15 replies to this topic

[jmc09]

Advertisement

Hi all.As a citizen of the UK we have always had a health service which is free to all and prescriptions were free to the poorest and neediest.Overall its been a great system in principle but has been used as a political football in recent times. Although it hasnt helped me cure my IBS,I have been able to try many treatments free of cost.I've always found it unbelievable that a country as wealthy and powerful of the US has never had free health care for everybody.But now it looks as though you may have a type of free health service at long last.I dont know all the details but it seems a step in the right direction and especially for IBS sufferers who go through many different treatments and medications to live from day to day.How will this new healthcare bill effect you and your families?

[refuse to live this way]

I don't believe it will change anything for myself of my family. From what I can tell, if you have health insurance through your employer you will continue to use theirs versus the new health care service. I haven't read all the particulars, but from what I've seen so far, employers who offer health insurance to their employees will be obligated to show the amount paid for health insurance on each employees W-2 at the end of the year. This will prove if the individual has employer sponsored health insurance. So, as usual, the hard working middle class will end up paying for it, but get no use of it because they actually have a job and work and their employer offers health insurance. Their may be minimum or maximum wage amounts involved somewhere along the way, but I haven't been notified of that yet. The US likes to work that way. The blue collar worker continues to work his butt off but doesn't reap any benefits, these are usually given to the poor or out-of-work, or those that just plain ole don't want to work. Hope this gives you an idea of what it's like in the great ole US of A.

[annie7]

oh no--the affordable care act is by no means a health service that is free to all like the NHS. we'll still have to pay for insurance, pay co pays for doc appts, scripts and tests etc--although possibly more preventive services might not require a co pay, which is good. many are saying that the co pays will be rising though which is a bit scary to me since hubby and i are both retired. i can barely afford some of my drug co pays as it is and frequently have to skip a month.sounds like many people--especially in certain areas-- might have to wait longer to get in to see their docs as well as longer wait times for tests etc. already i have to wait 2-3 months to see my gastro and even longer for the back doc. the neurologist was six months.sounds like long wait times are common with the NHS..guess that's all to be expected.IMHO--the pre existing condition part is definitely urgently needed as is the insurance coverage for children up to 26 yrs old.i do hope that the ACA will end up being a helpful and positive thing for people...it will be interesting to see what happens with the november election and all this.

[Linda46]

Something had to give in the US health system. As my brothers (doctors) so often joke, you don't want to even stub your toe in the US health system without health insurance. The right wing in the US are saying that the sky will fall in. We had the same hysteria in Australia in the 1970's when our universal health system started. We pay a percentage of our taxes at the end of the financial year to fund the health system. You cannot opt out, but you can elect to have private health cover as well. I choose to do this because I want to have my choice of doctor and specialist. I also want immediate care if I need it. This issue has always been seen as a human rights issue in this country. Some people work extremely hard, but depsite this, will not be able to afford health cover. If they suddenly get a serious illness, like cancer or Parkinson's disease, why should their livelihood or house be on the line? This cannot happen in Australia, but it definitely happens in the US. I think the people of the United States need to grow up a little.Linda

[Wendy-1]

How will it affect me? Well...I work for a small company that offers health insurance to stay competitive. But, they have already expressed with the number of employees that it will be financially cheaper for them to pay the employer penalty the government imposes and not offer it at all. Wonderful. That means I have to find and pay for my own insurance out of pocket which might be more money for less coverage than I have now (which carries a significant deductible). And since I am in that "working middle class", likely won't get any subsidy to offset the cost. Don't get me wrong, it has some wonderful benefits that I am all for but what good are those going to do me now when I may not have the benefit of an employer plan. In all honesty, they stopped a little short of going to a national system and left people like me out in the cold...either do it or don't is what I say...

[Linda46]

In countries like England and Australia, employers do not offer health insurance as a benefit of employment. To us, that seems ridiculous. I can't understand why you just can't bring in a system where everyone pays a percentage of their tax each year so that every citizen is covered. The problem seems to lie in the fact that any system like this is seen as socialism or communism to US citizens, despite the fact that so many non-socialist countries have these systems in place. So often I read on this NG about someone not being able to have a test or procedure because they don't have health cover or they don't have adequate health cover. You also pay way too much for medication in the US. You are being ripped off for everything! The insurance and pharmaceutical companies know this and they want to protect their interests!Linda

[annie7]

wendy--so sorry about your situation--that's terrible. and yes, that's exactly what i've been reading/hearing--that people working for the smaller companies will be kicked out into the cold and because of this, many in the working middle class will suffer. this is wrong. i agree--the ACA does have some good benefits but they stopped a little short.linda--it does seem to me that a plan similar to what they have in the uk and australia would be better. and oh yes the insurance companies and big pharma are definitely out there greedily protecting their own interests.

[jmc09]

Good points from Linda here but its interesting to see that the working 'middle classes' still blame the poor and 'work shy' rather than the rich who are responsible for their lack of opportunity rather than than the obscenely rich who refuse to put a share of their wealth back in to a system that gave them this wealth.It seems its a step in the right direction but there still seems a long way to go.

[Jen37]

I think it is "small" step in the right direction with the health care bill being passed. I am covered under my husbands insurance Blue Cross. I have to say that we have a $2,500 deductible for each family member! That means that if any of us has to have tests or go to the hospital we have to pay that deductible before the insurnace will pay anything. This is ridiculous in my opinion. I like that with this new health care bill that people will not be denied for pre-exsisting health conditions. I remember at one point when my son was little, he was under his dad's health insurance and his dad changed jobs so my son was without health care for a time. Well I tried to get health insurance for him, but because he has asthma the insuance companies would not accept him. The ones that did had monthly rates like $700 per month and the coverage was ####!! This is so wrong. Luckily my husband got him covered under his insurance.That was a few years back. Now my son is 20 years old and from what I am hearing with this new law, insurance companies have to cover kids until they are 26. This is really good news as most kids are in college at the age 21 and do not have a jod with benefits.It is in no way going to be perfect, it never is, but at least it is a baby step in the right direction. Health care should be free for everyone in my opinion. Hell, with the amount we pay here in Illinois with taxes they should have enough money to give free health care to everyone!!!

[jmc09]

If a small country like the UK,despite the efforts of the current government,can provide a free health care system then so can the US,if it wants to.Maybe if all the money they spent on the military which is more than more than half of the worlds spending then universal health care would not be a problem.Maybe the President and all his Generals could do with all being diagnosed with IBS,then they might have a change of view! lol

[annie7]

jmc--well said---excellent point! i couldn't agree with you more.

[Linda46]

If a small country like the UK,despite the efforts of the current government,can provide a free health care system then so can the US,if it wants to.Maybe if all the money they spent on the military which is more than more than half of the worlds spending then universal health care would not be a problem.Maybe the President and all his Generals could do with all being diagnosed with IBS,then they might have a change of view! lol

Not "free". If it is like Australia, we pay for it via out taxes.

[jmc09]

It is also funded by national insurance contributions here but in principle its free as there are no obstacles to being treated such as lack of money or insurance on the patients behalf.Health Care always has to be funded but along with education it defines how i view the country as how developed they are.The money is always there but its how the country's people vote for it to be spent that defines that country for me.But baby steps and small acorns etc.

[overitnow]

Having lived and paid somewhat higher taxes for our national social programs in Canada, I "enjoyed" major cancer surgery and follow-up radiation this past January through May. It took three weeks from diagnosis to surgery and seems to have gone well. I know at 66 I would have been old enough to qualify for Medicare in the States and my health care was free only because the monthly payment was covered by my then working wife's contract; but it was pretty clear that while this was life threatening, at no point would it have cost me more than the general monthly payment which is dramatically smaller than anyone in the States who has to pay for their own insurance. Personally, having worked in low paid non-union service sectors for much of my working life, I am pretty sure I would never have been able to afford Blue Cross for all those years my family was growing without Canadian Medicare. The nicest thing about this is that at no point do we ever hear the discussion about the "lazy"--often characterized that way by the more fortunate--riding on the backs of the workers. Mostly the argument from the wealthier is that they want to "opt out" of the national system in order to lower their taxes and buy their own health insurance. To me, this mostly sounds like the privileged trying to decapitate a system that benefits everyone according to need rather than means. Oh yes, in Canada we do get to choose and keep our own doctors, as well.But, class warfare seems so entrenched in the US political system that the reaction to the ACA is not surprising, just sad.Mark

[Linda46]

Having lived and paid somewhat higher taxes for our national social programs in Canada, I "enjoyed" major cancer surgery and follow-up radiation this past January through May. It took three weeks from diagnosis to surgery and seems to have gone well. I know at 66 I would have been old enough to qualify for Medicare in the States and my health care was free only because the monthly payment was covered by my then working wife's contract; but it was pretty clear that while this was life threatening, at no point would it have cost me more than the general monthly payment which is dramatically smaller than anyone in the States who has to pay for their own insurance. Personally, having worked in low paid non-union service sectors for much of my working life, I am pretty sure I would never have been able to afford Blue Cross for all those years my family was growing without Canadian Medicare. The nicest thing about this is that at no point do we ever hear the discussion about the "lazy"--often characterized that way by the more fortunate--riding on the backs of the workers. Mostly the argument from the wealthier is that they want to "opt out" of the national system in order to lower their taxes and buy their own health insurance. To me, this mostly sounds like the privileged trying to decapitate a system that benefits everyone according to need rather than means. Oh yes, in Canada we do get to choose and keep our own doctors, as well.But, class warfare seems so entrenched in the US political system that the reaction to the ACA is not surprising, just sad.Mark

Hi Mark,I am very conservative in my political views. Having said that, I believe that health is one area that requires a universal approach. My husband and I are lucky enough to be able to afford private health cover, but we can also use the public health system. Your average visit to the doctor is always on the public health system, whereas, if you are refered to a specialist, you chooses whether to use private or public health. I usually use my private health cover because it is quicker and I get to choose my specialist. If I was to choose my specialist on the public health system, they would probably shunt me down the list a bit. It's a funny thing about the US, they seem to think that they will never fall on hard times. Maybe the financial crisis of recent times will make some people take stock and realise that the poor are not always that way because they are lazy or haven't tried hard enough. Even the comfortable middle class can end up in crisis financially if they do not have the right kind of health insurance. You really need to get the health insurance companies out of the picture with a universal health scheme. It needs to be funded by peoples taxes. If people want the extra reassurance of private health cover to be used at private hospitals, then that should be available as well. We have public and private hospitals here.Linda

[jmc09]

Linda,i couldnt agree with you more.The problem in the UK and possibly the US is that the very wealthy are not willing to pay their fair share as they do everything to avoid paying them.Joe Public has no option as tax is paid through their wages,Pay As You Earn and most are happy to do it this way as long as higher earners contribute too.The wealthy have got wealthy through their country and its workers and so should at least contribute something,even from a moral standpoint too.At the moment the current UK government wants to base the UK system on the US system while the US wants more of a UK based healthcare system itself.Its clear that Healthcare should be decided and delivered by Health professionals and not politicians.