And So It Begins: Sick Kids Being Denied Specialty Treatment Under ObamaCare

[Sallow]

And So It Begins: Sick Kids Being Denied Specialty Treatment Under ObamaCare | Independent Journal Review

How many people are going to die because of Obama

Did you actually watch the report?

Those kids were TREATED ANYWAY!

Where were you folks when this happened???

Arizona Transplant Patients Die After State Cuts Medical Insurance - ABC News

That's Governor Jan Brewer's ConservoCare.

3 Americans Died.

Where was the outcry?

 

[Sallow]

Thanks for the objective reporting.

I'm sure this isn't like the false statements made by FOX 2 months ago based on patient reports that were later proven as gross distortions or outright lies.

The desire to kill ObamaCare = doth protest too much.

If you watch the actual report in the link?

They got treated anyway.

 

[Sallow]

Healthcare coming from the govt? Yes, it does mean that they are worse off. Who is the govt to tell anyone what he or she does or does not need?

Equating getting healthcare from the government to being worse off is a comically absurd equalization.

As for your second question about the government telling people what they need, I am not sure what exactly you have an issue with. Do you have a problem with minimum standards? Do you have a problem with the mandate? Like all other industrialized nations the US people generally care about the health care of their fellow citizens and consider it part of the government's job to ensure people can receive health care. If you have a problem with this then I would also assume you have a problem with Medicaid and Medicare.

yes, I do have a problem with minimum standards when I am being forced to purchase a product. A mandate is just another term for holding a gun to your head so that you will do as you are told.
I have a problem with people who think it is okay to ignore the rule of law under the false guise of 'caring for one another'. That way lays the end of freedom.

Oh, and equating healthcare from government, or anything from government, does make it worse off. What is comically absurd is a belief that government makes things better or does what is right, or even does anything, well.

What gun?

 

[Agit8r]

And So It Begins: Sick Kids Being Denied Specialty Treatment Under ObamaCare | Independent Journal Review

How many people are going to die because of Obama

This has to do with the state insurance exchange, and the companies that service that exchange. It is funny that people believe whatever Sarah Palin tells them, and thus assume that Obamacare is a centralized program run directly by the federal government.

It isn't like Europe, where people get the same care regardless of what they contribute to the system. The State exchange here in WA has multiple tiers of coverage, and the "Gold" tier covers more than the "Bronze" tier, etc. It hasn't been made clear which tier the patients in question were covered under, but this state has a good record of taking care of sick kids, so I trust our insurance commission will sort this out.

Seattle Children's suing to be on more state health plans | KING5.com Seattle

 

[billyerock1991]

Healthcare coming from the govt? Yes, it does mean that they are worse off. Who is the govt to tell anyone what he or she does or does not need?

Equating getting healthcare from the government to being worse off is a comically absurd equalization.

As for your second question about the government telling people what they need, I am not sure what exactly you have an issue with. Do you have a problem with minimum standards? Do you have a problem with the mandate? Like all other industrialized nations the US people generally care about the health care of their fellow citizens and consider it part of the government's job to ensure people can receive health care. If you have a problem with this then I would also assume you have a problem with Medicaid and Medicare.

yes, I do have a problem with minimum standards when I am being forced to purchase a product. A mandate is just another term for holding a gun to your head so that you will do as you are told.

I have a problem with people who think it is okay to ignore the rule of law under the false guise of 'caring for one another'. That way lays the end of freedom.

Oh, and equating healthcare from government, or anything from government, does make it worse off. What is comically absurd is a belief that government makes things better or does what is right, or even does anything, well.

deal with it... gun or not ...in life you're all ways forced to be responsible ... if you don't like it, pull the trigger...

as for government working ....lets look at its failures ... we were supposed to have our banking safe, rtight??? what happen??? republicans take control of the congress... they deregulates the banking and we all lose our asses in our 401k's... the what happens??? moron like you come here and say government can'rt do anything right ... you say stupid shit like "comically absurd is a belief that government makes things better or does what is right, or even does anything, well."...the fact that you can't see that the republicans have screw it up is your problem ... government does very good as long as you keep the republicans out of it with their deregulating of these plans ....once these republicans get their dirty little hands on it, it fails ... the problems isn't government... the problem is republicans and you're not smart enough to see that ... I challenge you to find a government plan that failed that a republican didn't screw it up first before it failed ... find just one if you can ...

 

[koshergrl]

And So It Begins: Sick Kids Being Denied Specialty Treatment Under ObamaCare | Independent Journal Review

How many people are going to die because of Obama

Did you actually watch the report?

Those kids were TREATED ANYWAY!

Where were you folks when this happened???

Arizona Transplant Patients Die After State Cuts Medical Insurance - ABC News

That's Governor Jan Brewer's ConservoCare.

3 Americans Died.

Where was the outcry?

That's so funny, because when you totalitarians were trying force obamacare on us before, your mantra was that people were DYING without it..that they couldn't GET care if they didn't have insurance.

Now you're defending the fact that obamacare isn't paying for kids with certain ailments that was previously covered by saying that hospitals are treating them anyway!

You agreed with us! And you knew all along! What pukes.

I talk to people every day, medicaid clients, who have lost their existing insurance and can't get it straightened out. The medicaid requirements have changed, but they haven't told anyone what the new standards are. What I do know is that they're rolling adults who were working and receiving medicaid into insurance with premiums, without any contact being made. One month, they have free medical, and the next they are racking up premiums. Welcome to obamacare.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No you don't, kg.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[emilynghiem]

Equating getting healthcare from the government to being worse off is a comically absurd equalization.

As for your second question about the government telling people what they need, I am not sure what exactly you have an issue with. Do you have a problem with minimum standards? Do you have a problem with the mandate? Like all other industrialized nations the US people generally care about the health care of their fellow citizens and consider it part of the government's job to ensure people can receive health care. If you have a problem with this then I would also assume you have a problem with Medicaid and Medicare.

yes, I do have a problem with minimum standards when I am being forced to purchase a product. A mandate is just another term for holding a gun to your head so that you will do as you are told.
I have a problem with people who think it is okay to ignore the rule of law under the false guise of 'caring for one another'. That way lays the end of freedom.

Oh, and equating healthcare from government, or anything from government, does make it worse off. What is comically absurd is a belief that government makes things better or does what is right, or even does anything, well.

What gun?

That if you don't buy insurance you are forced to pay a fine to government that will increase over time, and which you have no direct control over (since the state level allows for more direct voting by citizens, but not the federal level where this bill was passed and enforced through the IRS which is near impossible to police or reform with no checks and balances under the Constitution or by the people)

And if you don't like this plan, then you are under pressure to go through your state and come up with an approved state alternative that meets federal guidelines through an approved process, ie has to prove that it meets coverage requirements and be approved by an administration that is hostile to alternatives, even writing into the bill that innovations cannot be implemented as options until 2017.

So basically you are considered guilty of not being able to pay for insurance any other way "until proven otherwise" the burden of proof or of changing the law is put on the citizens who didn't consent to this bill but are required to pay into it, or get govt approval for other alternatives under limited conditions regulated by this bill.

All this should have been worked out BEFORE passing the bill; not enforcing or threatening to and then forcing people to fight against time to protect and defend their other choices precluded by this bill.

 

[westwall]

Equating getting healthcare from the government to being worse off is a comically absurd equalization.

As for your second question about the government telling people what they need, I am not sure what exactly you have an issue with. Do you have a problem with minimum standards? Do you have a problem with the mandate? Like all other industrialized nations the US people generally care about the health care of their fellow citizens and consider it part of the government's job to ensure people can receive health care. If you have a problem with this then I would also assume you have a problem with Medicaid and Medicare.

yes, I do have a problem with minimum standards when I am being forced to purchase a product. A mandate is just another term for holding a gun to your head so that you will do as you are told.
I have a problem with people who think it is okay to ignore the rule of law under the false guise of 'caring for one another'. That way lays the end of freedom.

Oh, and equating healthcare from government, or anything from government, does make it worse off. What is comically absurd is a belief that government makes things better or does what is right, or even does anything, well.

What gun?

\






Darkwind is probably referring to the guns the IRS agents will be holding to the heads of those who refuse to get insurance and refuse to pay the fine. That gun.

 

[westwall]

Equating getting healthcare from the government to being worse off is a comically absurd equalization.

As for your second question about the government telling people what they need, I am not sure what exactly you have an issue with. Do you have a problem with minimum standards? Do you have a problem with the mandate? Like all other industrialized nations the US people generally care about the health care of their fellow citizens and consider it part of the government's job to ensure people can receive health care. If you have a problem with this then I would also assume you have a problem with Medicaid and Medicare.

yes, I do have a problem with minimum standards when I am being forced to purchase a product. A mandate is just another term for holding a gun to your head so that you will do as you are told.

I have a problem with people who think it is okay to ignore the rule of law under the false guise of 'caring for one another'. That way lays the end of freedom.

Oh, and equating healthcare from government, or anything from government, does make it worse off. What is comically absurd is a belief that government makes things better or does what is right, or even does anything, well.

deal with it... gun or not ...in life you're all ways forced to be responsible ... if you don't like it, pull the trigger...

as for government working ....lets look at its failures ... we were supposed to have our banking safe, rtight??? what happen??? republicans take control of the congress... they deregulates the banking and we all lose our asses in our 401k's... the what happens??? moron like you come here and say government can'rt do anything right ... you say stupid shit like "comically absurd is a belief that government makes things better or does what is right, or even does anything, well."...the fact that you can't see that the republicans have screw it up is your problem ... government does very good as long as you keep the republicans out of it with their deregulating of these plans ....once these republicans get their dirty little hands on it, it fails ... the problems isn't government... the problem is republicans and you're not smart enough to see that ... I challenge you to find a government plan that failed that a republican didn't screw it up first before it failed ... find just one if you can ...

I challenge you to find a Federal program that has succeeded in the last 50 years.

 

[emilynghiem]

Can anyone explain to me what was legally stopping people from paying for the kids, or paying for the organ transplants, or paying for health care for others OUT OF VOLUNTEER CHARITY?

After Obamacare was passed, this bill RESTRICTED the options to either paying for health INSURANCE or paying a fine to government AS THE ONLY CHOICES.

So NOW you are no longer free to go fund an emergency surgery for someone
and try to deduct that or count that "in place of buying insurance"

BEFORE the bill was passed, you were equally free to fund any health care you wanted.

Now this is restricted; if you do pay for other methods, money is now taken OUT of that
amount and being FORCED by law to pay to health insurance or to government instead of paying directly for someone's health care, yours or someone else's which is no longer an equal choice.

Anyone care to clarify why the proponents of health care reform couldn't set up a voluntary system of paying into it if this is what they believed in doing?

Don't other charities like Red Cross work very well on volunteer contributions?
So if charities like Red Cross want to use insurance to cover more people,
then donors can CHOOSE to buy that if that helps resources go further.

Why not voluntary if people believe so strongly that this is necessary?

All the PROLIFE people I know invest their money and efforts VOLUNTARILY and not forced by law. Why not the prochoice people pushing this reform?

 

[william the wie]

No offense but what matters politically is:

Age correlates with voting.

Age also correlates strongly with the need for nearby Emergency Care to reduce death and disability rates for stroke and heart attack events.

The end of ER subsidies and overly narrow networks increases the average distance to ER services.

That is slow motion political suicide. There are numerous other politically idiotic parts of ACA that are not being addressed but given the dictatorial style of this administration none of them will be fixed.

 

[koshergrl]

I knew this would happen, and it will get a lot, lot worse.

And the response from our progressives will be "there are too many people anyway. Those kids need to be put out of their misery."

 

[emilynghiem]

And So It Begins: Sick Kids Being Denied Specialty Treatment Under ObamaCare | Independent Journal Review

How many people are going to die because of Obama

Insurance plans have always had gaps. Is this all Obama's fault now? If anything he increased standards which was the reason so many plans were cancelled.

If you change the policy or standards,
shouldn't you be responsible for REPLACING them with an alternative?

For example, if you ban guards from using certain types of guns by raising the standards,
shouldn't you make sure the guards have ACCESS to replacement guns before removing the guns they were using?

In short, the ACA should have been kept optional, and/or experiment with in WITHIN a controlled environment for study before launching it nationally as MANDATORY.
So the parts that work better get chosen voluntarily,
and the parts that don't leave it open for people to substitute something else that does work.

As it is, the President is having to adjust it but that is unconstitutional to do so from an executive position.
It should have been kept private or voluntary until all these issues were worked out on a local basis, and then experiment expanding it to more of the population.

 

[koshergrl]

The objective isn't to provide insurance to people.

It's to withhold treatment.

 

[emilynghiem]

The objective isn't to provide insurance to people.

It's to withhold treatment.

ie paying insurance companies is NOT the same as paying for health care provisions.
the insurance companies are not in the business of providing service or training any
doctors or nurses or building any clinics or facilities.

the govt made a mistake to force insurance providers and customers into a contract with each other under terms that we didn't agree to. Signed our names and ordered by law we pay under these terms.

that is not the job of govt to regulate our business or health care choices.
If federal govt is to be expanded to cover this field, then a Constitutional Amendment is required to pass to clarify or expand on the appropriate clause where the people or States can vote to give that power to federal govt.

No such amendment was proposed or passed before giving this authority to govt, first claimed under general welfare and commerce clause under a public health act being reformed, then argued before the Supreme Court that it was a TAX when the bill was NOT presented or voted on in Congress as a TAX which requires a different process to be CONSTITUTIONAL.

So the passage did not follow the Constitutional procedures but bypassed it by majority rule of one party over another which objected from the very beginning and was excluded.

So you wonder why this bill does not represent the American public -- it bypassed all the checks and balances put it place to make sure laws were passed by consent of the people.

This is pushing some national political religion by majority vote of THAT party,
and does NOT reflect either the consent of taxpayers forced to pay for it, nor the laws in the Constitution designed to limit and check govt from this type of political abuse.

I have not studied the Constitution in school since 8th grade, and it appears my 8th grade history teacher taught me more respect for Constitutional law, due process, equal representation and checks and balances, and the spirit of the law as "consent of the governed" since the Constitution is a social contract between people and government,
than President Obama learned as a graduate of Harvard Law School.

Maybe I should bet his law degree against my 8th grade education, that the ACA did not follow Constitutional procedures and the spirit of the laws, and see who admits what.

I hold that pushing this bill is teh equivalent of abusing the majority rule and party system to establish a national religion based on faith in singlepayer health care through federal govt by force not by choice, and lack of faith in any other way to pay for health care VOLUNTARILY such as by party that would be Constitutional and by public consent.

I'd like to bet 1 million to 10 million to Obama and the Democrat Party, and see how many people we can educate about the Constitutional principles and process our govt is under.

I think I could bet Obama 1 million, and then make a second bet that I could SOONER prove it can be proven that all people can reach a consensus on God and that science can prove spiritual healing can reduce costs of health care and crime to provide coverage to more people voluntarily BEFORE Obama would admit the ACA violates Constitutional principles.

I'd bet 10 million on that. Because the forgiveness it takes to prove a consensus on God and spiritual healing is necessary BEFORE the political changes take place as a result.

I'd love to make a public bet and have Constitutionalists go at it, trying to get Obama and the Democrats to admit the ACA is flawed, and prove we could sooner prove spiritual healing could reduce health care costs more effectively on a voluntary basis than ACA.

 

[MeBelle]

Where were you folks when this happened???

Arizona Transplant Patients Die After State Cuts Medical Insurance - ABC News

That's Governor Jan Brewer's ConservoCare.

3 Americans Died.

Where was the outcry?

And the rest of the story:

The issue presented itself when Governor Jan Brewer decided that the State of Arizona could not afford to pay for organ transplants for Medicaid patients in 2010. The state ultimately reversed the decision after a large public outcry.

Should Medicaid Patients Be Denied Organ Transplants? | Physicians News

How about these?

1) Aliso Viejo resident Danielle Nelson said Anthem Blue Cross promised half a dozen times that her oncologists would be covered under her new policy. She was diagnosed last year with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and discovered a suspicious lump near her jaw in early January.

But when she went to her oncologist's office, she promptly encountered a bright orange sign saying that Covered California plans are not accepted.
"I'm a complete fan of the Affordable Care Act, but now I can't sleep at night," Nelson said. "I can't imagine this is how President Obama wanted it to happen."

2)Maria Berumen, a tax preparer in Downey, was uninsured for years because of preexisting conditions. The 53-year-old was thrilled to find coverage for herself and her husband for $148 a month after qualifying for a big government subsidy.

She jumped at the chance in early January to visit a primary-care doctor for long-running numbness in her arm and shoulder as a result of bone spurs on her spine. The doctor referred her to a specialist, and problems ensued. At least four doctors wouldn't accept her health plan — even though the state exchange website and her insurer, Health Net Inc., list them as part of her HMO network. ***oops***
Obamacare enrollees hit snags at doctor's offices - latimes.com

Thursday, Jan. 30, 2014
Jasmine was flown to Lucille Packard Children's Hospital, but after days of tests, the transplant doctors there said she would not be getting a heart.
The hospital's letter described Jasmine as "currently too well, and having ongoing psychosocial considerations." Those psychosocial considerations were not explained in the letter.
The family says doctors at Stanford told them Jasmine could be treated with medication and rehabilitation at Oakland Children's Hospital.
However, Jasmine's grandmother began worrying when the teen continued getting worse. Cardiologists in Oakland once again said she needed a transplant.
"Stanford said no, but UCLA said yes," said Thomas.
2 Investigates: Family questions organ transplant centers... | www.ktvu.com

As of right now Justin is in the hospital in Atlanta because he ran out of medications and could not afford to buy more because he was denied Obamacare and Medicaid so he has to stay here so he can get his medicine! While he is in the hospital he is trying to get the doctors to write letter to Medicaid so he will be approved. The doctors are saying his liver is getting sicker an sicker either they can do a second liver transplant or just keep giving him his medicine until his liver stops in which if his liver stops he dies and they dont want to give him a new liver because thay say he can't get the medications he needs for this one that he will be in the same place he is now.. Well if Obamacare and Medicaid would approve him he wouldn't have this problem and he could get a new liver and get all the medicines he needs. Justin an his parents started fighting for Medicaid in 1997 when he got his transplant and they have denied him every since! Help us share this page to help fight for him to finally be approved to be able to get his new liver and medicines!!
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Obam...ansplant-Patient-Justin-Trutt/580422388712869

Blaming insurance companies will commence in

3


2


1

gooooooooooooooo!

 

[boedicca]

[IPAB]If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.[/IPAB]

 

[Zander]

Like everything about Obamacare, this is a GOOD thing!!

Right?

Do not question authority. Obey.

Also, prepare to pay a lot more in taxes.

 

[boedicca]

Yeah! All those dying kids are now freed from being Wage Slaves and can now pursue their artistic careers or become entrepreneurs!