Head of U.S. nuclear safety agency to step down

maine

UMaine passes budget; housing, some other fees rise

Letters

A fundamental right

Stephen Sokol and Gerda Neu-Sokol

Friday, November 6, 2009

The health care debate rages on, even though the most conservative members of Congress acknowledge that the nation's health care system is broken and must be changed. Nevertheless, their intransigence continues as they only look to defeat President Barack Obama and ignore the sufferings of their constituents.

A public option, similar to Medicare and stringent regulation of the insurance industry, an entity that is only beholden to profit and its shareholders, is critical to any meaningful reform.

I urge the public to support regulation and a strong public option. The bloated, inefficient, inequitable system must be changed. Health care must be acknowledged as a fundamental right of the people and not a commodity to be purchased by those who can afford it.

"If not now, when?"

Stephen A. Sokol, M.D., Lewiston

Gerda Neu-Sokol, Lewiston

More from Letters

D. McNally: Budget cuts mean job losses 3 hours 16 min ago

N. Willard: Support love, not hate 3 hours 16 min ago

M. Murphy: Less than adequate job 3 hours 16 min ago

W. Ferentz: Fixing Social Security 7

J. Thompson: Consider the accuracy 6

In order to make comments, you must verify your account.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. A member of our staff will call you to verify this information. To join in, fill out your user profile completely and check the box "please verify my status." We'll get back to you within one business day to verify your account.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
Excessively foul and/or vulgar
Inappropriately sexual
Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item

If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned.

Displaying comments, from newest to oldest

Hello fellow commenters,

By the_poorman, unverified — Sat, 11/07/2009 - 13:32

Hello fellow commenters, particularly those of you like Gil and Sirmel who do not understand complex issues. Read this and study it and then think about why it is imperative health care is reformed now:

Successful health care reform is vital to the nation's fiscal and economic future. The legislation the House will vote on in the coming days will guarantee security of coverage, limit the costs of care, create incentives for improved quality of care, and set us on the path towards sustainable economic growth. In short, the House health reform legislation takes the steps necessary to promote our economic health.

Specifically, the bill:
* Reduces the deficit by over $100 billion in the first 10 years, and continues to reduce the deficit in subsequent years, as judged by the Congressional Budget Office.
* Takes initial steps to "bend the cost curve," and thus might lead to even larger cost savings than official estimates suggest.
* Covers nearly all American citizens and legal residents.
We urge House passage of the legislation, which provides a historic opportunity to realize the long-delayed goal of significant health care reform.

Signed,
Dr. Henry J. Aaron, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Mike Chernew, Harvard University Medical School
Dr. David Cutler, Harvard University
Dr. Judy Feder, Georgetown University, Center for American Progress Action Fund
Dr. Dana Goldman, University of Southern California
Dr. Jonathan Gruber, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Len Nichols, The New America Foundation
Dr. Alice Rivlin, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Meredith Rosenthal, Harvard University School of Public Health
Dr. Jonathan Skinner, Dartmouth College
Dr. Katherine Swartz, Harvard University School of Public Health

Any problem that can't be solved with taxcuts, republicans pretend doesn't exist.

verified

The last report from the CBO

By Ray St. Onge, verified user — Sat, 11/07/2009 - 14:06

The last report from the CBO that I saw on Thursday said that only 96% will be covered. This will cost $1.05 Trillion over 10 years. This cost is offset by an estimated $161 billion over ten years from penalties to individuals, who do not purchase insurance and employer, who do not provide insurance to their employees. These fines brings the cost down to $894 billion over ten years. This estimate does not include $245 billion to stop Medicare payments to doctors from decreasing.

So how are they going to pay for this $894 billion. The bill is paid for by $426 billion in cuts for existing programs, such as Medicare Advantage. The difference of $572 billion would be made up by tax increases over a 10 year period of time. When you the cuts and tax increases, you get $998 billion. Subtract the $894 billion from $998 billion you get $104 billion. The decrease in the deficit is reduced not by savings, but by an increase in taxes. Now if you add back in the $245 billion in Medicare payments to doctors, you now add $141 billion over the same period to the deficit.

You obviously are not paying

By the_poorman, unverified — Sat, 11/07/2009 - 16:07

You obviously are not paying attention to what you are reading. Medicare Advantage is government funded private health insurance program designed to compete with Medicare. If the government defunds it, it is not a cut to any Medicare provided services. Medicare Advantage costs 14% more than traditional Medicare, so getting rid of it makes complete sense.

As for the CBO - their most recent estimate projects the House Democrats' health care plan would cost $871 billion over 10 years. The CBO
also found that the Democrats' bill reduces the deficit in the first 10 years. This CBO estimate is way less than the $1.1 trillion price tag of the original House bill that passed out of three committees over the summer and it comes under the $900 billion cap set by President Obama. In other words you read the CBO report wrongly - as it clearly states the deficit will be cut!

As to your suggestion taxes might be raised - the sooner the better for the richest amongst us. Taxes being raised on the top 5 percent of Americans, who own more than half of all wealth, for the benefit of the 50 million Americans who lack health insurance, is a very good thing.

Any problem that can't be solved with taxcuts, republicans pretend doesn't exist.

verified

The House Bill is now

By Ray St. Onge, verified user — Sat, 11/07/2009 - 19:28

The House Bill is now totaling $1.2 Trillion and it still does not cover 36 million Americans.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091102/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul

You must have dyslexia - the

By the_poorman, unverified — Sun, 11/08/2009 - 06:24

You must have dyslexia - the Democratic plan covers 36 million more people.

Here's the stark reality from the CBO:

The CBO did an estimate of the Republican amendment to the House health care bill. There are now hard numbers to compare between the Democratic and Republican notions for health care and the Rpeublican plan can be described in one word: fail.

Coverage:
Democrats – 36 million more covered by 2019, 96% of US covered
Republicans – 3 million more covered by 2019, 83% of US covered

That’s pathetic. Because the population is expected to grow over time, under the Republican health care plan there would be 2 million MORE Americans uninsured in 2019 than there are today, according to the CBO (50 million today, 52 million in 2019). But let’s look at cost:

Democrats – $104 billion in deficit reduction by 2019
Republicans – $68 billion in deficit reduction by 2019

Any problem that can't be solved with taxcuts, republicans pretend doesn't exist.

verified

"government funded private

By Ray St. Onge, verified user — Sat, 11/07/2009 - 19:13

"government funded private health insurance program" what kind of oxymoron is that. If it is government funded it is not private.

You have the internet right

By the_poorman, unverified — Sun, 11/08/2009 - 05:55

You have the internet right strange? Use it and learn before you post. PS - Fox News is not a credible news source so if that is where you are coming up with your diatribes it would explain a lot.

Lockheed Martin, Boeing, TRW, Halliburton, Exxon-Mobil - all private companies that receive significant government support yet are still classified as private companies.

Any problem that can't be solved with taxcuts, republicans pretend doesn't exist.

Nice web page, Mr. Dosh,

By Scotty_O, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 20:34

Nice web page, Mr. Dosh, Half the links don't work or show not available at this time. But I do have to give the good doctor credit...you have worked in the airline and aviation field since 2002. I have too, since 1995....so the medical industry is surveiled by the FDA, the airlines of course, the FAA. So why does a flap bracket the size of my fist that cost $6000. The answer is government regulation. So why does that one blood pressure pill cost 10 bucks? Governement regulation. So why aren't plane tickets to Hawaii $40,000........interstate competition. Can you say "United Health Care", or "Continental Healthlines". Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

. . b t w - Gruß Gut ,

By FarmAlumn, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 17:04

. . b t w - Gruß Gut , Steve and Gerda :) Dr. Steve Dosh , Bates '78

http://home.att.net/~stosher/wsb/html/view.cgi-home.html-.html

. . b t w - Gruß Gut ,

By FarmAlumn, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 17:04

. . b t w - Gruß Gut , Steve and Gerda :) Dr. Steve Dosh , Bates '78

http://home.att.net/~stosher/wsb/html/view.cgi-home.html-.html

So the AMA and the AARP have

By Gil, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 16:58

So the AMA and the AARP have endorsed the Dem plan? Riddle me this poorman - How exactly can you get behind an organization that endorses a plan that they haven't read yet? Brilliant, just brilliant. It has nothing to do with health care and everything to do with power. Why do you think that Eyebrows Pelosi and her colleagues refuse to answer where the Constitution provides them with the authority to even try to reform health care? Why do you think that they have included provisions that punish you if you don't purchase health care? Why do you think that the Dems have turned down attempts to have wording added that exclusively forbids ILLEGAL aliens from obtaining health insurance? Why are they in such a hurry to pass this over 1200 page monstrosity that no one has read? Keep towing the party line like good little sheeple, never questioning, ever obeying. I Hope They Fail
"Reasoning with a liberal is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. " Pirate

"How exactly can you get

By the_poorman, unverified — Sat, 11/07/2009 - 16:13

"How exactly can you get behind an organization that endorses a plan that they haven't read yet?" Just because other people are more educated than you Gil and are not illiterate is no reason to castigate them. Your racism and idiot flag are flying high - you mother would be proud, no?

In case you hadn't noticed Gil we had an election last year and your ideas were put up against Democrats and guess what - you got clobbered. No one like Republican ideas, as they all have proven to be catastrophic failures. Why would anyone care what you have to say now, when you and your ilk have been so clearly thrown out of any position of influence?

Any problem that can't be solved with tax cuts, or bumper sticker slogans Gil pretends doesn't exist.

don't you ever stop being a

By John 28, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 17:25

don't you ever stop being a bigot??? All subjects and you criticize all. What a total bigot idiot jerk you are!!!! Oh yes, I'll hear about it for you the bigot or all other bigots. Right wing republicans will soon be no more!

I notice that you have no

By Gil, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 18:43

I notice that you have no constructive input, could that be because you have no way of actually debating a subject due to ignorance? So instead, you personally attack me, using the word bigot 4 times in 2 sentences of hate filled tirade that means absolutely nothing. You really need to look up the definition of bigot. I know you want the federal government in charge of every aspect of your life because you are too afraid of having the responsibility for your own actions. Why not have Big Gov take the money away from some rich guy to pay your health care? You work hard in your menial, no skill needed, low paying job, the last thing you should have to worry about is paying your own health insurance. You have to use your money for your cell phone, and your X-Box, and the internet and cable. If you have nothing to add other than name calling, then you have nothing to add. Go back to sleep and keep your head in the sand.
"Reasoning with a liberal is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. " Pirate

"you have nothing to add. Go

By the_poorman, unverified — Sat, 11/07/2009 - 16:18

"you have nothing to add. Go back to sleep and keep your head in the sand."

Oh poor Gil - projecting a little too much aren't you now. If you line of thinking is so "perfect" why has it been rejected by the vast majority of Americans? Go back to Faux News and keep letting Glenn Beck convince you that you are losing your country.

Any problem that can't be solved with taxcuts, republicans pretend doesn't exist.

verified

Right on pormanand Dr.s

By Bob Mennealy, verified user — Sun, 11/08/2009 - 22:56

Right on pormanand Dr.s Sokol! If the Republicans had stuck to tax cuts and not searched for non existant weapons of mass destructionourcountry would bea lot healthier fiscallyand morallyand health carewould have been paid for!

verified

Bob67, who claimed they had

By Ray St. Onge, verified user — Sun, 11/08/2009 - 23:00

Bob67, who claimed they had weapons of mass destruction? If Saddam had come clean instead of lying, President Bush would not have invaded.

you forgot your 'thurd'

By John 28, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 20:10

you forgot your 'thurd' statement...hmmmmm....getting crazier and loosing it hun?? lol

I have no idea what you are

By Gil, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 22:42

I have no idea what you are talking about, but again, it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Why attack me personally and not defend your side of the argument if you disagree? Is it because that like your brethren Dan, you have no defense because you don't understand the topic, so, like a lib, you lash out at the person whose ideology doesn't agree with yours?
"Reasoning with a liberal is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. " Pirate

It is high time to turn

By John 28, unverified — Sat, 11/07/2009 - 06:35

It is high time to turn yourself in to a mental health institution before you harm more people, turd!

We've waited over a hundred

By tron, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 17:23

We've waited over a hundred years, so there's no rush. SCOTUS says the commerce clause of the Constitution give Congres the authority. YOU haven't read the bill, so how can you criticize it? And the party line you hate so much was the one that was elected over your precious republicans. Live with it.

WHY would you want to pick up a turd? Dessert?

Please explain how the

By Gil, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 18:46

Please explain how the Commerce clause covers the federal government becoming an an active participant in health insurance. I know I won't get a response because just like last time you threw this tired response out, you still have no idea, you obviously heard it somewhere and thought it sounded real smart. I haven't read the bill, neither have you, neither have those who are supposed to be voting on it tomorrow.
"Reasoning with a liberal is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. " Pirate

Last time I replied to your

By tron, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 19:12

Last time I replied to your exact same question, the rationale I quoted from SCOTUS was way above your ability to comprehend. No need to waste my time and yours, again.

You never responded. You ran

By Gil, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 22:37

You never responded. You ran off and hid, afraid to come back and explain. And now you lie and say you did. The Commerce cluse has absolutely nothing to do with federal control of health care. Go ahead, lie again. You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you in your huge, state check collecting behind.
"Reasoning with a liberal is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. " Pirate

And again you prove my point

By Gil, unverified — Sat, 11/07/2009 - 08:07

And again you prove my point Dan. You have run off and hid in order to avoid having to admit that you lied and that you indeed actually don't know what you are talking about.
"Reasoning with a liberal is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. " Pirate

. . Gee, what next ,Gilly ?

By FarmAlumn, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 17:03

. . Gee, what next ,Gilly ? The NRA and 'ole Jabba the Gut Dead Eye citizen Dick Cheney ? Cheney's got health insurance already ( like your Senators , L O L ) http://home.nra.org

. . Gee, what next ,Gilly ?

By FarmAlumn, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 17:03

. . Gee, what next ,Gilly ? The NRA and 'ole Jabba the Gut Dead Eye citizen Dick Cheney ? Cheney's got health insurance already ( like your Senators , L O L ) http://home.nra.org

As a doctor, you no doubt

By Gary C, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 14:00

As a doctor, you no doubt have more insight that I do on this complicated issue. But, here is my opinion anyway:
I think it is certainly true that no meangingful change in the way we fund healthcare can happen if there is no public option. There is no chance, however, that we will not have a public option of some kind. The US government already controls Medicare, Medicaid and the VA system. These will NOT be dismantled until the government itself is torn down.
None of these are run well, since the government is too big and cumbersome to run anything well.
Part of the solution is to fix Medicare, Medicaid and the VA system, and to cause more competition in private insurance. Fraud and waste are at unnacceptable high levels in every branch of the government, including these healthcare divisions. Private insurers require oversight, as well. They cannot be trusted to not screw over their clients or their competition.
Plus, too many lawyers are cashing in on medical mistake lawsuits, and too many people are suing doctors, hospitals, manufacturers etc for errors. Judgements are too high to be meaningful when honest mistakes happen. Carelessness and incompetence, are, of course, different matters. Tort reform must be part of the package.
Healthcare reform is a ginormous agenda, if it is to be done right. I am afraid it will not happen until politicians no longer are owned by special interest groups (like lawyers, the insurance industy, etc.) If anything meaningful is to happen, the concerns of the patients MUST be the top priority, and nothing yet convinces me that this will happen.
I am not sold that healthcare is a fundamental human right, however. I understand the concept of an inalienable, fundamental human right, but I can't say that healthcare falls into that category. I am willing to say this: You may be absolutely correct, and I might be dead wrong on this issue.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that many citizens' and politicians' primary concern is that whatever Obama likes MUST be fought until it fails. Political idealogues are shameless unthinking fools. And, these are the people we elect, year after year, to represent us. They are mostly the type of person who writes letters to the editor, too. Or calls into talk radio programs, or watch Fox news and enjoy the non-biased coverage. THAT must also change. Rational people need to speak up more and help the less fortunate think for themselves, not blindly follow the loudest voice.

Great letter and so true.

By the_poorman, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 08:32

Great letter and so true. The American Medical Association as well as the American Association of Retired Persons just fully endorsed the Democratic plans for reform. Medicare provides better health care to it's customers than any private insurer, and at 1/3 the cost. Wailing about Medicare fraud is a red herring as private insurers are victims of and perpetuate massive fraud.

The day health insurance companies are driven out of business will be a great day for America!

Any problem that can't be solved with taxcuts, republicans pretend doesn't exist.

I can foresee GREAT BIG

By Gary C, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 14:24

I can foresee GREAT BIG PROBLEMS if the governement runs the whole shebang on healthcare. Until we get a government without fraud and corruption, we need the checks and balances of the private sector.
Somebody must watch the henhouse, and it can't be the foxes.
Don't be so sure that private insurance companies are the entire problem. They are, after all, businesses designed to make a profit for their shareholders, and I'll bet most shareholders want lots of profit. They are only operating in an underregulated capitalist manner. We need private insurance companies (as I stated above), but we need them to run better, and without the ability to steal from the insured to pay the stockholders.
A more balanced system, with public and private options will be best to patients, with oversight on both groups to hold down fraud and waste.

For your

By jebbie47, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 13:01

For your perusal:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-200911050804mctnewsse...

Ask any person on "public

By cderaps, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 08:31

Ask any person on "public option" insurance medicare or medicaid and they will tell you this is not the solution and conservative members of congress are absolutely correct. Going with a public option would bankrupt this country for the same reason that so many people can not afford insurance, the greed beyond anything you could imagine of providers. Let me give you true example of what happens to someone with insurance that requires prior authorization from a primary care physician the same as the public options do. This is a real life, factual case. Tracy (ficticious name) developed an alegic reaction rash over much of her body. It looked a lot like poison ivy but she had not been anywhere to pick up poison ivy, had been in long pants, long sleeves and it was definitely the wrong time of year. She had not changed laundry detergents, fabric softener, bleach, body wash, soap, shampoo... you get the idea and the itching was making her crazy. She applied calamine lotion, took benedryl and tried for about a month to figure it out herself not wanting to go to the doctor. Finally, after more than a month, she had to give in and go to her pimary care who diagnosed a contact dematitis (contact allergy) which she already figured out, and prescribed prednisone which she really was not happy about. Tracy wanted to know what she was allergic to so she could get it out of her life, let her body recover naturally, and not have the reaction to that thing again since knowing what it was she could avoid it. Intead, she got dangerous drugs. She paid her co-pay at the desk and her insurance paid $316.

When she took the prescription to the pharmacy, the pharmacist did not want to fill the prescription. He told her the dosage was dangerously high and called the doctor who insisted that was what they wanted. Tracy paid her co-pay, the insurance paid the rest, she went home, followed the instructions exactly, gained twenty pounds in 10 days, was absolutely miserable with side-effects and the rash was uneffected she was still constantly being exposed to whatever. She suffered another week in frustration and called the doctors office and they insisted she come back in. The doctor insisted she use a steroid cream! Her response was, if high doses of oral steroids had no effect do you really think a cream is going to do anything? Doctor insisted of course and she got to pay another co-pay to the primary care the insurance company paid another $316 and she filled the prescription paying the co-pay for the cream which came in little tiny tubes for a rash that covers most of her arms and legs. This stuff was to be applied twice a day and a tube lasted 5 applications being very careful covering that much area. The prescription allowed for 4 tubes which meant in about 10 days that was done, but the rash was not.

She was madder than ever because she was out the co-pays for two doctors appointments and all those prescriptions, had gained 20 lbs had was still miserable and very very angry. She waits another week and in total frustration and now scratching herself blooding heads for the emergency room hoping for releif. The doctor is very nice diagnoses contact dermatitis and says he can not believe she was not immediately sent to a dermatologist or allergist. He tells her to take claritin instead of benedryl which did not make a difference and that he is faxing her doctor that she needs to see a dermatologist or allergist immediately. He even has her stand there watching him send the fax so she knows it was sent. Of course there is a big bill to her insurance for the emergency room visit.

Two days later not having heard from her doctor's office, she calls them to find out what is going on. When she asks about the fax, the nit-wit says "oh, so you want to make sure we put it in your file," ah, no I want an appointment with an allergist or a dermatologist. Of couse they had to look for the fax and would get back to her, which they did not. Two days later she calls again, they had not found it, her response, are you going to call the hospital to get it or do I need to call and have them send it again, I know they sent it the first time, I was standing there when it was sent. We will call. Two more days nothing and she calls again. Oh, yes we got the fax, and you wanted what again, we will have to send the file back to the doctor. Two more days and a her adult daughter had an appointment with the doctor for a fever, runny nose, cough, and tightness in her chest, and she attends college, (swine flu come to mind) not for the doctor its a pulled muscled, daughter left in disgusted but not before she mentioned her mother is still waiting for that referal which the doctor had no clue about and the daugher dutifully paid her co-pay and the insurance company forked over $316 then the daughter went home crawled into bed and missed a week of classes. Tracy called the doctor's office again to remind them she was still waiting for that referal which by then was about two weeks after the hospital trip.

Two days later the doctor's office calls and the doctor wants her to come back in so they can ook at the rash again and give a better description to the doctor they will refer her too. Well contact dermatitis, is contact dermatitis is contact dermatitis. And she was not about to fork over another co-pay to this greedy.....and have her insurance pay another $316 for nothing she called her insurance and changed primary care providers.

He took one look at her and immediately referred her to an allegist.

She has been calling everyone she can think of to complain about the first doctor, insuance company, medical board, et cetera, no one cares, it isn't their area et cetera. Her insurance told her she should just change doctors. She said that fixes it for me, but what about everyone else you insure that uses that doctor and my premiums are effected because you are getting took with every paitient on your plans that they see. It should have been one office visit of $316 plus co-pay to the primary then the allergist of about $500 with the tesing and all done instead this is going to cost you folks/me over $5000. $816 vs $5000+ it is not hard to see where the problem lies in the United States in providing medical care and public option will just encouage more $5000+

who in hell is going to read

By John 28, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 17:28

who in hell is going to read your long winded letter? Not Me!!!

I feel bad for Tracy, and

By Gary C, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 10:22

I feel bad for Tracy, and can understand her anger and disappointment. Many, including Tracy, need to understand that doctors are hog-tied by insurance paperpushers and cannot practice medicine the way they want to, unless the patient is willing to foot the entire bill. If you want coverage by your insurance company, you doctor has to go through hoop and after hoop, untill they can show a papertrail of alternatives, before insurance companies will pay for what works. In other words, the insurance companies require a patient to fail on several therapy attempts before they will pay for the stuff that works. If you are rich enough, the doctor can do what is the most effiective treatment immediately; if you can't pay the bill yourself (honestly, who can?), you are required to get sicker before you can get better. I have worked with doctors for the last 20 years, and very few are greedy, most would rather get people well and keep them out of their office so that sick people can get faster care. I swear that this is true.
Hopefully, our governmental representatives will break free from the influence of the insurance lobby put together a healltcare bill that puts the patient first. Unless they do this, these situations will not change.
I know that it is easy to blame doctors for these idiotic failures in care, but 99% of doctors will agree that there is little they can do at this point. Insurance rules.
I'm sorry, but these are the facts as I know them.
If Tracy waited two weeks before calling the doctors office about a referral, she needs to realise that it is her health, not the doctors office, that she is responsible for. If she could not call, or ask someone to call after a day or two of waiting, how can she expect a busy office to remember her referral? Nobody is perfect, and that is never more true than when you are dealing with a group of people working in a high volume, high stress environment. In any business, sometimes things fall through the cracks or somebody loses a piece of paper, or somebody is stupid or incompetent, but it is not fair to blame other people for not doing something that is your responsbility. She should take charge of herself, and learn realistic expections, or she will never be happy with any doctor.

She was went to the doctor,

By cderaps, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 12:30

She was went to the doctor, followed the dangerous instructions, and called and called and called after a second appointment and trip to the emergency room. He new doctor saw her once and she was in he allergists office a week later. The insurance company did not require the first doctor to dick around and rip them off, the doctor had and continues to have a scam going, dah. In medicaid and medicare it is worse, those patients go to these same doctors and every last one of them has to have a referral every time they see a specialist even for a chronic condition like having a heart problem or arthritis. The primary makes them go to their office first every time before they see the specialist so they can get paid too.

That is not what the story

By Gary C, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 12:49

That is not what the story say (duh! right back at you)
It says that she suffered for two weeks after the first visit before she called the 1st doctor again, who told her to come right in. (He didn't say wait around and I will get to you when I get to you.)
You are pretty quick to say that she followed "dangerous instructions", but it says that she did not seek any help for 2 weeks before reporting side effects. Every freakin prescription I have seen filled in the last 15 years tells you what SIDE EFFECTS TO LOOK OUT FOR, AND WHAT TO DO IF YOU HAVE THEM. She didn't report the problem, how can her doctor fix it? I don't know the doctor, maybe he is a greedy idiot, I can guarantee you he is not the Amazing Kreskin.
Her new doctor could know about the previous attempts to treat her, and their failure to effectively treat the problem, so was able to do the referral right away--not a miracle event, standard procedure.
The doctor nor the insurance company requires her to suffer in silence.
As for your complaints about referrals, that is exactly the point I made earlier--Medicare will not pay for the specialist until the primary has seen the patient and signed off on the need for a specialist. It is the law, not the doctor.

Ask any person on "public

By cderaps, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 08:31

He took one look at her and immediately referred her to an allegist.

Mr Sokoi: You refer to

By jebbie47, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 08:24

Mr Sokoi: You refer to "similar to Medicare" if you believe this then maybe you should retract your opinion. There is approximately $60 Billion in fraud each year,why doesn't congress do something about it?? Now if they manage medicare like they do what do you think the Public Option will provide??
Take a look at the medical industry as a whole, then tell us who is making the profits, can you do this????? Also it may change your thinking but 1 has to do their homework to be able to be fully informed. Try it you may like it.

Sirmel you make yourself

By the_poorman, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 08:41

Sirmel you make yourself look foolish on your own, but here is an article providing more proof of your foolishness. Fraud due to a hospital:

Hospital sends parents $29,000 bill after son is murdered

By Muriel Kane
Thursday, November 5th, 2009 -- 11:00 am
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

Hospital sends parents $29,000 bill after son is murdered

Shortly after the funeral of California student Scott Hawkins, who was beaten to death by his college roommate on October 23, his parents received a second shock.

A bill for $29,186.50 arrived from the hospital where Hawkins had been taken after being found unconscious in his dorm room, along with a form letter telling "the patient" that he was considered indigent and should seek further treatment through county health services.

Gerald and Elizabeth Hawkins had been informed by Sacramento State College that their son was already dead when his body was discovered and were not aware that he had received level 5 trauma care for five minutes in the hospital emergency room.

"It was just devastating and insulting," Gerald Hawkins stated. It's just hard to grasp for words. My wife and I were near collapse."

"It was just awful," Elizabeth Hawkins told CBS13 News. "I don't think there's any civilized country, anywhere in the world that would allow the parents of a murdered boy to receive a bill like this. ... When you have barely enough energy to finish your sentences, having to sit down and deal with something like this out of the blue is extremely difficult."
Story continues below...

UC Davis Medical Center issued a statement apologizing for the "clerical error" and explaining that "the patient's death in the emergency department should have been flagged as a death in the outpatient record." That would have generated a letter of sympathy and a tactful inquiry about the family's insurance.

Hawkins was a transfer student who had only been rooming for a short time with his alleged attacker, Quran Jones, and it was not clear what prompted the attack. Death was attributed by a representative of the college to "blunt force trauma," and one police spokesperson said Hawkins had been beaten with a baseball bat, although this has not been confirmed.

When police responded to reports of the disturbance, they found Hawkins unconscious and Jones wielding an eight-inch knife. Jones was shot by police as he advanced with the knife and will be charged with murder when he recovers.
Any problem that can't be solved with taxcuts, republicans pretend doesn't exist.

UC Davis Medical Center

By jebbie47, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 12:52

Ah does this mean they made a mistake or what?? which is it??

Question: How many democrats does it take to change out a light Blub, Answer: 501 1 to change it and 500 to demonstrate against the power company that provides the electricity.

verified

Sirmel, I have to

By Ray St. Onge, verified user — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 15:19

Sirmel, I have to respectfully disagree with your answer of 501. First, they would blame the previous administration for burning it out, even though they new it was burnt out when they took office. Then they would second create a large government bureaucracy to study the bulb, come up with an estimate of $5.00 to change it. After it was changed, the actual cost would be more list $1,000. They would keep the bureaucracy around to make sure it doesn't burn out again. Oh, and how do they pay for it, they tax the rich.

How many Republicans does it

By the_poorman, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 14:10

How many Republicans does it take to change a light blub?

1. One to deny that the light bulb needs to be changed.

2. One to attack the patriotism of anyone who says the light bulb needs to be changed.

3. One to blame Clinton for burning out the light bulb.

4. One to tell the nations of the world that they are either for changing the light bulb or for darkness.

5. One to give a billion dollar no-bid/cost-plus contract to Halliburton for the new light bulb.

6. One to arrange a photograph of Bush, dressed as a janitor, standing on a stepladder under the
banner: “Light Bulb Change Accomplished.”

7. One administration insider to resign and write a book documenting in detail how Bush was literally in the dark.

8. One to viciously smear #7.

9. One surrogate to campaign on TV and at rallies on how George Bush has had a strong light bulb changing policy all along.

10. Who needs a light blub when you can get all aglow just by thinking about Ronald Reagan?

Any problem that can't be solved with taxcuts, republicans pretend doesn't exist.

And how many libs.... Well

By Scotty_O, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 20:12

And how many libs....
Well two of course, one to screw in the light bulb (energy efficient Al gore approved), and the other the screw you out of a hard days pay.
Case closed.

. .hAHHhAhah , poorman .

By FarmAlumn, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 16:31

. .hAHHhAhah , poorman . That's pretty darn ƒunny :) You know how many ƒrenchmen it take to change one ? A : One . He holds the bulb and the r e s t of Europe revolves around him (:

Yep! typical left winger all

By jebbie47, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 14:47

Yep! typical left winger all spin no substance.

Your story may or may not be

By Gary C, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 10:38

Your story may or may not be true, I don't know, but it sounds likely enough, so I won't argue one way or the other.
However, if the patient DID receive care at the hospital, but the injuries were too severe for the boy to survive, does this mean that the treatment did not cost the hospital anything at all? The whole incident is horrifying and regrettable, but it was not free. As another poster mentioned, hospitals are REQUIRED to care for patients regardless of their citizenship status, race, color, or ability to pay for the care. If the patient cannot pay, or the insurance will not pay, who pays for this care? The next patient who does have insurance, or the next patient(God help them) who can afford to self pay; essentially, everytime you pay a hospital bill, you are also paying for someone who was unable to pay. THAT is why the bills are so amazingly extravagant. Not fraud, its the law, and very simple economics.
In a perfect word, the attacker would be liable for the victims medical bills, as well as for his death. But that is not always the case; if the parents are not responsible for the bills, and since the hospital will not likely take the greiving parents to court, you and I will pay that bill.
This is NOT fraud due to a hospital.
You may wish to rethink your "foolishness" diagnosis.
I am quite certain that there is significant fraud at work at almost any level of the healthcare system, and in our government in general, too. This is not it, though.

Very good,I was giving him a

By jebbie47, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 12:59

Very good,I was giving him a chance to answer maybe poorman doesn't know what Fraud means?? ya think?? quite different from medicare fraud I say Foolish Poorman !

verified

name me one person in this

By John Clement, verified user — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 07:48

name me one person in this country who was denied health care because they couldn't afford it. just one.

verified

Nataline

By Mark Wrenn, verified user — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 12:24

Nataline Sarkisyan
______________________

"A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

verified

Lil, try telling the whole

By Ray St. Onge, verified user — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 16:07

Lil, try telling the whole story. The reason the insurance company refused to pay was because the procedure was considered experimental.

verified

You forgot the part about

By Mark Wrenn, verified user — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 17:29

You forgot the part about the hospital offering to do the surgery if they came up with a $75,000 down payment. But, they didn't have a spare $75,000 laying around, therefore she died because not only did Cigna deny the claim, they didn't have the $75,000 for the down payment. You should read a little more, you know, "the whole story".
______________________

"A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

verified

they had insurance so

By John Clement, verified user — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 15:56

they had insurance so obviously they could afford it, they were originally denied the operation but cigna relented albeit a little late and she died. unfortunate? yes but she was not denied it because she had no insurance. with govt run health care she would still be dead. 14 years old, the cost-benefit analysis would not be in her favor to make it worthwhile for the operation.

verified

So, now you're all for

By Mark Wrenn, verified user — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 17:26

So, now you're all for rationing care?
______________________

"A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

verified

no that is what we will get

By John Clement, verified user — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 19:39

no that is what we will get with the public option. how about this: there are only 6 insurance companies allowed to sell health care in maine but there are about 1700 nation wide. open it up to all and the price of insurance comes down. same thing happened in the late 70's early 80's with the phone company, no one called the west coast until after 7 pm because it was so expensive, now with competion the price came down a lot. the came thing with lasik and plastic surgery, people shop around when it is their money on the line. cap claims on lawsuits and loser pays. if you want to sit there and let the government tell you what you are going to get and be happy with it then you are intellectually lazy and morally bankrupt. the rest of us want to take care of ourselves and our families.

verified

I'm familiar with many from

By Ronald Riml, verified user — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 10:36

I'm familiar with many from my twenty years experience as a cop. You get initial stabilization, but not the lasting treatment that results in a cure.

Your ignorance is no excuse.

------------------------------------------
When I was a young Sailor - I drank like a Sailor, fought like a Sailor, and screwed like a Sailor. Now that I am old and wise - I have a few scars, but many fond memories.

Deimos, you know that's a

By patty31r, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 09:18

Deimos, you know that's a trick question because people aren't going to be denied health care when they show up to be treated. They will be treated and then pay through the nose if they don't have health insurance.

"If not now, when?" How

By Scotty_O, unverified — Fri, 11/06/2009 - 07:01

"If not now, when?"
How about when we buckle down, fix our economy, and learn to compete with China.... Or are going to import their health care too?

More photo galleries »

RSS	Top headlines \| Lewiston/Auburn \| Franklin \| Oxford Hills \| River Valley \| Sports \| Entertainment \| Obituaries
News	Lewiston/Auburn \| Franklin \| Oxford Hills \| River Valley \| New England \| State \| National \| Business \| Matter of Record \| Submit a news tip \| Archive search
Lifestyle	Encore \| b Section \| Sun Spots \| Dr Donohue \| Dear Abby \| Horoscopes \| Ask Sun Spots \| Submit your event
Sports	Local \| Community \| National \| Contact sports
Opinion	Our View \| Letters to the Editor \| Guest Columnists \| Sunday Perspective \| Write a letter to the editor
Community	Obituaries \| Funeral Notices \| Connections \| Weddings, Engagements, Anniversaries \| Well Done \| Matters of record \| Submit a connections item \| Submit an obituary
Multimedia	Video \| Photo Galleries
Services	Subscribe to the Sun Journal \| Subscribe to the e-Edition \| Manage your newspaper delivery account \| Manage your online commenting account \| Order photos \| Place a classified ad \| Send us a press release \| Write a letter to the editor \| Send us a wedding announcement \| Archive search
Advertising	Search classifieds \| Jobs \| Real Estate \| Legal Ads \| Special Sections \| Special Sections calendar \| Advertise with us \| Contact advertising

SunJournal.com	Contact Us \| Staff Directory \| Advertise with us \| Special Sections calendar \| Commenting Policy \| Privacy Policy \| Photo reprint policy \| Submit a news tip \| Get the App in the Apple Store
Sun Journal	Subscriber Services \| Purchase Photos \| RSS Feeds
Sun Media Group	Sun Journal \| The Forecaster \| Bethel Citizen \| Advertiser Democrat \| Rumford Falls Times \| My Job Wave \| MaineLink \| Privacy Policy

A fundamental right

Sponsor

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

In order to make comments, you must verify your account.

Advertisement

Displaying comments, from newest to oldest

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Top Stories

Advertisement

Sunjournal.com on facebook