and from, which can be half an hour each way. I'm not blaming my lack of transportation on my health problems, it just doesn't help any. Enough of my complaining.
Hello Joan, Complaining, no, I would say observing. You are seeing what the rest of us pass by each and every day without so much as a care in the world. You see the advantage and need of public transportation for not only our elderly, but for us all. Our cities are spread out in all directions, because of that, we only have our vehicles to get us to those doctors and places to purchase what our needs are to sustain us. For some reason, we were lead to believe that this is supposed to be the best of our world. I would disagree with that completely. As we shall see healthcare for all become a reality, maybe we will also see public transportation become an even bigger deal for us here, that includes the rural areas as well. There is no reason why small towns cannot have daily service by means of public transportation in the richest nation in the world, or are we?
If we had universal health care such as Paul Wellstone or Dennis Kucinich have advocated, the mandate would be a nonissue.
There is a sense of community coming together for a benefit. Every little bit helps a family buried with medical bills and the feeling of support comforts them in their time of need.
You can add George McGovern to the list of those who advocated universal care.
Tax corporations more and get them out of providing employee health coverage. No reason for all those temporary uncovered workers then. They might as well work 40 hours. And increase the minimum wage too.
It all fits together except in the tiny TEA Pot brains.
Universal health care would greatly improve our country. When we "Pay for Service" it's too late. We need preventative maintenance. The HMO's aren't all bad, but wellness means a better diet, and a better understanding of food and how we process it and a real change in agriculture and what we buy in our local grocery stores. Not an easy change!
Michael, chili feeds can't handle health care bills any more effectively than hastily assembled donations can run the national parks or compensate ranchers for their losses. Ad hoc fundraising is no way to solve big problems.
Let me be as coldly analytical as I can and reformulate my question: think about the man-hours and resources that go into organizing a chili feed. What's the return on investment? And when a neighbor has a sudden, catastrophic hospital bill, we do have to organize an event and sell an ancillary product to raise the money? Why not just pass the hat, and throw in all the money we'd have spent on beef and tomatoes and plastic forks?
Or better yet, why not just create a reliable health care funding mechanism that serves every citizen, not just those with lots of friends who know how to advertise and cook, not just those in communities with disposable income? Why not create a funding system that doesn't have to be organized and reorganized ad hoc in each community in response to each crisis, but instead is always there, at the same number for every hospital to call when a patient comes in?
Why not, instead of requiring every citizen to fulfill the responsibility Kevin is talking about by tracking down one of numerous private plans with different prices and conditions, unify the system, cover everyone, and pay for it through taxes?
Chili feeds, private insurance... I'm glad y'all got me thinking down this line!
Joan and Jerry, I am writing this post in San Antonio, attending the e-Clinical National Conference. There are 3,500 attendee’s here, all using the electronic medical record system known as e-Clinical. I have to say, that what Obama did to stimulate Doctor’s to use electronic medical records, fulfilled its purpose to stimulate the economy. When I see over 50 other sponsors offering devices and programs for the EMR, and users of the system from every part of the country, I began to realize the vision congress and our president had when they offered this stimulus package to my profession.
The real cool stuff for Joan…..Telemedicine. Yes, shortly, your doctor, if on board with the advances in medicine known as EMR, will be able to connect with you, via the internet. You are obviously connected (thanks to the awesome blog known as Madville) the next step is just around the corner. Unfortunately, the success of this stimulus is going unrecognized. So hang in there, Joan, you count, and I pray we can elect representatives, both at the state and national level, that are more interested in you, rather than those huge corporations that contribute to them (Plug Intended).
Universal health care would probably be better, but Obamacare really has potential. It's still private, competitive, government moderated. Even without right wing support it may work because it brings customers to the table for something they really need. It's very moderate.
John, agreed, universal care would certainly take the risk out of caring for patients, as we would treat them all the same and doctors would not have to fight different battles for their patients with different insurance companies.
The problem is going from whole milk to skim milk. I have to tapper my patients when I want them to consume a healthier diet, or curb their addiction to nicotine. Like health care, I don't think our country was ready to go with the leaner, more efficient diet of health care, but tapering down to 2% fat milk (Obamacare) might have been a better option. Who knows, this may work out. What is really cool, I have seen, first hand, it’s benefit to my family and my patients.