Justin and Claire 4: Mini-horses Not Babies

[theotherelise]

I strongly disklike Hilary Spivey, but I think many people who have loved one’s going through cancer feel like there is nothing they can do to help. So giving to a financial support fund feels like something they can control and demonstrate support through. Especially for those far away. 

but yeah, get health insurance and learn a freaking lesson about your privilege. 

[JermajestyDuggar]

I admit I was glad to see Hilary speak up on that post about how scameritan didn’t cover the cancer treatments. These people need to know it’s a scam and shouldn’t rely on it. The only reason why anyone even bothers with that scam is because our health care system is completely broken. 

[GuineaPigCourtship]

It doesn't matter how much you save or how much you make in your business for most Americans.  Unless you're a member of the super rich, you probably cannot afford cancer treatments without insurance.  Even then, depends on the insurance.  I wouldn't want to ask for help if I didn't NEED it, but I don't think anyone should be too proud to ask for help with their 13yo child who has expensive medical needs.

My husband works for the state, though, so we currently have amazing insurance.  I definitely come from a position of extreme privilege at the moment and would never feel comfortable being uninsured.

[JermajestyDuggar]

33 minutes ago, GuineaPigCourtship said:

It doesn't matter how much you save or how much you make in your business for most Americans.  Unless you're a member of the super rich, you probably cannot afford cancer treatments without insurance.  Even then, depends on the insurance.  I wouldn't want to ask for help if I didn't NEED it, but I don't think anyone should be too proud to ask for help with their 13yo child who has expensive medical needs.

My husband works for the state, though, so we currently have amazing insurance.  I definitely come from a position of extreme privilege at the moment and would never feel comfortable being uninsured.

I think this is why woo and “health” MLMs are so common in the US. I think they are made more popular because people can’t afford  regular health care in this country. If you don’t have insurance, it’s cheaper to go to a chiropractor, have an unassisted homebirth, drink plexus, use essential oils, and go to H4C and spend your GFM $50,000.

[Cam]

Those immersed in religion are often sitting targets ripe for a scammer to take advantage of them. Church goers get sucked into the simple “God will take care of all your needs” mantra. They are duped into believing this religious lifestyle protects them from all harm, including illness. They feel they never have to worry because God is on their side. Just place that faith right there and you’re good to go! Easy-peasy.

Then someone comes up with the idea for a Christian health insurance plan that will prey on all those misguided beliefs (but makes nice sums of money for those running the company). I’m sure many with that type insurance have been blindsided by something like a family member’s cancer diagnosis and its treatment cost only to learn how the Christian insurance they carry falls short on coverage.

Our family has been affected by cancer numerous times. We have good insurance that’s paid for massive amounts of treatment, for which I’m grateful, and we’ve also had hefty amounts of out of pocket expenses that were challenging.

Going through cancer treatment is difficult enough without finding that your health insurance is a sham.

Edited July 23 by Cam

[Cupcake79]

I am SO thankful for living in a country where noone is economically ruined by expensive treatments for illnesses like cancer or something else. I gladly pay my taxes. From what I learn here I have the impression that even if you have a fairly good salary and health insurance it is still possible to have huge amounts of debt after an illness. How is it possible? 

I just recently read about a woman from my European country who some years ago lived in the US. For some reason (I don't want to reveal why, but it was reasonable) she didn't have health insurance and she got pregnant. A hospital birth would have cost her about 35000$. That was not an option. She chose between going back home to give birth or give birth at a birthing center. She chose the birthing center, which cost about 8000$. It wasn't her first child and everythin went well. To me this is so strange. I have given birth to three children, one with complications. I think I might have paid something like 500€ in total out of my own pocket. For three births. How does anyone poor ever afford to have children in the US? Does this Medicaid/mediccare or whatever it's called kick in? I can definitely see why Samaritans and the like can be seen as a good option, even when I realise it probably isn't.

 

[Cults-r-us]

18 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

I think this is why woo and “health” MLMs are so common in the US. I think they are made more popular because people can’t afford  regular health care in this country. If you don’t have insurance, it’s cheaper to go to a chiropractor, have an unassisted homebirth, drink plexus, use essential oils, and go to H4C and spend your GFM $50,000.

         But woo medicine and MLM products are also expensive. There are several reasons people are distrustful of conventional medicine. My grandpa called the doctor "the Croaker". There was a lot of fear, distrust and poor outcomes when people only saw doctors as a last result for desperate illness.

     I have neighbors who are not Fundie but who stay isolated and have a family culture fearful of outsiders. Her mother died of lung cancer (lifelong smoker) after which they suffered even more suspicion and distrust of doctors. So when she, herself, discovered a breast lump she did not seek medical attention for more than a year. Needless to say, she is in the graveyard now.

     Although more people have health insurance thanks to Obamacare, it is still expensive.  Insurance companies make contracts with health care providers for services. For example, the hospital takes a loss accepting a contract for $6,000 for each hysterectomy thinking it will make money on heart procedures but then the insurance company changes it's reimbursement. This is part of how hospitals charge so much but still lose money (not that hospital systems aren't greedy). But the person who is truly screwed is the uninsured because they get charged way more than what an insurance company would pay. It would be a lot more fair if everyone was charged the same.

[Giraffe]

@Cupcake79 cost plays into it for some of these women, I'm sure. The other reason is the US's abysmal statistics on maternal-fetal mortality. But what these women are ignoring is that the solution isn't to birth unassisted or to not have medical care during pregnancy. But it probably feels like a solution when they hear anecdotes from friends about all the "unnecessary" things they had done during pregnancy/delivery. And then they go into pregnancy and delivery with anecdotes and Dr Google and assume they basically know as much as the experts now so why the big deal. It's mind boggling!

ETA: In the US there's a vast difference between a white person giving birth and a non-white person giving birth. These women also don't acknowledge that simply by being white they have a greater chance of accessing competent medical care. https://www.cdc.gov/maternal-mortality/php/data-research/index.html

Edited July 24 by Giraffe

[Meggo]

I am an American living in Canada - and have been steeped in both health care systems. We have the provincial plan - like everyone does. It's a base level of care. My son is 11 and wears glasses and we've never paid anything for his eye exams. I know we've paid for his glasses - but not the exams. We also have work-offered insurance (dental, orthodontics etc etc) which is nice. 
But also - thinking of insulin. My sister is an insulin dependent diabetic and has been since she was about 11. She has also been perpetually underemployed for years - but she is astounded that her bottle of insulin is WAY cheaper in Canada (and doesn't need a prescription to get it) even before you calculate in the exchange rate. 
I've also been able to get her parts for her insulin pump WAY cheaper over there than over there. Like - this isn't a vanity thing. She's not looking to get a nose job just because she doesn't like hers. She needs insulin to LIVE. Why is it SO HARD for the American health system to get that price down? (I know why - I just find it disgusting). 

Also - I think there are probably more people starting businesses in Canada because they know they don't have to worry about insurance. I mean - breaking your arm in the US is probably pretty expensive (xrays etc etc). Being in a car accident could likely bankrupt someone. Cancer too. But in Canada - while it's not a perfect system (and my little corner has long waits for things) no one is going to go bankrupt because they got cancer. 

[Expectopatronus]

@Meggo I could not agree more. In the past 18 months, my daughter visited the ER due to an allergic reaction, had tubes put in her ears and had eye surgery. I broke my leg, had a hysterectomy, emergency surgery to fix the error from the hysterectomy, subsequent surgery to take the stent out of the ureter and numerous x-rays, ultrasounds and CT scans. I would be bankrupt if I had to pay for all that. Social medicine is the way to go! 

[Meggo]

On 7/25/2024 at 10:29 PM, Expectopatronus said:

@Meggo I could not agree more. In the past 18 months, my daughter visited the ER due to an allergic reaction, had tubes put in her ears and had eye surgery. I broke my leg, had a hysterectomy, emergency surgery to fix the error from the hysterectomy, subsequent surgery to take the stent out of the ureter and numerous x-rays, ultrasounds and CT scans. I would be bankrupt if I had to pay for all that. Social medicine is the way to go! 

My son spent a month in the NICU when he was born. I'm sure if he was in the US and subject to "life time caps" or whatever - he'd be out of luck. 

As it is - before the ACA - my sister (diabetic since she was a kid, survived leukemia as an adult) - would be completely unable to get health care without a job. She's been perpetually under employed (she has a masters degree in international business but keeps getting hired by companies that then sell or dissolve etc - it's ridiculous) so it's extra heart breaking.

 

[Giraffe]

I was working on my finances with a friend this weekend. I've used up the amount in my annual health savings account already (copays, injection that insurance wouldn't pay for, er visits). I felt like I was drowning and relatively speaking it's not even that much! But it's enough for me to need to make some adjustments. I so wish we had socialized medicine!

[sarasue59]

On 7/25/2024 at 9:29 PM, Expectopatronus said:

@Meggo I could not agree more. In the past 18 months, my daughter visited the ER due to an allergic reaction, had tubes put in her ears and had eye surgery. I broke my leg, had a hysterectomy, emergency surgery to fix the error from the hysterectomy, subsequent surgery to take the stent out of the ureter and numerous x-rays, ultrasounds and CT scans. I would be bankrupt if I had to pay for all that. Social medicine is the way to go! 

But but but, that's SOCIALISM!!  Just kidding.  I 100 percent agree with you, but I know I will never see a universal healthcare system put into place in this country in my lifetime.  For my nieces and nephews and their children, I hope it does come to fruition at some time in the future.

[Coconut Flan]

54 minutes ago, Meggo said:

My son spent a month in the NICU when he was born. I'm sure if he was in the US and subject to "life time caps" or whatever - he'd be out of luck. 

The ACA abolished life time caps also.

Also I would have died six years ago if I had been on the NHS.  Never forget it isn't perfect either.  I've had both.  Both sides need to improve.

[Meggo]

1 hour ago, Coconut Flan said:

The ACA abolished life time caps also.

Also I would have died six years ago if I had been on the NHS.  Never forget it isn't perfect either.  I've had both.  Both sides need to improve.

100% - there is absolutely room for improvement in both systems. 

[GuineaPigCourtship]

Like many other Americans, when I graduated college at 22 I was off my parents' insurance.  I had been diagnosed with Crohn's disease (likely don't have it, thank god, but that was the closest they came based on my symptoms at the time) and my medications were almost $800/mo.  I was completely uninsurable and basically resolved to do as well as I could with grad school and work until I got sick enough and died OR succeeded in graduating and managed a job that provided me with insurance.  Just a fact of life before the affordable care act.  It's pure luck that didn't happen and I did have a classmate whose sister died of untreated Crohn's because she didn't have money for meds.  The healthcare system is so fucked up, but less than it used to be.  Thank goodness.

[tanba]

On 7/29/2024 at 6:02 PM, Coconut Flan said:

The ACA abolished life time caps also.

Also I would have died six years ago if I had been on the NHS.  Never forget it isn't perfect either.  I've had both.  Both sides need to improve.

I agree that the NHS also needs to improve, but the NHS is such a mess partly because of all their austerity crap. I do think one of these systems (universal healthcare) is more fair and makes more sense in theory. If we’re looking at the entire population, at least. I think it’s heartbreaking for the individuals, if, for instance, universal healthcare decides not to cover a treatment, because its chances of working are too small. But on a population-level, having a clear rule for what is being covered, and having the same thing covered for everyone, regardless of finances, is still the fair thing to do. Now, in the UK, due to austerity, the wait times are ridiculous. But that’s not a required element of universal healthcare, the Uk had universal healthcare for years and years without this being a problem. 

If you have money in the UK, by the way, you can also go private, if you wish to.

[AprilQuilt]

20 hours ago, tanba said:

I agree that the NHS also needs to improve, but the NHS is such a mess partly because of all their austerity crap. I do think one of these systems (universal healthcare) is more fair and makes more sense in theory. If we’re looking at the entire population, at least. I think it’s heartbreaking for the individuals, if, for instance, universal healthcare decides not to cover a treatment, because its chances of working are too small. But on a population-level, having a clear rule for what is being covered, and having the same thing covered for everyone, regardless of finances, is still the fair thing to do. Now, in the UK, due to austerity, the wait times are ridiculous. But that’s not a required element of universal healthcare, the Uk had universal healthcare for years and years without this being a problem. 

If you have money in the UK, by the way, you can also go private, if you wish to.

yes, and let's bear in mind that as well as austerity the NHS has been purposefully allowed/encouraged to fail because the Tory government was invested in demonstrating that it did not work so that they could justify privatising it. I passionately believe that with better funding and management the NHS can improve hugely, just as it did under the previous Labour government. I don't think Labour are a silver bullet either and don't have gigantic confidence in Starmer's government but I do not doubt that they'll do better for the NHS than the previous lot.