# Doctor tells Obama supporters: Go elsewhere for health care



## Philobeado (Apr 2, 2010)

MOUNT DORA  A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."

The sign reads: "If you voted for Obama  seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."



I love stories like this 

Obama health care supporters: Florida doctor tells Obama health care supporters to go elsewhere - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com


----------



## Dr Gregg (Apr 2, 2010)

what's to love? The doctor is a complete and utter asshole


----------



## Truthmatters (Apr 2, 2010)

I think his patients better watch what they say to him.

He may Hurt someone who says the wrong thing


----------



## beowolfe (Apr 2, 2010)

Since he's practicing in a GOP dominated county, I think it's just an ad campaign to increase his business.  Wingnuts will go to him now in droves.


----------



## Nonelitist (Apr 2, 2010)

While I personally wouldn't do what he did, I support his being able to do so.

Good for him.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 2, 2010)

Freedom speech and an attempt at freedom of association.   The doctor can't refuse care if the patient persists in trying to see him.  But his sign encourages such patents to look elsewhere.

It's his right to free speech.


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Apr 2, 2010)




----------



## Nonelitist (Apr 2, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Freedom speech and an attempt at freedom of association.   The doctor can't refuse care if the patient persists in trying to see him.  But his sign encourages such patents to look elsewhere.
> 
> It's his right to free speech.





You are correct.  He has already said that he won't refuse treatment to anyone, but that some might go somewhere else based on the sign.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Apr 2, 2010)

Philobeado said:


> MOUNT DORA  A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."
> 
> The sign reads: "If you voted for Obama  seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."
> 
> ...



Good for him.  He may lose money and patients but at least he is putting his money (or lackthereof) where his mouth and opinions are.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Apr 2, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Freedom speech and an attempt at freedom of association.   The doctor can't refuse care if the patient persists in trying to see him.  But his sign encourages such patents to look elsewhere.
> 
> It's his right to free speech.



He is a private doctor with a private business and he has the right to accept or refuse any patient he chooses to.   He may lose some insurance or medicare money but its still his right to do this.   

We dont live in obamacare land yet, the bill isn't implimented or enforced yet.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Freedom speech and an attempt at freedom of association.   The doctor can't refuse care if the patient persists in trying to see him.  But his sign encourages such patents to look elsewhere.
> 
> It's his right to free speech.



Are you sure about that?

A doctor can't refuse "emergency" care, but when a patient comes to his office for routine appointments, my understanding is that he is not under any obligation to provide services.

Immie


----------



## rikules (Apr 2, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> While I personally wouldn't do what he did, I support his being able to do so.
> 
> Good for him.




he is breaking the medical code.

he should lose his license.

I have no doubt that if a dem/liberal doctor did this you would
NOT support it at all!
you would be OUTRAGED and DEMAND that he be punished.


this man is just another conservative asshole

but "conservative" and "asshole" is redundant


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 2, 2010)

rikules said:


> Nonelitist said:
> 
> 
> > While I personally wouldn't do what he did, I support his being able to do so.
> ...



The article made it clear the doctor is inside the line of ethics.  Being as he is in a Republican county, he will gain more business than he loses.  People who hold opposing political views are assholes huh?  Hello...asshole.


----------



## manu1959 (Apr 2, 2010)

rikules said:


> Nonelitist said:
> 
> 
> > While I personally wouldn't do what he did, I support his being able to do so.
> ...



he is in not refusing medical care to anyone you twit.....he is voicing his opinion so patients can decide if they want to be treated by someone with that opinion.....

would you prefer he lie to them.....


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

Philobeado said:


> MOUNT DORA  A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."
> 
> The sign reads: "If you voted for Obama  seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."
> 
> ...


He practices in rabid Republican land...central Florida.

This is just more evidence of the Republican health care plan: Drop dead.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Freedom speech and an attempt at freedom of association.   The doctor can't refuse care if the patient persists in trying to see him.  But his sign encourages such patents to look elsewhere.
> ...


You can't turn someone down because of their skin color or religion.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



You might have him on the 0bama messiah complex folks.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...


----------



## Modbert (Apr 2, 2010)

Philobeado said:


> MOUNT DORA  A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."
> 
> The sign reads: "If you voted for Obama  seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."
> 
> ...



So which people of which political party did Jesus turn away? I can't seem to find it anywhere here in my bible. Maybe you could help?


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



So, we are back to the argument that everyone has to do business with everyone else simply because of racism?

Personally, I would not refuse to serve a client that I didn't agree with, but I respect the right of a doctor, a photographer, a lawyer, a plumber, a bartender, a mechanic etc. to chose whom he will take on as a customer.  

Personally, even though I oppose HCR, if that were my doctor and I came to his office for an appointment, I would immediately inform him, that I would be seeking a new doctor.  It is in my opinion, inappropriate to do what he did.  However, I still respect his right to have done so.

Immie


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...


I'm just pointing out that you can't refuse service to people based on their ethnic background or religious views. So how can you refuse it based on political philosophy?

Not that I'd consider going near this idiot doctor.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



As I said, neither would I.  However, in my opinion, your stance is one more step towards the removal of our right to associate with whomever we want to associate.  I do not condone this doctor's behavior.  However, I am uncomfortable with the government forcing us to provide services for something I am opposed to.

For instance, suppose I am an accountant.  I am also a man of faith.  Suppose an adult book store owner decided that he wanted to hire my firm to do his books.  Being a man of faith and due to my religious convictions, I decide that I would rather not provide services to an adult bookstore.  Yet, under your stance, I would be required to provide those services.  I have a problem with that.

Immie


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...


I'm talking about doctors. I don't think you should be allowed to BE a doctor if you are going to refuse service. It is unethical.

Heck, you can turn down the adult book store.


----------



## Sinatra (Apr 2, 2010)

He will NOT lose money and patients.

He is making a point - and a very valid one.

His entire professional way of life is being overtaken by Big Government, and this is some small measure of communicating that to those in his own community.


----------



## Modbert (Apr 2, 2010)

Hippocratic Oath - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:
> I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.
> 
> I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.
> ...



Can someone point out to me where in this oath that all doctors take that not treating a certain group of people is applauded?


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



don't worry, many of them won't, they will choose to get outta the business rather than jumping through obama's hoops.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Dogbert said:


> Hippocratic Oath - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> ...



it has been quitely pointed out to you libtards on numerous occasions that doctors do not like bureacracy. they will leave the profession..


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

pull 500 billion dollars from medicare?? you expect doctors to take medicare pathients?? That's why you are known as DUmmies.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



One, he did not say that he would turn anyone away.  He suggested they seek care elsewhere. 

Two, in the case of emergency care, he would be required by law to provide emergency care and then send the patient to his/her own doctor.

Three, If the doctor can't turn away patients, what right do I as an accountant have to turn away clients.  Weren't you involved in the thread about whether or not a photographer could turn down a lesbian wedding ceremony?  Didn't you claim the photographer was required to perform her services to that lesbian couple.  If the photographer is required to do so, why would I as an accountant be afforded the right to turn down an adult book store?

Note: if you did not say that in the other thread then fine this question does not apply to you, but I thought we had this discussion then.

Immie


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

84% of the people answering the poll said "good for him."   ya'll keep on believing though that everybody wanted this.. keep on keeping on.


----------



## Sinatra (Apr 2, 2010)

The sign in no way contradicts the doctor's oath to provide care.

What the sign does communicate is that Obamacare in fact is setting up obstacles to providing that very care his patients have enjoyed prior...


----------



## Sinatra (Apr 2, 2010)

Yup - the doctor is quickly becoming a hero.

Of course, he must simply be an anti-Obama racist pig though...

____



WillowTree said:


> 84% of the people answering the poll said "good for him."   ya'll keep on believing though that everybody wanted this.. keep on keeping on.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...


You're mixing me up with someone else.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...






If this physician has established a "relationship" with any given patien ie seen them and treated them then he is obligated to issue a letter informing said patient he no longer wishes to be his/her physician. Then he is obligated to assist said patient to the best of his ability in finding another physician.


----------



## Modbert (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> it has been quitely pointed out to you libtards on numerous occasions that doctors do not like bureacracy. they will leave the profession..



Bureacracy? Do you mean Bureaucracy?

Also, no one likes to deal with paper work. However, Bureaucracy is not a evil thing.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 2, 2010)

This doctor is an asshole.  I hope the karma he's putting out is returned to him soon.


----------



## Modbert (Apr 2, 2010)

Sinatra said:


> *The sign in no way contradicts the doctor's oath to provide care.*
> 
> What the sign does communicate is that Obamacare in fact is setting up obstacles to providing that very care his patients have enjoyed prior...





Because refusing care to someone is providing care?


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Dogbert said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > it has been quitely pointed out to you libtards on numerous occasions that doctors do not like bureacracy. they will leave the profession..
> ...



it is to doctors.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

Republican heroes. Soldiers that won't serve their country and doctors that won't serve the public.


----------



## Modbert (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> it is to doctors.



No, too much Bureaucracy hampers a doctor's ability to do work.

However, with technology over time and when it comes more inexpensive, it will be easier.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/technology/19patient.html



> The report, published online on Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine, found that doctors who use electronic health records say overwhelmingly that such records have helped improve the quality and timeliness of care. Yet fewer than one in five of the nations doctors has started using such records.



I'm sure you'll hate this though.



> The government took a step in that direction last week, announcing a $150 million Medicare project that will offer doctors incentives to move from paper to electronic patient records. The program is intended to help up to 1,200 small practices in 12 cities and states make the conversion.
> 
> Individual doctors will be offered up to $58,000 over the five-year span of the project, which is intended to test the impact of incentives on the spread of electronic health records. Further programs across the country are planned


----------



## Modbert (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Republican heroes. Soldiers that won't serve their country and doctors that won't serve the public.



If this were Liberals who had done this under Bush, their tune would be slightly different though.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Wouldn't be the first time I have done that to someone.  

I'll look and see if I can find the thread.  No promises.

Immie


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Republican heroes. Soldiers that won't serve their country and doctors that won't serve the public.



Democrat heroes.  War protestors who bomb public offices and become professors and anyone who will grant an entitlement.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Dogbert said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > it is to doctors.
> ...






that's another bone of contention in the upcoming court battles,, electronic access of patients records by the government.. good luck with bribing the doctors though.


----------



## Modbert (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> that's another bone of contention in the upcoming court battles,, electronic assess of patients records by the government.. good luck with bribing the doctors though.



Link? I remembered a thread about this awhile back, you were spewing bullshit on this subject then.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Republican heroes. Soldiers that won't serve their country and doctors that won't serve the public.
> ...


Funny thing...I've never seen anyone defend Ayers.

But here we have people singing the praises of assholes simply because they are anti-Obama.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



Here's the thread I was thinking of:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...s-bid-to-refuse-same-sex-wedding-jobs-14.html

It appears the liberal lady I was thinking of was Bodecea.  What can I say?  I mixed up two ladies I enjoy having discussions with.  My apologies to you both.

Immie


----------



## Coyote (Apr 2, 2010)

Philobeado said:


> MOUNT DORA  A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."
> 
> The sign reads: "If you voted for Obama  seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."
> 
> ...



Why do you love stories like this?  It's a doctor who clearly puts politics above his patients.

How sad.  Politics don't belong in the relationship between a patient and his doctor.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


No problem. I'm guilty of the same thing. For the record, I think that in many cases people can turn down who they do business with. But not in all cases.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



see? that's where you show your racist tendencies. People aren't anti obamalama, they are anti obamalama policies,, hello


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Coyote said:


> Philobeado said:
> 
> 
> > MOUNT DORA  A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."
> ...



that's not the way I read it. He is a ticked off doctor. He is not alone. You will see many more.

What part of you democrats rammed this down everyone's throats in a partisian vote, using all manner of dirty tricks, and backroom deals for special people to buy votes pisses people off do you not understand exactly??


----------



## manu1959 (Apr 2, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Republican heroes. Soldiers that won't serve their country and doctors that won't serve the public.
> ...



you forgot aiding they enemy in uniform during a time of war.....


----------



## Valerie (Apr 2, 2010)

The doctor might actually be bound by an insurance contract to see patients who have the insurance he is contracted with....Also, here is the pertinent part of the Florida law regarding patient rights:




> SUMMARY OF THE FLORIDA PATIENT'S BILL
> OF RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
> 
> ...
> ...


----------



## Defiant1 (Apr 2, 2010)

He sounds like a great doctor to go to.

At least you don't have to worry about sitting in a waiting room full of dummies.

I'm actually working on advocating this kind of behavior for all business just in a little different way.

Interviewing owners of businesses, starting with friends and members of "the club" to find out who is with us, then giving them a sign/logo to display.  

Members are then encouraged to only patronize businesses with logos whenever possible.

Lists of those that don't merit a logo will be made available.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...


And yet, you're the one that equated racism with being anti-Obama.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 2, 2010)

Valerie said:


> The doctor might actually be bound by an insurance contract to see patients who have the insurance he is contracted with....Also, here is the pertinent part of the Florida law regarding patient rights:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He isn't violating any of that either.  The guy is just becoming a hero the more the left rails against this.  By the way, I'm not looking to libs for a moral compass.  They recycled that into a tolerance mood ring a long time ago.  Must have lost that now.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



Well, fortunately, you are correct in that it can not be done in all cases.  It would really suck if a restaurant was legally allowed to deny service to a black person or vice versa or a person of Hispanic or Asian decent.

On the other hand, it is disturbing to me that photographers, doctors, accountants etc. have to serve everyone.  In the case of this doctor, he is an urologist.  I would assume that in any emergency he would take care of any patient, but to require him to serve all non-emergency patients in a private office seems unduly intrusive to me.

Immie


----------



## Coyote (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Philobeado said:
> ...



"You democrats"????

P.S. If "you Republicans" are going to have a hissy fit over it, remember how the parts of the "Contract with America" were rammed down opponents throats through a similar " partisian vote, using all manner of dirty tricks, and backroom deals "  That's the down and dirty of politics.

 The AMA, which speaks for a large number of doctors supported this bill.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

Valerie said:


> The doctor might actually be bound by an insurance contract to see patients who have the insurance he is contracted with....Also, here is the pertinent part of the Florida law regarding patient rights:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't see how that applies in this case.  We are not talking about failure to provide emergency care, nor are we talking about denying care based on race, national origin, religion, handicap or source of payment... um, unless you claim support for President Obama to be a handicap.  

Immie


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



it means I hear the message the librus are putting out.. don't get excited. we all know the CBC equates opposition to obamalama to racism..


----------



## Coyote (Apr 2, 2010)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Philobeado said:
> 
> 
> > MOUNT DORA  A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."
> ...



Why good for him?  Of course he has a right to free speech but the plain truth is he has decided to put politics over and above his professional oath and ethics.

Regardless of my feelings on the HC Bill or the political parties - I would not have a person like that for my doctor.


----------



## Valerie (Apr 2, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> > The doctor might actually be bound by an insurance contract to see patients who have the insurance he is contracted with....Also, here is the pertinent part of the Florida law regarding patient rights:
> ...




  I'm not claiming anything, just putting the law there for you to see for yourself whether it applies or not...


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Coyote said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



show me! and The AMA speaks for aboutt 20% of the nations physicians.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...


It's your message. But I don't expect you to admit it.

Fact is, this doctor is like the soldier the fuckwit US Army Retired posted about. Neither will do their job because of their feelings toward Obama and his policies.

Republicans are dipshits, crybabies and unethical twits.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 2, 2010)

Defiant1 said:


> He sounds like a great doctor to go to.
> 
> At least you don't have to worry about sitting in a waiting room full of dummies.
> 
> ...



Hmmm........."finding out who is with us, hten giving them a sign/logo to display".

What are you going to do to identify those who are "with you" who go to those businesses so that they can receive "better" service?  A numerical prefix like say.......6 6 6?

Next, you'll probably want to be able to refuse to allow anyone to buy or sell anything unless they have your "sign".  

If you think about it, it kinda sounds like the sign of the Beast from Revelations.  Hmmm....maybe the reason the GOP is calling Obama the anti-Christ is because they've been consorting with demons themselves.

By the way asshole, your flag is wrong, it's not the Gadsden Flag (the one used by tea bagging assholes such as yourself), it's the very first Union Jack of the US Navy.

Did you serve in the Navy, or were you just like every other cowardly teabagger and you refused on the basis you're a pussy?


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



There ya go again... tying all of a particular group into a great big knot because of (in this case) two unethical, dipshit crybaby, twits.  

What if I were to say, Liberals are intolerant, immoral, anti-religious whiners because of the two lesbians who tried to force their beliefs on the photographer in that thread I pointed you to?

Immie


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 2, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...



Umm......Immie......it was the REPUBLICANS that reimbursed a GOP'er for the lesbian bondage strip club.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 2, 2010)

Poll Finds Most Doctors Support Public Option : NPR


WillowTree said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...



You may be right - I"m finding a reference that they speak for 20 to 30%, not the majority.

However....in the process of looking there are some other relevent bits of data I found.
The majority of doctors supported a public option: 63% blend of public/private; 27% private only; 10% public only.

According to a NEJM poll: the majority of doctors actually support health care reform, including both public and private options, by an overwhelming majority of 69%. That support dropped to only 27% when the public option was removed and only private options remained.  

Interestingly, Fox News (O'Reilly) promoted a more recent poll, from NEJM that claimed the majority of doctors were opposed to healthcare reform.  Except....there was a bit of a problem with that poll.  It was not conducted by NEJM or in anyway affliliated with them.  In fact, it was conducted by the Medicus Firm, a physician headhunting group, and it was published in their free advertiser newsletter.

Conclusion: NEJM conducted a scientific poll, polling broad swath of doctors via mail and found support for reform. Medicus, a marketing firm in physician recruiting conducted a survey by email drawing only from their marketing database and found little support.

Which is more believable?

So what is the real level of doctor support for healthcare?


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

ABikerSailor said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



What?

Forgive me, because I don't see what that has to do with my comment.  

I was talking about the two lesbians who sued the photographer for discrimination because she refused to photograph their "wedding" and won.

Immie


----------



## Defiant1 (Apr 2, 2010)

ABikerSailor said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > He sounds like a great doctor to go to.
> ...


 
Where have I referred to it as the Gadsden flag?

I know it's the Navy Jack.  I picked it because I raised my right hand Feb. 1972 at the Naval Reserve Center in Brockton, Ma.


Why do you have such a problem with people doing business with like-minded people?


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 2, 2010)

I was making a joke Immie......chill dude.......besides, how often do you get a chance to bring up the words "naked bondage strip club" in politics?


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 2, 2010)

Defiant1 said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



Because when those people exclude others to the detriment of the ones excluded and they are citizens of the same country? 

Well........kinda reminds me of "whites only" stores and diners.  You'd like a return to the 1950's I guess?

And.....I'm a vet as well, served active from 1982-2002 in the Navy.  I don't like seeing tea baggers use that flag.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

ABikerSailor said:


> I was making a joke Immie......chill dude.......besides, how often do you get a chance to bring up the words "naked bondage strip club" in politics?



Hehe,

I was simply fishing for more info.  "Naked bondage strip club", okay so it peeked my interests.  What can I say?

Immie


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 2, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > I was making a joke Immie......chill dude.......besides, how often do you get a chance to bring up the words "naked bondage strip club" in politics?
> ...



Can't blame a man for fishing on a subject that concerns fishnets.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 2, 2010)

ABikerSailor said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > ABikerSailor said:
> ...



What?... huh?  Oh yeah, my mind was definitely on the fish nets.  

Immie


----------



## Defiant1 (Apr 2, 2010)

ABikerSailor said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > ABikerSailor said:
> ...


 

I'm not a Tea Party person.  I'm an elected Republican Party official.
Although I admire the Tea Party for their efforts their mission doesn't jive with mine.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Republicans are not the ones who made the sleazy backroom deals now are they? no they are not.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

ABikerSailor said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > ABikerSailor said:
> ...



What's the difference in a whites only diner and a blacks only caucus?


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...


Yep...it's never the Republicans' fault. Not only did they fail to stop health care reform, they also failed to shape it whatsoever because they focused on demonizing the Dems. 

Now they whine. And whine. And whine.

Lather. rinse. repeat.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...






lather, rinse, repeal.. sounds better.


----------



## Political Junky (Apr 2, 2010)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Freedom speech and an attempt at freedom of association.   The doctor can't refuse care if the patient persists in trying to see him.  But his sign encourages such patents to look elsewhere.
> ...


Actually, the hippocratic oath might conflict with his actions.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



he had his fingers crossed, just like obamie did.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 2, 2010)

Dogbert said:


> Hippocratic Oath - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh what the hell, the Hippocratic Oath is just a goddamned piece of paper.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 2, 2010)

Sinatra said:


> The sign in no way contradicts the doctor's oath to provide care.
> 
> What the sign does communicate is that Obamacare in fact is setting up obstacles to providing that very care his patients have enjoyed prior...



He's making a political statement. How often do doctor's offices get walk-ins so that potential new patients would even see the sign? Usually first-timers have already set up an appointment. I'm with whoever said he posted that notice just to garner more business from the rick folk who can pay top dollar. If the doctor had been serious, the common sense approach would be to simply say the office is no longer taking new Medicare/Medicaid nor future Obamacare patients. But this guy had to act like a real asshole about it.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 2, 2010)

Sinatra said:


> Yup - the doctor is quickly becoming a hero.
> 
> Of course, he must simply be an anti-Obama racist pig though...
> 
> ...



You people have strange precepts for what constitutes a "hero."


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 2, 2010)

Defiant1 said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



You're an elected republican official?  Nice.......when the fuck is the GOP gonna pull their collective heads outta their asses and get rid of that idiot Steele?

For that matter, why does your partly let Limp Idiot, Palin, and Blech speak for it?

You've got a lotta 'splainin to do Lucy...............


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 2, 2010)

Most doctors are in it for the MONEEEEEEEEEEEEEY these days anyway. Gone are the days when their oath and the simple words "First do no harm" actually meant something. They all either aspire to get into the more lucrative specialties, or they are recruited by mega corporations as "consultants." 

The so-called bedside manners portrayed on medical dramas like Gray's Anatomy are non-existent in reality. I'm fascinated by those real-life stories on Discovery Health Channel, like _Mystery Diagnosis_. I'm always _mystified_ by the bungling that goes on, not the "mystery" of the diagnosis. The most recent episode involved a young woman who had huge weeping lesions all over her body and doctor after doctor just scratched their heads, and yet not a single one bothered to order a biopsy. I mean _DUH!_ The regular ER doctors and GPs don't really seem to care that a symptom might NOT be "just the flu." On that program, only when the situation becomes tragically unmanageable and repeated trips to a regular doctor is useless, the patient finds appropriate treatment by doing his/her own research and locating an expert on his own.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 2, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Republican heroes. Soldiers that won't serve their country and doctors that won't serve the public.



Hear hear. And what about doctor-soldiers? Would this creep bend over a bleeding GI or Marine and ask if he voted for Obama before committing to saving his life?


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Dogbert said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...



They already have patient files in an office database, in addition to the paper copies which of course every clerk in the office is privy to, so in effect, your 'privacy' has always been laid bare. Their databases would simply be incorporated into a national database. No more risking a life while waiting for "records" to be copied and delivered to a specialist. No more screwups on conflicting medications. The VA has had such a system in place for 20 years, and I know of no complaints about it.

There's also a bogus claim being sent out virally by the rabid right that anyone can obtain someone else's private medical information via a Freedom of Information Act request. That is pure crap. NO personal information on ANY private citizen has EVER been allowed by that Act.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 2, 2010)

Defiant1 said:


> He sounds like a great doctor to go to.
> 
> At least you don't have to worry about sitting in a waiting room full of dummies.
> 
> ...



Good luck with that. My brother-in-law who used to own a car dealership had a big 11 X 14 photograph of George and Laura Bush peering over his desk, always has right-wing talk radio in the background, and he lost a customer because of it. The customer simply said "If you think its appropriate to display political propaganda, then I don't trust you not to have propagandized your sales pitch to me." Who knows how many other customers he lost but didn't have the balls to say why?


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...



Only because they're the minority. Jeezus, woman, how do you think the Prescription Drug bill got passed? In any event, most of the "deals" were eliminated in the final bill, so you might's well move on to your next Obalamalamamanananana bitch.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



Surely you jest. A congressional caucus is a group of elected officials who pursue one or more specific agendas having to do with similar interests. There are literally hundreds of them, many Republican generated:

Caucuses of the United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do those^ look like diners to you???


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



yellow rain,, now instead of nebraska getting expempt from medicaid expenses all 57 states will at the expense of the 50% of us who pay taxes. makes no never mind to the parasites does it?


----------



## naomibee (Apr 2, 2010)

Sinatra said:


> He will NOT lose money and patients.
> 
> He is making a point - and a very valid one.
> 
> His entire professional way of life is being overtaken by Big Government, and this is some small measure of communicating that to those in his own community.



more states and people like him need to do the same...


----------



## boedicca (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> yellow rain,, now instead of nebraska getting expempt from medicaid expenses all 57 states will at the expense of the 50% of us who pay taxes. makes no never mind to the parasites does it?




Don't you know?  We're going to save 3,000% on our health insurance, so we'll have plenty of money to pay for all the extra Medicaid!


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 2, 2010)

We see a lot of specialists besides our family doctor. Here is how they stand.

Family Doctor: Has quit doing volunteer work at a free clinic, is now refusing any new Medicare/medicaid patients.

Endocrinologist: HE simply shakes his head and looks skyward.

Podiatrist: She actually used the words; "Stupid fuckers"

Dentist: "I'm trying to ignore Washington"

Hematologist: "I hope it's a joke"

Cardiologist: "They'll be after you next."

Not one who cares for this legislation. And the good Doctor is within his rights to turn down new patients. After all he's a busy man.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > He sounds like a great doctor to go to.
> ...



yep! obama showed those uppity Reppublican car dealership owners who was bozz didn't he?


----------



## Ravi (Apr 2, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Republican heroes. Soldiers that won't serve their country and doctors that won't serve the public.
> ...


I believe so. Honestly, I've had a family member disown my husband because he voted for Obama...and some how that makes him responsible for the world turning communist.

Such hysteria.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 2, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Republican heroes. Soldiers that won't serve their country and doctors that won't serve the public.
> ...



Honestly, in 22 years I don't remember having actual Political discussions while on active duty. Closest thing we got to that was having a Voting Assistance Officer. And he/she only assited you in getting an absentee ballot.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 2, 2010)

The doctor in this article at least states his issue.  Others will be less obvious.  Cleaning out old records of those who haven't been in for awhile that happen to be on Medicare.  Move their office away from the public transit routes, switch to later day appointment schedules, repeatedly reschedule appointments and many other effective methods.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 2, 2010)

Defiant1 said:


> Why do you have such a problem with people doing business with like-minded people?



I forget the term for it, but some professions have a system of ethics that are above that and the medical profession is one of those.  They can't simply decide not to treat black people, or not to treat homosexuals or not to treat Jews.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Coyote said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you have such a problem with people doing business with like-minded people?
> ...



and where did this physician say any of that?? he said obama supporters. did he knot? and then he didn't refuse to treat them, he advised them that their new health care would start now,,didn't someone post here that a physician was going to a cash only basis,, so as to avoid dealing with insurance companies now run by big government? Can't fault them for that. And do pretend you weren't warned.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 2, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



He essentially told those who voted for Obama could seek health care elsewhere did he not?

Aside from that....most people don't realize that there has been an increasing trend, starting long before this bill, for doctors to go to a cash only basis to avoid the overhead costs and frustrations and limitations of having to accept INSURANCE - private insurance - not government.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 2, 2010)

Coyote said:


> I forget the term for it, but some professions have a system of ethics that are above that and the medical profession is one of those.  They can't simply decide not to treat black people, or not to treat homosexuals or not to treat Jews.




They have such strong ethics - but Obama justifies health care reform by claiming that they needlessly whack off people's feet to get $20,000.

Go figure.


----------



## AquaAthena (Apr 2, 2010)

Philobeado said:


> MOUNT DORA  A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."
> 
> The sign reads: "If you voted for Obama  seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."
> 
> ...



*Changes in HIS health care began when the government took control.* He has a right to be pissed.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 2, 2010)

Coyote said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



which is what I've been saying all along. Hello, and now you are screaming about race,, hello


----------



## Coyote (Apr 2, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > I forget the term for it, but some professions have a system of ethics that are above that and the medical profession is one of those.  They can't simply decide not to treat black people, or not to treat homosexuals or not to treat Jews.
> ...



Oh?  I seriously doubt that is the principle justification or even a minor justification for healthcare reform.  Sounds like the typical rightwing talking points.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 2, 2010)

Here you go, in The One's own words:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG56B2et4M8]Obama SPEAKS![/ame]


I didn't recall properly - he actually said $30,000 - $40,0000, not $20,000.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 2, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Here you go, in The One's own words:
> 
> Obama SPEAKS!
> 
> ...



Again, not his main justification for healthcare reform.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 2, 2010)

He used this claim on his stump speech to scare people into supporting his government takeover agenda.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 3, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> We see a lot of specialists besides our family doctor. Here is how they stand.
> 
> Family Doctor: Has quit doing volunteer work at a free clinic, is now refusing any new Medicare/medicaid patients.
> 
> ...



Money, honey, as I said. How many poor doctors do any of us know? How many even have incomes that would put them in middle- to upper-middle class neighborhoods? They all live in gated communities. I feel sorry for none of them. Poor, poor doctors being 'forced' to actually do their jobs on poor people. Waaaaaaaah!!!!!!!


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 3, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



Another repeat of another con myth, completely debunked as soon as it went viral. Gullible-itis has become a pandemic.

snopes.com: Steve Rattner - Car Czar


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 3, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



I was only using that as an analogy to the absurdity of the situation. But that reminds me, God Bless those doctors who sacrifice the good life to become dedicated to the Veterans Administration and who earn on average $20K less per year.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > I forget the term for it, but some professions have a system of ethics that are above that and the medical profession is one of those.  They can't simply decide not to treat black people, or not to treat homosexuals or not to treat Jews.
> ...



There's plenty of background material suggesting that doctors routinely perform unnecessary hysterectomies and tonsillectomies, full hip replacements, and the like. Also, OBGYNs are performing far more cessarian sections for deliveries these days. It takes a lot less time than having to wait around for many hours for a baby to come out the old-fashioned way. After all, they could be playing golf!


----------



## boedicca (Apr 3, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> There's plenty of background material suggesting that doctors routinely perform unnecessary hysterectomies and tonsillectomies, full hip replacements, and the like. Also, OBGYNs are performing far more cessarian sections for deliveries these days. It takes a lot less time than having to wait around for many hours for a baby to come out the old-fashioned way. After all, they could be playing golf!




Oh really?

Then please provide that Plenty of Background Material.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > I forget the term for it, but some professions have a system of ethics that are above that and the medical profession is one of those.  They can't simply decide not to treat black people, or not to treat homosexuals or not to treat Jews.
> ...



I just Googled your accusation and found no other reference to Obama ever having made such an absurd statement. Congratulations, your comment is now officially in Google's files, since yours is the ONLY reference to it. 

You can have your opinions, people, but please stop the outright lies. I expect that kind of idiotic remark from someone like Willow, but not someone who at least tries to convince everyone she has some credentialed smarts.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 3, 2010)

I posted the Youtube clip in which you can hear him say it in his own words.

If a direct video quote isn't good enough for you, then so be it.

I checked Clusty and found quite a few links, so I can't help but wonder at how you use Google.

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/c...steps-on-Foot-Amputation-Pay-to-Surgeons.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...oose_amputation_because_of_reimbursement.html

http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-docto...cause-surgeons-get-paid-more-than-physicians/

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/08/at-what-cost-cutting-off-a-leg/23197/



Now, please post your Plenty of Background Material that proves that doctors routinely perform unnecessary hysterectomies and tonsillectomies, full hip replacements, cesareans, and the like.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 3, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



See post #108, if you have not already see it.

Immie


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Here you go, in The One's own words:
> 
> Obama SPEAKS!
> 
> ...



"All I am saying is let's take the example of Diabetes.........Right now if a family care physician works with his patient to modify diet, etc they might get reimbursed a pittance, but if that same diabetic ends up getting his foot amputated that's 30,000-50,000 the surgeon is reimbursed. *Why not make sure we are also reimbursing the care that prevents the amputation?"*

Operative words, and of course he is right-on.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > There's plenty of background material suggesting that doctors routinely perform unnecessary hysterectomies and tonsillectomies, full hip replacements, and the like. Also, OBGYNs are performing far more cessarian sections for deliveries these days. It takes a lot less time than having to wait around for many hours for a baby to come out the old-fashioned way. After all, they could be playing golf!
> ...



Take your pick. There are pages and pages relating incidents.
Doctors perform unnecessary surgery - Google Search


----------



## boedicca (Apr 3, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> "All I am saying is let's take the example of Diabetes.........Right now if a family care physician works with his patient to modify diet, etc they might get reimbursed a pittance, but if that same diabetic ends up getting his foot amputated that's 30,000-50,000 the surgeon is reimbursed. *Why not make sure we are also reimbursing the care that prevents the amputation?"*
> 
> Operative words, and of course he is right-on.




His operative words are completely inane and a strawman.

Diabetics get tons of care (if they seek it) to prevent the complications that lead to amputation.   Considering the high rate of diabetes in the U.S., if what Obama claims is true, then we would see a huge number of amputees.  We don't.

He also grossly inflated the fees, as has been refuted by the AMA and organizations for surgeons.

Obama makes up "facts" to demonize those who provide the care.   What a leader....not.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 3, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> Take your pick. There are pages and pages relating incidents.
> Doctors perform unnecessary surgery - Google Search




Non-responsive.    Please provide some credibly studies instead of links regarding lawsuits.  Any tort lawyer can exploit some unfortunate person to generate fees.

Just like John Edwards drove OBGYNs out of his state.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> I posted the Youtube clip in which you can hear him say it in his own words.
> 
> If a direct video quote isn't good enough for you, then so be it.
> 
> Now, please post your Plenty of Background Material that proves that doctors routinely perform unnecessary hysterectomies and tonsillectomies, full hip replacements, cesareans, and the like.



I just did. That you would even deny that unnecessary surgeries don't occur is itself absurd. In the same vein, would you deny that 99,000 people die unnecessarily because of hospital errors? As people stop using hospitals for their health care, hopefully that outrageous figure will come down also.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Take your pick. There are pages and pages relating incidents.
> ...



I'm not about to spend hours finding links only to have you come right back and still never admit you're wrong. Sorry, go find another victim today. And by the way, in the video, Obama did *not* use the words "chopping off" feet in the ugly context you wrote. His point was hardly a "strawman argument." He was legitimately making the point that PREVENTION is the key.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 3, 2010)

IOW - you made an unfounded accusation that you cannot back up.

There most likely are some unnecessary (in hindsight) procedures performed by doctors.  Given the highly litigious nature of our society which increases the risk of a malpractice suit, it makes sense that doctors would err on the side of caution and perform surgery instead of "waiting and seeing" or prescribing drugs.   The patient doesn't have to agree to the surgery, btw - but individual responsibility probably eludes you.

Obama himself has advocated handing out pain medication to the elderly instead of surgery.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-dQfb8WQvo]Take A Pill[/ame]


Get ready for pills to be the standard under the regulations set by ObamaCare.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> IOW - you made an unfounded accusation that you cannot back up.



Unfounded? I just won't play your partisan game. I just knew you'd bring up tort reform. Gee, I wonder *why* doctors malpractice insurance is so high? Is it "unfounded"??


----------



## Care4all (Apr 3, 2010)

*IF YOU VOTED FOR OBAMA

SEEK UROLOGY CARE 

ELSEWHERE



CHANGES TO YOUR HEALTHCARE

BEGIN RIGHT NOW

NOT IN FOUR YEARS.
*

So, he is telling his own patients that had sceduled appointments with him that come in through this entrance, to their appointments, to seek their urology care elsewhere.

He IS NOT SAYING that he is going on a cash basis as some defenders of him have implied.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 3, 2010)

Care4all said:


> *IF YOU VOTED FOR OBAMA
> 
> SEEK UROLOGY CARE
> 
> ...


They can spin all they want, but that statement is him refusing care to patients that voted for Obama.

Now I wonder, can he tell if people voted for Obama by looking at them?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 3, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Here you go, in The One's own words:
> ...



Except that if a Diabetic loses their foot it is not the endocrinologist or family doctor who would do the surgery. It pays them to keep seeing the patient every 3 months. Some Surgeon would make the big bucks.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Take your pick. There are pages and pages relating incidents.
> ...



Unnecessary Surgery - NYTimes.com
Needless Surgery
Unnecessary Surgery: The Four Most Common Unwarranted Operations - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com
Unnecessary surgery.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 3, 2010)

^^^ More articles of anecdotal incidents and "estimates" all intended to support a narrative of "let's design our entire health care system around a few random incidents".

Case in point:

_ ONE CASE HISTORY:

Recurrent dizziness. Patient is terrified that he might be having a heart attack. Doctor had ordered a 24-hour ambulatory electrocardiogram, taken with a small portable device that keeps track of the heartbeat. When the patient returned to the office the next day for evaluation, the electrocardiogram showed dramatic fluctuations of the heartbeat: 130 beats a minute during activity, only 40 beats a minute when the patient ia asleep. During the time he's been monitored, the patient has not experienced any dizziness. THE DOCTOR RECOMMENDATION:

''You need a pacemaker.''

A pacemaker is, in fact, implanted the next day and the patient becomes a statistic: one of millions of Americans who have undergone unnecessary elective surgery - nonemergency procedures performed as alternatives to more conservative treatment...._


The patient thought he had had a heart attack and tests showed an erratic heart beat.

If the doctor had not recommended the pacemaker and the man had died, the narrative would have been "incompetent doctor causes man to die by withholding pacemaker".


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 4, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



That's also an inadequate answer since many doctors combine their talents into one similar practice (partnering). 

The point with using the diabetic analogy I think is that many diabetics can barely afford their insulin, let alone have regular monitoring by a private physician IF they have no insurance.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 4, 2010)

boedicca said:


> ^^^ More articles of anecdotal incidents and "estimates" all intended to support a narrative of "let's design our entire health care system around a few random incidents".



You're just full of all inclusive projections. No one ever said that, it is not what Obama implied, it is not what the "entire" health care system is all about. Fail.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 4, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> That's also an inadequate answer since many doctors combine their talents into one similar practice (partnering).
> 
> The point with using the diabetic analogy I think is that many diabetics can barely afford their insulin, let alone have regular monitoring by a private physician IF they have no insurance.




I call shenanigans.

I have a close family member who is a Type I.  There are many resources for diabetics, including ones that help people who can't afford supplies get them at low and no cost.  

Insurance is not Health Care.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 4, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > ^^^ More articles of anecdotal incidents and "estimates" all intended to support a narrative of "let's design our entire health care system around a few random incidents".
> ...




Obama himself engaged in the fear mongering of unsupported claims and anecdotal stories.   The entire Dem debate prior to the televised vote was to hold up one sad sack person after another (i.e., the one who had to use her sister's dentures) after as scare tactics.  

Their math didn't add up - the CBO score was cooked - so they had to resort to fear.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 4, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



My 35 year old son has type 2 Diabetes with nerve damage in his feet and hands, he went undiagnosed in Europe (Social Medicine) for nearly 3 years. He has been back in the states for about 4 years now and was correctly diagnosed within 6 months. He has been laid off for 7 months now and still sees our family doctor and a Podiatrist every 3 months. He pays for the check ups and his medications and test strips with his unemployment checks.

 And of course he cannot find work. He had coverage until he was laid off.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 4, 2010)

boedicca said:


> ^^^ More articles of anecdotal incidents and "estimates" all intended to support a narrative of "let's design our entire health care system around a few random incidents".
> 
> Case in point:



From those sources.

One:  In 2002, J. Bruce Moseley, currently a clinical associate professor at the Baylor Sports Medicine Institute in House, *headed a randomized study to find out exactly how effective knee arthroscopies were*. Osteoarthritis patients, prime candidates for arthroscopy,* fared no better than patients who received a sham surgery*. However, knee arthroscopy today remains among the top 10 outpatient procedures, *with more than 650,000 surgeries performed yearly*.


Two:  Hysterectomy. This procedure ranks second behind a Caesarean section as the most commonly-performed surgery on women in the United States. About 600,000 hysterectomies are performed here each year. *A 2000 study revealed that around 70 per cent of the hysterectomies in 9 Southern California managed-care facilities were inappropriately recommended.* The most common mistake cited was physicians' failure to try less-invasive and safer approaches first.

Three: Angioplasty.* A study reported in the New England Journal of Medicine suggested that angioplasty for patients not having a heart attack will not help them and might even cause some harm.* *Many did as well on medical therapy such as aspirin, blood thinners, and drugs to lower cholesterol*. This trial suggested if the procedure was performed at least three days after a heart attack, it provided no help.



Exactly what "few random incidents" are you referring too in your own dishonest narrative?


----------



## Maple (Apr 4, 2010)

Philobeado said:


> MOUNT DORA  A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."
> 
> The sign reads: "If you voted for Obama  seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."
> 
> ...



I love it, my doctor is threatening to retire early and probably will because of Obamacare.


----------



## Maple (Apr 4, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



The focus most definitely has not been on JOBS, it's been on the takeover of 6% of our economy.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 4, 2010)

Maple said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



6%?

Don't you mean 1/6th as in almost 17%?

Immie


----------



## California Girl (Apr 4, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > *IF YOU VOTED FOR OBAMA
> ...



I see nothing that says he will refuse to treat them, I see someone who (while I don't actually agree with him) is recommending that Obama voters go elsewhere.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 4, 2010)

You know, I see a bunch of people that want to tell a person how to run his life and business.  Whether he is wrong in his approach is debatable.  What clearly is wrong is the group trying to run his life.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 4, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> You know, I see a bunch of people that want to tell a person how to run his life and business.  Whether he is wrong in his approach is debatable.  What clearly is wrong is the group trying to run his life.



Don't you know, it is the Democratic way.

Immie


----------



## Care4all (Apr 4, 2010)

FYI





> _Principles of Medical Ethics:
> 
> 1. A physician shall be dedicated to providing competent medical care, with compassion and respect for human dignity and rights.
> 
> ...


_

These oaths together with the AMA Code of Ethics are what most of the public not unreasonably expects of its physicians today. 






			1. Service to humanity, caring for the sick, promoting good health, and last but not least alleviating pain and suffering.

   2. A promise of integrity, honesty, humility, and -- above all -- compassion.

   3. A realization that although harm is inevitable it must be outweighed by benefit.

   4. Gender, race, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation, nationality, or social (and in some oaths by implication and in other oaths in so many words) financial standing shall not influence the physician's judgment.

   5. A promise to oppose policies in breach of human rights and a promise not to participate in them. Physicians will strive to change laws that are contrary to their profession's ethics and will work toward a fairer distribution of health resources.

   6. A promise to recognize mistakes in self and others, and to learn from them.

   7. A statement that teaching those who come after us as well as our colleagues and learning from them as well as research leading to better patient care in the future shall have an equal standing as does patient care today.

   8. This promise is made freely and without coercion.
		
Click to expand...

_
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/550118_7


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 4, 2010)

Care4all said:


> FYI
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Do you think spamming that will change anyone's opinion?

I highly doubt it.

Immie


----------



## Care4all (Apr 4, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > FYI
> ...



if they had any kind of a brain and could think for themselves instead of just taking their own partisan side and fight like hell, right or wrong for it, THEY WOULD. :


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 4, 2010)

Care4all said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



Brainless Partisan?  You fit the bill to a T.  

Immie


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 4, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> You know, I see a bunch of people that want to tell a person how to run his life and business.  Whether he is wrong in his approach is debatable.  What clearly is wrong is the group trying to run his life.



So he did not agree to the AMA code of ethics when he bacame a DR?

Strange.... a right winger not wanting a group trying to run his life....


----------



## Coyote (Apr 4, 2010)

California Girl said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



If you voted for Obama....and you saw that sign...would you not feel unwanted or question the quality of your treatment if you stayed?  Seriously now - the implication is clear - while he may treat them, he does not desire to.

Should doctors be thus Cali?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 4, 2010)

Doctors can have political views and be against certain bills...but should they take it out on their patients?

Is that professional?

Is that ethical?

Either way - no matter who I voted for, I would take my business elsewhere rather than see a group marginalized for their political beliefs.


----------



## Care4all (Apr 4, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 4, 2010)

Coyote said:


> Doctors can have political views and be against certain bills...but should they take it out on their patients?
> 
> Is that professional?
> 
> ...



He's not taking it out on his patients.  The minute you show me that he has turned one single patient away who went through that door or even asked them to sign a document stating they did not support Obama or HCR, I will agree with you.  Note: I've been asking people in the other thread to show that for a day and a half now, not one has been able to do so.  *Edit: whoops, it is this thread I have been asking it in.*

He's making a statement to Congress, Obama and the country in general about HCR.  Problem is... they aren't listening.

Immie


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 4, 2010)

Care4all said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



What you thought you could call me a brainless partisan and not get a reply?  

Immie


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 4, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Doctors can have political views and be against certain bills...but should they take it out on their patients?
> ...



And they won't listen until they realize that the shortage of Doctors has gotten critical.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 4, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


This is where the talking points collide. There can't be both a shortage of doctors and financial harm to a practicing doctor.


----------



## Care4all (Apr 4, 2010)

they created the shortage as well....i was reading an article that said doctors/ama/ other related groups estimated that there would be an overage of 160,000 doctors by the year 2000....  boy were they wrong!  the article said because they cut back doctors allowed in medical school to combat the projected overage, it made the actual shortage worse....

and that this in turn made doctor's PAY GO UP.....very lucrative for doctors!


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 4, 2010)

We should have cut back on Lawyers and politicians instead


----------



## Coyote (Apr 4, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



[/quote]

That is because his statement is directed at the people walking into his office.

I'm sorry...I don't agree.  I think some professions should be above politics.  If he wants to make a statement - he can write to congressmen, write to president, write letters to the news paper, start political actions.

Another thing is this shortage of doctors.  There has been a chronic shortage of doctors for some time now and it has nothing to do with Obama's bill.  In fact, it can't even accurately be called a "doctor shortage" because it's a shortage of GP's.  There are plenty of specialists - specialists earn far more money then GP's hence medical students are more likely to go into those more lucrative fields.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 4, 2010)

Ravi said:


> This is where the talking points collide. There can't be both a shortage of doctors and financial harm to a practicing doctor.



Well that is the beauty of government involvement Ravi.  Government can use a reimbursement reduction to both cause reduced income for doctors and drive them away from the profession at the same time.  Ravi, I know your smarter than that.  Tired?  Busy?


----------



## Ravi (Apr 4, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > This is where the talking points collide. There can't be both a shortage of doctors and financial harm to a practicing doctor.
> ...


Nope, just not paranoid. Sorry you are.


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 4, 2010)

A Dr in private practice is required to accept medicare/medicaid patients?


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 4, 2010)

Ravi said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



So you don't see this as a possible outcome?  Pretty basic economic principle involved.


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 4, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > This is where the talking points collide. There can't be both a shortage of doctors and financial harm to a practicing doctor.
> ...



so Dr's in private practice are required to accept medicare/medicaid patients?


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 4, 2010)

Well Saveliberty, what about it?  Are Dr's required to accept Medicare/Medicaid patients?  
Or do they choose to and thereby live with the consequenses of their decision?

Do you think private insurance pays Doctors full fees ?
Are doctors required to accept private insurance?


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 5, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> A Dr in private practice is required to accept medicare/medicaid patients?



no


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 5, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> Well Saveliberty, what about it?  Are Dr's required to accept Medicare/Medicaid patients?
> Or do they choose to and thereby live with the consequenses of their decision?
> 
> Do you think private insurance pays Doctors full fees ?
> Are doctors required to accept private insurance?



no


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 5, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> Well Saveliberty, what about it?  Are Dr's required to accept Medicare/Medicaid patients?
> Or do they choose to and thereby live with the consequenses of their decision?
> 
> Do you think private insurance pays Doctors full fees ?
> Are doctors required to accept private insurance?



It is a complicated question.  Doctors frequently work in groups, sometimes the hospital or group may require the doctor to accept these patients.  I think you inadvertly are pointing to the crisis at hand.  Doctors are going to look at their new reinbursement rates and rules, then conclude they are going to reitire in large enough numbers to create a real rationing situation.


----------



## Defiant1 (Apr 5, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Well Saveliberty, what about it? Are Dr's required to accept Medicare/Medicaid patients?
> ...


 
I don't think Care4All and her posse will allow that to happen.  They put shock collars on doctors and chain them in their offices if needed.

I don't know if you knew this or not but those doctors took an oath.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 5, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> A Dr in private practice is required to accept medicare/medicaid patients?



Our Family Doctor says he will not accept any additional Medicare/Medicaid patients. Not sure if they have to accept any at all.

I know we found several that would not accept Tricare.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

Mayo Clinic in Arizona has already announced it will not accept new Medicare patients as well.   

It's likely that the price controls mandated by ObamaCare will be at Medicare levels - what happens when doctors refuse to see ObamaCare patients?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Mayo Clinic in Arizona has already announced it will not accept new Medicare patients as well.
> 
> It's likely that the price controls mandated by ObamaCare will be at Medicare levels - what happens when doctors refuse to see ObamaCare patients?



Maybe we all should brush up on our Herbal Lore?


----------



## jillian (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Mayo Clinic in Arizona has already announced it will not accept new Medicare patients as well.
> 
> It's likely that the price controls mandated by ObamaCare will be at Medicare levels - what happens when doctors refuse to see ObamaCare patients?



you might want to do a little fact-checking on that one.

from the mayo clinic:



> Some recent media reports have inaccurately stated that Mayo Clinic in Arizona is no longer seeing any Medicare patients. This is not true.
> 
> Rather, a five-physician Mayo Clinic Arizona family practice clinic in Glendale, Ariz., has opted out of Medicare as part of a Mayo Clinic time-limited trial that will be reviewed at its conclusion. This means that Medicare will no longer reimburse Mayo Clinic for primary care services at this specific primary care facility, not at Mayo Clinic in Arizona overall. This affects only primary care office visits for the five Mayo family practice physicians at this site. Specialty care, laboratory services, imaging studies and ancillary services at Mayo Clinic are still covered by Medicare. Current Medicare patients may continue receiving primary care at the Glendale clinic but will be required to pay out-of-pocket for office visits.



Medicare and Mayo Clinic in Arizona  Health Policy Blog

If you read the link, the clinic also talks about the medicare schedule. That schedule as referred to in the website, has nothing to do with this bill or with President Obama.


----------



## jillian (Apr 5, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Mayo Clinic in Arizona has already announced it will not accept new Medicare patients as well.
> ...



would be more helpful if people brushed up on facts, I think. (see my post above).


----------



## Ravi (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Mayo Clinic in Arizona has already announced it will not accept new Medicare patients as well.
> 
> It's likely that the price controls mandated by ObamaCare will be at Medicare levels - what happens when doctors refuse to see ObamaCare patients?


Things aren't always as portrayed by wingnut websites.



> Mayos Medicare losses in Arizona may be worse than typical for doctors across the U.S., Heim said. Physician costs vary depending on business expenses such as office rent and payroll. It is very common that we hear that Medicare is below costs or barely covering costs, Heim said.
> Mayo will continue to accept Medicare as payment for laboratory services and specialist care such as cardiology and neurology, Yardley said.
> Robert Berenson, a fellow at the Urban Institutes Health Policy Center in Washington, D.C., said physicians claims of inadequate reimbursement are overstated. Rather, the program faces a lack of medical providers because not enough new doctors are becoming family doctors, internists and pediatricians who oversee patients primary care.
> Some primary care doctors dont have to see Medicare patients because there is an unlimited demand for their services, Berenson said. When patients with private insurance can be treated at 50 percent to 100 percent higher fees, then Medicare does indeed look like a poor payer, he said.
> ...


Mayo Clinic in Arizona to Stop Treating Some Medicare Patients - Bloomberg.com


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 5, 2010)

The move is NOT an endorsement of 0bamacare.  It is a measured step away from it.  If Jillian's statement is correct with regard to this not being related to the new rules, it will just gain more momentum.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 5, 2010)

With Rate Cut Looming, Doctors Threaten To Stop Accepting Medicare Patients - Kaiser Health News

With Rate Cut Looming, Doctors Threaten To Stop Accepting Medicare Patients 
PrintShareEmailTopics: Medicare, Delivery of Care, Health Costs, Politics, States

Feb 26, 2010

With a 21 percent Medicare reimbursement rate cut set for Monday, unless Congress acts to block it, some doctors are threatening to refuse new Medicare patients in their practices. 

"'To our physicians, we are providing information on their Medicare participation options, including how to remove themselves from the Medicare program,' said James Rohack, president of the American Medical Association, whose more than 250,000 members include doctors, medical students and faculty members," CNN reports. Rohack says temporary delays of the yearly scheduled rate cut should be eliminated. "He said the AMA wants the current law to be repealed and a new formula used 'that more accurately reflects the cost of providing care' in determining Medicare reimbursement rates. &#8230; In the meantime, physicians are asking the AMA to prepare handouts they can give patients to prepare them for the worst-case scenario: getting dropped completely. And a new report on the AMA's Web site tells doctors how they can help their patients find other doctors if they decide to no longer accept Medicare." 

A survey by the American Association of Neurological Surgeons "found that 65% of its 3,400 members said they are referring their Medicare patients to other doctors. About 60% said they were reducing the number of Medicare patients in their practice" (Kavilanz, 2/25).


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 5, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> Well Saveliberty, what about it?  Are Dr's required to accept Medicare/Medicaid patients?
> Or do they choose to and thereby live with the consequenses of their decision?
> 
> Do you think private insurance pays Doctors full fees ?
> Are doctors required to accept private insurance?





WillowTree said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > A Dr in private practice is required to accept medicare/medicaid patients?
> ...



If it is true that doctors are not required to take on all patients for instance Medicare/Medicaid patients, then Care's claim that this doctor is unethical for choosing not to take on patients falls apart.

If a doctor is not required to take any patient that comes to his door then her argument falls apart.

How can a doctor fulfill that oath if he does not take on every person that walks through his door even those who tell him they won't be paying the bill?

Immie


----------



## Ravi (Apr 5, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Well Saveliberty, what about it?  Are Dr's required to accept Medicare/Medicaid patients?
> ...


No. Refusing certain insurances isn't the same thing as refusing certain people. Not to mention that just because a doctor doesn't accept your insurance doesn't mean he or she won't treat you.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 5, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Well Saveliberty, what about it?  Are Dr's required to accept Medicare/Medicaid patients?
> ...



He/she can direct the person to a federally funded clinic, available everywhere in the US, or another free clinic or an ER, depending on the circumstances.

HRSA - Find a Health Center - Search Page

However, since this information is readily available to everyone, it is not clear he/she is obligated to do even this.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

jillian said:


> If you read the link, the clinic also talks about the medicare schedule. That schedule as referred to in the website, has nothing to do with this bill or with President Obama.





What do you think the purpose of a trial to test opting out of Medicare Reimbursement is meant to accomplish?


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> If it is true that doctors are not required to take on all patients for instance Medicare/Medicaid patients, then Care's claim that this doctor is unethical for choosing not to take on patients falls apart.
> 
> If a doctor is not required to take any patient that comes to his door then her argument falls apart.
> 
> ...




Doctors turn down patients all of the time, for a variety of reasons.  Some refuse new Medicare patients, certain health insurance plans, smokers, pregnant women, or based on just plain old scheduling (they have no time to accomodate new patients).


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

Ravi said:


> No. Refusing certain insurances isn't the same thing as refusing certain people. Not to mention that just because a doctor doesn't accept your insurance doesn't mean he or she won't treat you.




It is most certainly analogous.   

Patients can opt to pay in cash if they still wish to see the doctor who refuses their insurance.

Patients who have read the notice can still make an appointment to see the urologist who posted the sign.  There is no proof that he actually refused to treat anyone.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 5, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



I'm truly sorry for his condition. Diabetes is one of those diseases that most people think belong to old people, and it's especially hard on someone young. But I'll say the same thing I said to Immie. He could probably have his medical needs paid for by Medicaid if he is unemployed because of a layoff. While I realize with some people it's a matter of pride not to use a government program, "pride" can be an unnecessary killer.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 5, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Doctors can have political views and be against certain bills...but should they take it out on their patients?
> ...



Of course the bill is signed into law now. Why didn't he join groups objecting before? Or hang his hateful sign out before?


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 5, 2010)

Ravi said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



Well, there actually IS a shortage of doctors, primary physicians anyway, and that's because most don't stay in general practice too long. They soon realize that it's much more lucrative to specialize or consult. Hopefully, with the education grants being expanded, more *dedicated* young people will be encouraged to enter the medical profession and stay with it. The incentives will now be there.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 5, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Actually, he probably couldn't qualify for Medicaid unless he is declared disabled if he is a single adult, however, he could go to a federally funded clinic where he would pay only what he could afford and be given his medications and other diabetic supplies on the same basis.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 5, 2010)

Coyote said:


> SFC Ollie said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



That is because his statement is directed at the people walking into his office.

I'm sorry...I don't agree.  I think some professions should be above politics.  If he wants to make a statement - he can write to congressmen, write to president, write letters to the news paper, start political actions.

Another thing is this shortage of doctors.  There has been a chronic shortage of doctors for some time now and it has nothing to do with Obama's bill.  In fact, it can't even accurately be called a "doctor shortage" because it's a shortage of GP's.  There are plenty of specialists - specialists earn far more money then GP's hence medical students are more likely to go into those more lucrative fields.[/QUOTE]

I really didn't read your post before I posted mine, basically saying the same thing.
Honest!


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 5, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > A Dr in private practice is required to accept medicare/medicaid patients?
> ...



Hey! Ya got one right for a change!


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 5, 2010)

Defiant1 said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



Frankly, I don't think anyone can accurately predict how this will all turn out. Obviously, (*VERY* OBVIOUSLY), there will be changes along the line. So all the projections really mean nil.

What disturbs me more than anything is that so many people STILL assume incorrectly things that are contained in the final bill, such as claiming that they won't be able to keep their own insurance (among others).


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Mayo Clinic in Arizona has already announced it will not accept new Medicare patients as well.
> 
> It's likely that the price controls mandated by ObamaCare will be at Medicare levels - what happens when doctors refuse to see ObamaCare patients?



And of course there's ALWAYS a little more to the story than conservatives like to tell. Read the facts contained in the blog response for more accuracy concerning the Mayo Clinic's announcement.

Mayo Clinic No Longer Accepting Out of State Medicare & Medicaid Patients!  OurParents


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > No. Refusing certain insurances isn't the same thing as refusing certain people. Not to mention that just because a doctor doesn't accept your insurance doesn't mean he or she won't treat you.
> ...



Some doctors will NOT accept cash. As soon as you check that box on the visit form, the office will want to know if you have the cash available today or if you expect to be billed personally. Short of an emergency situation, you CAN be turned away. Been there done that. I was pointed in the right direction to a clinic down the street, and that happened long before Medicaid was even on the books.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 5, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



So you admit you don't know how it will turn out, but it is worth risking 80% of the public who like their coverage, just think it should cost less?  Somehow you think good will come out of reduced doctor reimbursements, cuts to medicare D, adding high risk folks and more government involvement?


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 5, 2010)

toomuchtime_ said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > SFC Ollie said:
> ...



Medicaid benefits vary from state to state. When I was laid off in the 80's, I was not disabled and I was divorced. But I qualified for Medicaid; filled out the paperwork at the unemployment office. However, a friend of mine did not qualify because he had quit his job voluntarily.


----------



## MaggieMae (Apr 5, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



I'm saying that most of the benefits won't kick in until 2014, so that leaves plenty of time to make amendments to the bill. I'm saying that I don't know what those changes will be, and I'm saying that you shouldn't automatically project that the whole thing is evil, when you do not know that for a fact. Clear?


----------



## dazzvalor411 (Apr 5, 2010)

I am proud of this doctor.  The new reform is really going to hurt a large chunk of the medical profession because doctors are no longer going to be properly reimbursed for medicare patients.  This becomes even scarier when we learn that a larger number of people will be pushed into medicare. They can't afford this bill, and all doctors have the right to speak out against it.  He is not breaking any code of eithics.  He is being out spoken in a private practice and has not refused care.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 5, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Medicaid qualifications do vary from state to state, but I have not heard of any state where an indigent adult without dependents can qualify for Medicaid unless he/she is disabled or in need of urgent care and then the qualification is only for a limited period of time unless you are declared permanently disabled.  Congress also had this understanding which is why they included in the health care bill the requirement indigent adults without dependents can qualify for Medicaid without being disabled or in need of urgent care.

Perhaps you misunderstood what happened to you and your friend back in the 1980's.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 5, 2010)

Preachers and ministers are trusted with our spiritual well being.

Doctors are trusted with our physical well being.

Neither should be political at their job.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 5, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



Sorry, you are wrong on that.  If Dr. Jones refuses my insurance, he is refusing to provide services to me.  Saying, "if you are a medicare patient go elsewhere." is no different than saying, "if you voted for Obama go elsewhere".

Immie


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 5, 2010)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



And that is exactly what Dr. Cassel did.  He sent them to other doctors.

Why would it be unethical for Dr. Cassel and not unethical for a doctor that refuses Medicare?

Immie


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 5, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Do you know that he did not join other groups before?

You'll have to ask him why he decided to post that sign when he did.  I don't know the answer to your question nor do I find it relevant.

Immie


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 5, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



Read what the bill says about insurance companies that are not part of the "exchange" not being able to write new policies.  I believe it is section 102.  If a company cannot write new policies, it cannot stay in business.  My the beauty of the plan!  

Being a part of the exchange makes the insurance company puppet of the government and limits our choices. How difficult is it to understand that?

As for the changes... well, President Obama mentioned his ultimate goal was to bring us to a Universal plan within twenty years.  Those are the changes we should all be looking forward to.  If looking forward to is the proper phrase.  Believe me, I'm not looking forward to it.

Immie


----------



## Ravi (Apr 5, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...


Sure it is. The medicare patient can pay out of pocket.


----------



## Care4all (Apr 5, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Doctors can have political views and be against certain bills...but should they take it out on their patients?
> ...



He VERBALLY took it out on them.....gave them a real tongue lashing....he TOLD THEM TO WALK, walk from his office this very minute, not in 4 years when HCR starts....just because some of his patients did not, does not lessen what he told them....so, I totally disagree with you.

His message was direct to his own patients....read the message, it is CLEARLY to them...not to congress as you falsely state, not to new patients who happen by his office, as others falsely state, but to his very own patients...and not even one on one or by his office manager, but through a very public, nasty, note on his own lobby door....

the guy, is missing some screws....  you call it free speech...I call it like it is....dumb, stupid, high strung, unprofessional, and an unethical move for a Physician....there were so many other means for him to address his thoughts and feeling on the hcr bill than to pull his very own patients in to it in such a nasty, intimidating, fashion.

I could care less if he was republican or democrat or libertarian or a teapartier....


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> [
> 
> Some doctors will NOT accept cash. As soon as you check that box on the visit form, the office will want to know if you have the cash available today or if you expect to be billed personally. Short of an emergency situation, you CAN be turned away. Been there done that. I was pointed in the right direction to a clinic down the street, and that happened long before Medicaid was even on the books.




So what you are saying is that Doctors have the right to turn away patients. 

Given that, the and doctor in FL had every right to encourage patients to go elsewhere (although there is still no evidence that he actually refused care to anyone).


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 5, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



It would be accurate to say that you may temporarily keep your present health insurance but when the bill is fully implemented you will be able to keep your own health insurance only if it fully meets the requirements of a qualified plan under the bill's definition or if you pay a fine of thousands of dollars a year for not having a fully qualified health insurance plan.  When Obama says you will be able to keep your present plan if you like without explaining this, he is either lying or has no idea what he is talking about.  Both explanations are plausible.


----------



## Care4all (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...



The sign was directed towards his EXISTING PATIENTS....there is a protocol to stop seeing an existing patient.....and their health care COMES FIRST for the treating physician so NO, you are not correct on that Boe....and thank God you are not!  Physicians SHOULD MEET a certain level of ethical behavior, their professions calls upon it...if they don't accept such, then do NOT become a physician.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

Did the doctor refuse to see anyone who tried to make an appointment?

And here is the modern version of the Hippocratic Oath:

_*I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment*, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.

I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help._


Doctors do not swear to cede their judgment to government bureaucrats.    There is an underlying good faith covenant between doctors and society that the latter would not abuse the good will of doctors.   ObamaCare violates that good will - and this doctor has every right to "bell the cat".

Doctors already refuse to see patients for a variety of reasons:  Medicare, Insurance, Smoking, Pregnancy, Scheduling...this doctor has the right to decide how he wishes to allocate his schedule.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 5, 2010)

Care4all said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



It was a note, he didn't verbally say anything to a patient.  You can call it anything you like.  He still has is license and hasn't violated a single law or code.  While there may have been other ways he could have made his point, you have to admit, he has gotten nationwide exposure to the issue.  It is unlikely another method would have done that.  Thanks for giving him such a widespread stage.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 5, 2010)

Turns out the guy is a liar. He was on Fox and "Friends" and claimed the bill was going to cut hospice and that "they" want you to die a slow and painful death.

He's not even worth discussing. He's a jackass, a liar and an unethical boob.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 5, 2010)

Care4all said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



You may think it was rude of the doctor to direct this message to his existing patients as well as prospective new patients, but as long as competent care was available to them from other urologists in the area, their health care was not jeopardized and there was nothing unethical about his sign.

Get a grip.  Not everything you disapprove of has to be illegal, unethical or immoral.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 5, 2010)

Care4all said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Like hell, you could care less.  If he were a Democrat telling Bush supporters to take a hike, you would be patting him on the back and crucifying anyone that had the guts to claim he was unethical.

Immie


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Did the doctor refuse to see anyone who tried to make an appointment?



No, he did not, but that is so far over her head, that you will never get her to understand it.

Immie


----------



## Care4all (Apr 5, 2010)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



It was unethical, it broke his physician's code of ethics....in more than one manner.   I can not help that you guys could care less about that and want to make this in to some kind of HCR issue....to me, this is your own problem that you have to deal with...this is about yourselves and how far you are willing to end your own ethical stances in order to support a political position....

This sign was insulting and demeaning and intimidating and downright nasty, to some of his very own patients, that he is suppose to care for...and not just in a physical manner....he essentially spat on them at his door, and sure....if they made it inside, he wiped off his spit when they entered his office, but you know what...you and others can try to fool yourselves all you want in to believing that is not unethical, as long as he saw them in his office then as i said before...go for it but you ain't fooling me in to believing what he did was not unethical...because it was....end of story, UNETHICAL and does NOT meet his Physicians code of ethics.

I do not support this health care bill,

but I also do not support this kind of unethical behavior and verbal abuse from a licensed physician towards his very own patients...he gives good physicians a bad name...I don't see his fellow brother physicians doing what he did across america, they KNOW it would have broken their code of ethics....he didn't.

care


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

Care4all said:


> It was unethical, it broke his physician's code of ethics...




How did it break the code of ethics?

(And not the AMA one - only 20% of doctors belong to the AMA).


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

_American Urological Association Code of Ethics:

1. Recognizing that the American Urological Association seeks to exemplify and develop the finest standards of urologic care, I hereby pledge myself, as a condition of membership, to live in strict adherence with its principles and regulations. I pledge myself to pursue the practice of urology with honesty and place the welfare and rights of my patients above all else. *I pledge to deal with each patient as I would wish to be dealt with myself. *I will render services to humanity with full respect for human dignity, giving full measure of service and devotion, and using my skills to the very best of my abilities. I pledge myself to cooperate in advancing and extending the art and science of urology by my attentive diligent membership in the American Urological Association.

2. I will maintain my qualifications by continued study using the scientific basis of evidence and proof, for medical knowledge must continuously be maintained and improved. All this so that I may select the best alternative for a particular patient's care. I will advance my knowledge and skills, respect my colleagues, seek their counsel when in doubt about my own abilities, and assist my colleagues whenever requested. I will accept that "competence" includes having adequate and proper knowledge to make professionally appropriate and acceptable decisions regarding management of the patient's problems, as well as the ability and skill to perform what is necessary to be done and to ensure that the aftercare is the best available to the patient.

3. I will safeguard the public and the profession from physicians deficient in moral character or professional competence, and will expose to the proper authorities without hesitation any illegal or unethical conduct of fellow members of the profession, or of those who engage in fraud or deception. I will encourage impaired physicians to seek help and to withdraw from those aspects of practice affected by their impairment. I will report to appropriate authorities suspected abuse or neglect of patients, sexual harassment and exploitation, and/or sexual misconduct in patient-physician relationships.

4. Physician-patient confidences will be safeguarded within the constraints of the law.

5. Pre- and post-operative care of my surgical patient and continuing care of my medical patient will be my personal responsibility unless specifically designated to a competent substitute. Any delegation of my services will be to appropriately trained physicians or physician-extenders (PA's or NP's). I will accept income only for medical services actually rendered or supervised by me, and my remuneration will be commensurate with services rendered, regardless of who pays the bill.

6. Any advertising I use will be honest and straightforward, not false, misleading, fraudulent, extravagant, or deceptive. My communications with the public will be accurate, and I will not misrepresent my training, my credentials, my experience, or my ability.When asked or when presenting data that may involve a conflict of interest, I will disclose any personal commercial interests, including any gifts of more than minimal value from commercial firms or significant stock and security investments in commercial firms if there may be any effect on patient care, research, medical decisions, etc. I recognize that failure to do so will invite disciplinary action. I will be truthful, honest, and fair in dealing with patients and colleagues. If I am asked to give expert testimony in the courtroom or outside the court, my testimony will be based on recent and substantive experience in the region in which it is given. I will thoroughly review the medical facts and testify to the content fairly, honestly, and impartially, to the best of my knowledge, ability, and experience, neither condemning practices clearly within accepted standards nor excusing performances
clearly outside such standards.

7. I will conduct my research and perform my academic activities in an honest, fair, truthful, and complete fashion, recognizing my responsibilities to myself, my reputation, my colleagues, my institution, society in general, and to posterity to do so. The dissemination of information is inherent in the pursuit of investigation. Timely and appropriate reporting of results is a responsibility I accept in doing research of any kind. As an author I will verify that I and my associates in the research are familiar with and have adhered to the guidelines for responsible ethical research. I will assure that the use of clinical trials or investigative procedures follow the accepted guidelines and standards as drawn up by local Institutional Review Boards that monitor investigations or by the similar Institutional Review Boards at the National Institutes of Health. Any support by commercial firms for my research will be completely disclosed by all involved in a written statement when reporting such research in any forum whatsoever.

8. I will acknowledge that my commitment to a patient is total once I accept the case, and if I withdraw from providing that care, I will endeavor to assist in obtaining an adequate substitute. I will condemn unnecessary surgery as an extremely serious ethical violation, and will not engage in fee splitting or itinerant surgery---surgery anywhere without appropriate preoperative evaluation or adequate and skilled postoperative care.

9. I will consider informed consent integral to providing appropriate medical or surgical care. I recognize that my patient must be provided with all of the information necessary to consent and to make his own choice of treatment, regardless of my own advice or judgment. The information provided must include known risks and benefits, costs, reasonable expectations and possible complications, available alternative treatments and their cost, as well as the identification of other medical personnel who will be participating directly in the care delivery. Wherever feasible, I will respect my patient's rights and be limited by the scope of my patient's consent.

10. I will obey the law. I will seek to change laws that are contrary to the best interests of the patient. I will accept the profession's self-imposed discipline.

11. I believe my responsibilities to the community and to society are part of a physician's code and that a physician must safeguard the public.

12. I will work constantly to improve this Code of Ethics, thereby improving the care I deliver and its value to society. I recognize that there will be a need from time to time to amend or change some portions of this Code. Emerging issues inevitably will appear involving "Ethics." Those must be judiciously considered in the light of the best interests of the individual, of society, and of the yet-unforeseen consequences of the various alternative actions. Hopefully this Code of Ethics will serve as a frame work for evaluating and deciding on these emerging issues.

These I pledge._


AUA - Code of Ethics


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> _American Urological Association Code of Ethics:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


_



Interesting......_


----------



## Coyote (Apr 5, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



I would be incensed at him whatever his political beef - partisan politics does not belong in a doctor-patient relationship.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

Indeed.

It's a slippery slope to demand that a doctor be obligated to provide care no matter what conditions the government puts in place.  I doubt any of us would wish our careers to be so affected.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 5, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > _American Urological Association Code of Ethics:
> ...


_

What this doctor is doing is not technically unethical, but it's kind of the letter of the law versus the spirit of the law isn't it?  Do you really think that is the right way to behave as a doctor?  Is it really a good thing?  Or is his behavior being feted as free speech a part of partisan comradre?_


----------



## Coyote (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Indeed.
> 
> It's a slippery slope to demand that a doctor be obligated to provide care no matter what conditions the government puts in place.  I doubt any of us would wish our careers to be so affected.



Certain professions are supposed to be above things like politics, race, etc.  If a person is unable to pay for the care, that is a different matter.  But doctors are like EMT's, police, emergency service personel.  They can't decide the won't treat Republicans, or blacks, or Catholics just because they don't like them.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 5, 2010)

Coyote said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Indeed.
> ...



You know.....that makes me think about the racist behavior of the South in the 50's and 60's.  If you were black you couldn't eat at a whites only diner.

Because you voted for Obama (a black guy), you can't get urology treatment from this doctor (a white guy).

Dude is a bigoted prick, what's to really figure out?  

He should also quit practicing if he's gonna act like an ass.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

Coyote said:


> Certain professions are supposed to be above things like politics, race, etc.  If a person is unable to pay for the care, that is a different matter.  But doctors are like EMT's, police, emergency service personel.  They can't decide the won't treat Republicans, or blacks, or Catholics just because they don't like them.




They aren't slaves.    If doctors are to be held to that standard - then we as a society have an equal responsibility not to abuse them.

Clearly, this doctor doesn't feel that society is living up to that end of the bargain.


----------



## Titanic Sailor (Apr 5, 2010)

drop dead America. That sounds like the Democrat motto for all of their legislation in the last century. The only bipartisanship we have seen has been to vote against Obama.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Certain professions are supposed to be above things like politics, race, etc.  If a person is unable to pay for the care, that is a different matter.  But doctors are like EMT's, police, emergency service personel.  They can't decide the won't treat Republicans, or blacks, or Catholics just because they don't like them.
> ...



Who said ANYTHING about slaves?  How is this even REMOTELY like slavery? 




> If doctors are to be held to that standard - *then we as a society have an equal responsibility not to abuse them.*



Absolutely.  But there is no evidence abuse is occurring.

A doctor doesn't HAVE to take insurance - any insurance, private or government.  They can opt to be cash only.

He has a right to limit how many patients he sees and whether he desires to take new ones.

Once you start deciding to limit patients based on politics, race, gender (other than specialization), religion, ethnicity....or simply because they look at you funny...then you need to reconsider your profession and what it means to you.

Can EMT's make those kinds of distinctions?  Ambulance whizzes up to a house with an "Miss Me Yet' Bush sign and the EMT says - forget it, he voted against healthcare reform....they'll have to send another ambulance?

Clearly, this doctor doesn't feel that society is living up to that end of the bargain.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Care4all (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Certain professions are supposed to be above things like politics, race, etc.  If a person is unable to pay for the care, that is a different matter.  But doctors are like EMT's, police, emergency service personel.  They can't decide the won't treat Republicans, or blacks, or Catholics just because they don't like them.
> ...



That's fine and well, but why sanction him taking this out on his very own patients through his nasty note to them?


----------



## boedicca (Apr 5, 2010)

Coyote said:


> Who said ANYTHING about slaves?  How is this even REMOTELY like slavery?



It's a matter of degree.   If the government dictates virtually every aspect of a professional's life (as will be the case with ObamaCare), that would certainly not feel "free".   




> Absolutely.  But there is no evidence abuse is occurring.
> 
> A doctor doesn't HAVE to take insurance - any insurance, private or government.  They can opt to be cash only.
> 
> ...




And that's the point of difference.   Many Americans have concluded that ObamaCare does cross the line.   Doctors (along with Insurance Companies, Drug Companies, Medical Device Manufacturers) have been demonized and vilified - with the result being a legislative mess that will micro-manage them.   If I were a doctor, I would feel that the social contract had been violated.

We'll have to see.   Recent polls show as much as 45% of doctors considering early retirement because they don't like what they've seen so far about the bill.

The doctor did not refuse to care for anyone in an emergency situation - so the EMT and ambulance comparisons are fallacious.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 5, 2010)

Care4all said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



Again, you are confusing etiquette with ethics and emotion with reason.  This sign violated no law or ethical stricture.  The fact that you have strong feelings about this sign does not mean it was illegal, unethical or immoral to put it up.  As long as competent care from other urologists in the area was available, the most you can reasonably say is that in your opinion it was rude of the doctor to put it up.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 5, 2010)

Care4all said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



"It was unethical, it broke his physician's code of ethics."  He is not up on charges is he.  Provide a link that Florida has begun ethics violations against him.  Your emotions that ran away with your judgement over the law to begin with, has returned to blind you once again.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 5, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



Wait for it.. Grayson is working to that end.. You know Garyson? The Congressdick that said "Republicans want people to DIE QUICKLY"?


----------



## EriktheRed (Apr 5, 2010)

Philobeado said:


> I love stories like this



I do too, since it shows what a bunch of assholes Republicons are.


Isn't it cool, too, how the guy pretty much admitted he doesn't even really know just what he's protesting against?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Apr 5, 2010)

EriktheRed said:


> Philobeado said:
> 
> 
> > I love stories like this
> ...



From the OP's link:

In his waiting room, Cassell also has provided his patients with photocopies of a health-care timeline produced by Republican leaders that outlines "major provisions" in the health-care package. The doctor put a sign above the stack of copies that reads: "This is what the morons in Washington have done to your health care. Take one, read it and vote out anyone who voted for it."



I'd say he knows more than you do about what he is protesting about.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 5, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> EriktheRed said:
> 
> 
> > Philobeado said:
> ...



I'd say he only knows what the Republicans have been telling him.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 5, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Who said ANYTHING about slaves?  How is this even REMOTELY like slavery?
> ...



It's a matter of ridiculous degree.  By your logic - any rule that inhibits behavior or forces compliance to a rule or societal norm is slavery.

In fact, there is no indication that the government* "dictates virtually every aspect of a professional's life*" or will do so, with the healthcare bill - that's gross hyperbole at best.  Try again.



> > Absolutely.  But there is no evidence abuse is occurring.
> >
> > A doctor doesn't HAVE to take insurance - any insurance, private or government.  They can opt to be cash only.
> >
> ...



Who's "many"?  How "many"?  Crossed the line *how*?



> Doctors (along with Insurance Companies, Drug Companies, Medical Device Manufacturers) have been demonized and vilified - with the result being a legislative mess that will micro-manage them.   If I were a doctor, I would feel that the social contract had been violated.



Well that is strange.  The bill contains many elements that were supported by the Republicans at one time, has managed to get and keep the support of insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry.  According to the NEJM, the majority of doctors support most of the elements in that bill.  Can you provide any actual studies beyond the "testimonial" of a pissed off doctor or someone's personal experiences with doctors, which support your point?



> We'll have to see.   Recent polls show as much as 45% of doctors considering early retirement because they don't like what they've seen so far about the bill.



What polls?



> The doctor did not refuse to care for anyone in an emergency situation - so the EMT and ambulance comparisons are fallacious.



Oh?  Perhaps, to use your words - it's a "matter of degree".


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 5, 2010)

The doctor is now saying that "it was just a joke".


----------



## Care4all (Apr 5, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



Where have I spoken about the LAW or our government being involved in this?

Why is it that all you got is to put words in my mouth?

Do you WANT the government to control this so that BREAKING THE ETHICAL CODE for physicians is ALSO breaking the LAW, that our government governs??  

Do you not believe in SELF GOVERNANCE by the private sector for their own sector? 

Because if you do believe the private sector can govern and should govern themselves regarding their sector's ethics, then you can't come in and say these ethics don't mattern because they are not LAW....that is being hypocritical and defeats the purpose of self governance.,,,can you understand that?

so these oaths and ethical codes ARE IMPORTANT, so that we do not have to have our government, govern them, down to the nitty gritty.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 6, 2010)

Care4all said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



A little dodging never helped a point.  So, you admit he hasn't broken a law.  Good start.  Now, you need to recognize that Florida has a medical ethics board too.  No pending review there either.  You need to com to grips with your real issue here.  That appears to be that you don't think doctors should be allowed to express an opinion.


----------



## EriktheRed (Apr 6, 2010)

SFC Ollie said:


> EriktheRed said:
> 
> 
> > Philobeado said:
> ...






> Cassell: Hospice cuts in 2012Does the government want people to die slowly?
> Colmes: Do you really think the government wants people dead?
> Cassell: Well I think that theyre cutting all supportive care, like nursing homes, ambulance services
> Colmes: What to you mean theyre cutting nursing homes?
> ...



Doctor Against Treating Obama Supporters Admits Not Knowing What&#8217;s In Health Reform Bill  Alan Colmes&#039; Liberaland


----------



## Care4all (Apr 6, 2010)

saveliberty said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



I do not think Physicians should express their political views at their office IN THE MANNER THAT THIS DOC DID, involving his very own patients personal care....I do not believe, as the Physician's code STATES that physicians should EVER let politics interphere with his patients, or at his office where his patients are FORCED to hear his view, when they ONLY WANT TO SEE THE DOCTOR that THEY ARE PAYING, for their Medical care.

This doctor, after his working hours and care for his patients, can go off and join any group, can have the group meet in his own doctor's office, can plastered his office with signs saying the government should all be voted out, or anything he pleases....

But it is unethical for him to bring those personal and free speech rights, in to his physician practice and among his patients.

THAT is what the physician's code translates to....and he broke this oath imo...

Whether he gets charged or does not get charged with a crime in the state, is not my issue....

He will do himself in, all on his own....if he hasn't aready...I'm fairly confident of that....15 minutes of fame is just that, 15 minutes.

If his fellow doctors who follow the code are disgusted with his sign to his own patients, then they will no longer reference patients to him....

those on both sides of the aisle that were appalled at his sign when they came in for their appointments, will find another doc...., and those that walked away after reading the sign or hearing about it, that had to find their own REPLACEMENT CARE without him assisting them, and become sicker because of the delay in treatment, will SUE HIM for malpractice and breaking his code will be used against him, as the ethical code they take is always used in malpractice suits.....

There is much that can happen to him....may he get, what he deserves, for treating his patients in such an unethical, nasty, manner.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 6, 2010)

Care4all said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...


*and we see you creaming your drawers wanting harm to come to the doctor cause he dared say something you don't like.. yet,, you applaud the asswipe democrats and all their glorified unethical behavior  booo fucking hoooo I thiought this was a marathon yesterday??? *





Hey! Care4None. you need to fucking get over it, you applaud the party that stole 960 Billion dollars from elder care and ya wanna whine about one pissed off doctor.. Care4None is onna roll.


----------



## Full-Auto (Apr 6, 2010)

Care4all said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



There is so much wrong with this where to begin.

Who the hell are you to decide what the ethics should be?

What the hell is the CODE?  If you refer to the oath, explain the abortion section and why the left ignores that portion.


----------



## Care4all (Apr 6, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



Willow, why don't you try educating yourself once in a while?

It IS PART of their Ethical code, that once they take a patient, even if the patient is in the rears with payment, they MUST complete their care with their patients, OR they MUST find a replacement Physician to take on their patient's care once they pass it over to them...


----------



## Care4all (Apr 6, 2010)

from all all that i have been reading up on....the patient who took the Doctor's words, as they were presented to her, on the door of his office, and walked away...can bring ethical charges against him....whether she does it or not, we will see....these things take time.


----------



## Full-Auto (Apr 6, 2010)

Care4all said:


> from all all that i have been reading up on....the patient who took the Doctor's words, as they were presented to her, on the door of his office, and walked away...can bring ethical charges against him....whether she does it or not, we will see....these things take time.



That dog doesnt hunt.  we have already seen the legal opinions.

But hell you have been making things up that goes beyond the known facts so continue. its amusing.


----------



## WillowTree (Apr 6, 2010)

Care4all said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



so, how many patients have asked him to assist in locating another physician?? they better follow the prescribed steps or their eithics complaints may fall in the cesspool of your thought processes ......


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 6, 2010)

Care4all said:


> I do not think Physicians should express their political views at their office IN THE MANNER THAT THIS DOC DID, involving his very own patients personal care....I do not believe, as the Physician's code STATES that physicians should EVER let politics interphere with his patients, or at his office where his patients are FORCED to hear his view, when they ONLY WANT TO SEE THE DOCTOR that THEY ARE PAYING, for their Medical care.
> 
> This doctor, after his working hours and care for his patients, can go off and join any group, can have the group meet in his own doctor's office, can plastered his office with signs saying the government should all be voted out, or anything he pleases....
> 
> ...



In your OPINION.  That is ALL it is.  Here's the litmus test Care:  Did the doctor actually refuse to treat a single patient?  Did the doctor discuss with the patient their political leanings to verify?  Sort of hard to sue a doctor for malpractice when you, as the patient, didn't go to the appointment.  It all boils down to your feelings.  Get over it.


----------



## Claudette (Apr 6, 2010)

The Doc is within his rights. Doctors refuse Medicare and Medicaid patients all the time. Jeeze

I'm sure if an emergency comes in they will get treated. 

I don't find his decision any worse than our Govt telling us we have to purchase a commercial product. Healthcare. 

Will be very interested to see how the SC views this.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 6, 2010)

Full-Auto said:


> There is so much wrong with this where to begin.
> 
> Who the hell are you to decide what the ethics should be?
> 
> *What the hell is the CODE?  If you refer to the oath, explain the abortion section and why the left ignores that portion.*



Don't bother, she like the rest of them will just go on ignoring that question, because they don't like the answer that must come from it.

Immie


----------



## Care4all (Apr 6, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> > There is so much wrong with this where to begin.
> ...



maybe because I am tired of doing ALL of the research on this...I know the answer, but the question is, why don't you guys KNOW the answer...and it comes down to believing in what you believe, and not wanting to know the information that may differ with your own opinion....and I am not guilty free of doing this same thing, it's just your turn for it, I suppose?

The original Hippocratic Oath is not taken by medical Doctors, it has been revised many times over the past few millenniums....and abortion and euthanasia mentionings have been left off of the oath they take today, which is labeled a Physicians Oath. 

I gave a link for the various different oaths being used earlier in this thread or the other thread on this same topic....if you or the others questioning this had gone in to the link, or googled it yourself, you would have had your own answer.

Care


----------



## Care4all (Apr 6, 2010)

Claudette said:


> The Doc is within his rights. Doctors refuse Medicare and Medicaid patients all the time. Jeeze
> 
> I'm sure if an emergency comes in they will get treated.
> 
> ...



No Claudette.

Doctors can not dismiss their EXISTING patients without following the protocol in their code of ethics...

YES Claudette.

Doctors can refuse medicare patients or even patients with insurance, since they too insist that the doctors get paid below their going rate, but THIS is refusing them before they BECOME patients.

Once they are patients and are in need of his specific care, then the Physician is obligated to find another Doctor or facility to take over the patient's care, if he no longer wants to service his patient.

This is a GOOD THING....and I am grateful this has been included in the code of ethics that doctors decided for themselves, it was an important, responsible, standard to have for their field.


----------



## Immanuel (Apr 6, 2010)

Care4all said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Full-Auto said:
> ...



Oh?  Then my apologies. It must have been one of those dozen spammed posts you made and didn't actually address the question, just spammed the oath without discussion.

It still does not make your wildly hysterical accusations correct.

The man did nothing unethical or immoral.  He did not refuse medical care to a single soul. 

Immie


----------



## Claudette (Apr 6, 2010)

Did the sign say existing patients??

Nope. Don't think so. Think this was for anyone new. 

Doc is within his rights.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Apr 6, 2010)

If he didn't want Medicare/Medicaid patients he should have said that.

Not all Obama supporters have it, and I'm pretty sure there are some GOP'ers that do.

Turning it into a political statement that would make those under his care uncomfortable was plain stupid.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 6, 2010)

If a doctor is going to be put under an obligation not to say anything that would make his patients "uncomfortable", then as a society, we should not be passing laws that make his job untenable.

Just sayin'.


----------



## Titanic Sailor (Apr 6, 2010)

I'd like to live in a state where we can let Democrats visit, but have to live else where so our kids can have a future...........

Texas?


----------

