Tuesday, 28 October 2008
-
When a Child Dies: Healthcare and the Election
by Nurse Jenna 
When a child dies there is a profound sense for everyone that something is wrong with the world. It is a grief that surpasses others because the cycle of life is disrupted and the belief that children will outlive their parents, which is so fundamental to how we live our days, plan our futures, and dream our biggest dreams is destroyed. A child’s death is a parent’s worst nightmare, so much so, that it is almost unfathomable--until it happens.
For those of you who read my posts you know I write passionately and unapologetically about what I believe is important to maintaining the health our children. I do not believe our system is perfect, nor are our doctors, or nurses, and that we have a lot of work to do to become better. This goes without saying since right now, one of the top topics of national debate is on how to make our healthcare system better with the next administration. But you probably have taken note that there are many aspects of the care we are able to receive in the United States that I defend-- prenatal care, hospital labor and delivery practices, well-child care, and public health policies - because we have many reasons both from scientific and anecdotal evidence -- to believe they work. At the very least, I hope to express why I think they are better than some of the alternatives.
Tragically, but completely coincidentally, my Spanish teacher’s cousin, here in Ecuador, died over the weekend at 9 years old of a similar blood disorder that I posted about here last week--where the family was able to save their son by having another baby. Today I listened in horror to the details of his illness and death, with a mounting sense of rage of how this child was essentially “allowed” to die. This has nothing to do with needing to find a bone marrow donor, though that would have eventually had to happen, but rather the fact that he died because he never got to see a specialist--not even so much as a pediatrician in the 6 months since his diagnosis.
How could this be? My inadequate Spanish language abilities could not keep up with all questions I had regarding the care he had gotten, and more importantly, the care he did not get. The corruption of the medical system permitted doctors to bypass my teacher’s cousin for less critical patients who could pay more. This was what ultimately prevented him from seeing a doctor who may have been able to save his life.
When his spleen ruptured over the weekend, his mother was actually given a choice while he was bleeding to death: they could operate and if he lived, he would subsequently continue to receive the same care he was receiving, or they could let him die. Knowing what he had suffered and despite her efforts to get him to a doctor who could help him, he had already gone into renal and multi-organ failure. She was helpless to get him better care and therefore she chose to let him die. This is a decision one could certainly question, but more importantly, I ask--how can the healthcare system be so negligent as to force a mother to make this decision? Needless to say, there is no legal recourse for her either. The word "malpractice" is not part of the common vernacular here.
While this is a terrible story, it is not about a lack of resources or a lack qualified specialists----it is about how they are allocated according to a family’s ability to pay. People in the United States face similar situations when loved ones are allowed to die because insurance companies refuse to pay for needed medical treatment. We cannot allow our system in the United States to degrade further to this level where the people who make the decisions for our health and our children’s health are the people behind a desk determining if the money it costs for treatment is worth the value of a life. Sometimes, it takes a tragic story like this both to remind of us of what we have and to assure that we take the steps necessary so that we do not end up somewhere we do not want to be. When a child dies, we all grieve, but we need to do more.
We need to think about the current discussions of healthcare changes and how they will affect our families. With the election only a week away, what concerns do you have about how the proposed changes will have on the quality of our healthcare? Is this a primary issue for you in this election?
-
recommend
- recs 3
-
share
-
email
- sent 0
Related Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to momaroo's Momaroo Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in momaroo's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (26)
My primary concern in this election is that Obama has no problems killing babies in the womb ( no matter how old they are), part way born or even after they are born if they survive an abortion. THAT is my concern. I have two babies and am expecting my third. I love them very much and it just makes my heart hurt to know that some babies have to suffer and die like this. I would save them all if I could... but since I can't I will be voting for life in this election!
While we do not have a perfect system, we do have some of the best healthcare in the world in this country. My concern is that going to completely socialized medicine will undermine all of that. Your story is about what many consider to be a 3rd world country. Look at some of the issues people have getting early treatment in countries like England and Canada, which are supposedly on par with us economically and socially. It's ridiculous. I have no health insurance and pay out of my own pocket. I sometimes have to make decisions based on whether I can afford to pay for something. I am one of those that falls through the cracks because we make too much money for assistance, but not enough money to pay for everything up front. Thankfully, God has provided thus far. I think the costs of our healthcare are too far out and need some kind of adjusting here, and that our insurance companies have too much power here. There needs to be some kind of reform there, but a government health plan for all is not the solution.
Wow. I continue to be completely blown away by how mis-informed so many people are on so many different topics related to the prospective presidential candidates' plans for healthcare. Just wow...I don't think there's anything else to say. If people haven't "gotten it" by now, is there really any use in trying to explain it yet again?
How terrible! I can't even comprehend what it would be like to lose one of my children!
I live in Alabama and, several years ago, the state began providing health insurance for children of working parents with low income and no coverage. Administered through BCBS, it is an excellent plan, covering just about everything.
I am very grateful for this program, since my children have benefitted greatly. Fortunately, there is also Medicaid for those whose income is too low, providing free health insurance and benefits for those with even lower incomes.
Not a cure all, but a solution that has worked for the benefit of my kids. The fact that I have no insurance hasn't been a problem~yet! But at least my youngest daughter is covered for now!
@filtered_sunlight@xanga - Honestly, any help explaining would be useful. It is difficult to get information out there. Sometimes something one person says sinks in when something someone else says does not. So please....write away! I read your comments and know you have a lot of good things to say.
Since the birth of our youngest daughter, healthcare has taken on a whole new meaning. She has CHD and Down syndrome. We were lucky, we had great insurance and fantastic doctors. Since then I have become involved with many families dealing with children with congential heart defects. Not all families are as fortunate as ours. Some are unable to get insurance due to their childs condition and are forced to go on Medical. (Medicaid in many places, Medical in California).
What many do not realize is that these programs do not cover many of the drugs needed for serious health problems. Often times the family is forced to pay the costs which can be hundreds of dollars.
Every person should have the ability to receive proper healthcare, not just "good enough". That is one of the biggest issues I am using to reach a decision. I want real healthcare reform, not just a bunch of doublespeak.
No system is perfect, but I thank God for the fact that I live in a country where I can recieve medical treatment and it is my right to recieve care reguardless of whether I can pay or not. It is a strain on our system to have the uninsured or those who cannot afford medical care to be cared for, but it is a must. We cannot dehumanize people and priortize them according to income or anything else than need.
I am very insecure about the government stepping into our healthcare system, and rather feel standoff-ish. I would rather step back and see what will happen in the future and see what reforms are actually done. Candidates have been promising reform for a long time with little to no changes - remember when President Clinton's wife Hillary in 1993 tried to present healthcare leglislation that died before reaching the senate or house floor. It just hasn't happened and I wonder if it ever will.
I think my issues have been the economy and the security of our nation. I am far more worried about how I will pay my bills and the war. I'll admit that since we have insurance, healthcare is not the priority that it is for others.
That family will be in my prayers.
In the U.S. individuals needing medical care are able to get it, regardless of their ability to pay. Yes, it's a strain on the system, but no one is going without care...all you have to do is head over to your nearest ER and you will be treated, even if you don't have a cent in your pocket.
There are also programs like Medicaid and CHIP to help families who cannot afford insurance, if they choose to take advantage of the government aid.
The one thing that bothers me is how insurance companies get HUGE discounts when they pay doctors and hospitals for their services, while patients paying in cash have to pay a MUCH higher cost. That's just plain WRONG. It almost encourages people NOT to pay.
The system isn't perfect, but it's far better than the system we'd have under socialized medicine. Just look at Canada for an example of that.
Obama's healthcare plans scare me...my husband and I don't believe in accepting government aid but under Obama's plan, we would be REQUIRED to have insurance for our children, or face some sort of penalty.
I think McCain's plans to make insurance plans portable between jobs and across state lines would be an excellent help to encourage competition between companies and drive down the cost of premiums. And maybe a tax credit for families who purchase their own health insurance.
Healthcare really isnt a primary issue for me - although it important. But I do have one question (that I have yet to find an answer for). Everything I have read so far (and everyone I have talked to) emphasizes that Obama wants to make the healthcare affordable - through an option of government.
What is affordable? How does Obama define that?
The people that get medical care here in the US, are the very poor and the wealthy. I was on MediCal when I was living with my mother, we had access to healthcare. Once I turned 18, I couldn't use MediCal. By that time, I was working and was a full-time student. They said I made too much money. An individual qualifies for MediCal if they make $600 or less. Who survives on $600? The system is built, so that people stay poor. If you try to make a little more, you lose your mediCal. Or people cheat the system and try to get paid in cash.
For about 3 years I had no health insurance and I got sick. I went to the emergency room and now have a $10,000 bill. I was deathly ill, but I had to think about whether or not I could go to the hospital. What's unfair is that patients with no health insurance end up paying more. This bill only included medication I received and my few hour stay at the hospital. It didn't include the doctor or CATT scan, both these were waived for me by those companies. Luckily, my husband now has health insurance through his job.
I believe everyone has a right to be healthy and have access to healthcare. Every child should have healthcare. I believe in Obama's plan.
@MlleBaroque@xanga - Have you worked in the medical field? Have you had a family member DIE because they could not get adequate health care in America? I have. I have seen many people denied the care they need because they had no way to pay. It's true that you can go to an ER and get care if you can not pay, but ER's can only do so much (and of course, you will be stuck with a huge bill.. and if you can't pay it the hospital will take you to court and win, which means your wages will be garnished, or worse). Specialists cost MONEY. If you don't have the insurance, or money to go, you don't. There are millions who make too much for Medicaid, but can not afford healthcare. (the medicaid income limits are extremely low)
@MlleBaroque@xanga - Unfortunately one of the huge problems and congestions in our healthcare system as it stands is that people abuse the E.R. It is not designed to be used for primary care or maintenance of chronic conditions. It is MUCH more costly for everyone who puts money into healthcare in any capacity to be paying for people who abuse the ER in this way, not to mention the fact that it takes up space and personnel for true emergencies. This is actually an epidemic problem and anyone who has had to wait HOURS in the ER for a problem is well aware of this situation. The ER is not designed to care for the uninsured and this is not the solution to the problem of our uninsured, but is actually worsening the existing problem. This is enabling the vicious cycle to continue. Requiring mandatory insurance for everyone, but especially children is a beginning to help this problem, but people in the United States fear socialized medicine like they did communism in the days of the Cold War. It is an irrational fear and one that prohibits us from addressing some of our largest healthcare issues. All children NEED to be insured. No parent should go bankrupt because their child comes down with an illness. Yes, this requires government intervention to assure that children are insured, but sometimes indeed those with more need to pay for those with less, especially when those with less are our country´s children, and in essence, our country´s future.
@WasabiBek@xanga - Here are some links to get real information.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_alive_baloney.html
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obama_and_infanticide.html
A good website to help you make a better decision is:
dividedwefail.org
For cryin' out loud... I wish EVERYONE would so some REAL research instead of believing whatever they say about each other. McCain and Obama LIE about EACH OTHER!!!!!! They BOTH do it! You should really be questioning BOTH of their qualities instead of allowing either campaign to make up your mind for you! THERE IS STILL TIME TO ACTUALLY MAKE AN EDUCATED DECISION BASED ON FACTS AND NOT BOLOGNA THAT THEY SAY ABOUT EACH OTHER!!!!
In regards to losing a child... I am glad my parents had the childrens hospital for my brother, he died in heart surgery when he was 18 months old (He had down syndrome, they found out before he was born and never once considered it was a choice to have him. He was their child and there was no choice involved. Unlike some VP candidates that called it a choice.) and the childrens hospital has a foundation that when a child dies at the hospital they pay for all of their medical bills so that the parents do not have monthly reminder that their child died.
Oh and you still have to pay for the ER. The ER can not turn anyone away regardless of their ability to pay, but that does not mean they will not have a bill. Those are two separate things. Plus most people without insurance (At least in my area this is true) go to Urgent Care clinics for the flat fee to see the doctor.
@bassangel@xanga - Correct--They will not turn people away and correct, you WILL get a bill!
@alexiah100@xanga - The primary reason healthcare reform stalled in 1993 was not due to the particular plan or the lack of a need to reform health care; this was mostly due to a concerted effort by those who profit from reform to stifle debate (HMO's, pharmaceutical firms etc.)
In hindsight, I think this is a credit to the Clinton Administration - they tried to fix the problem before it got to be a crisis. 15 years later, health care sure looks like a crisis to me.
What some people fail to grasp is that the health care reform issue IS tied to our economy. For example, the big 3 automakers are in SERIOUS trouble - and one of the primary reasons is that their health care obligations are gigantic (for example, some estimates have GM sitting on $50 billion dollars in liability due to health care costs associated w/ employees and retirees.) This is dragging down (and will ultimately probably kill at least Chrysler) 3 of the largest employers in the country.The biggest problem is that people have been profiteering off health care for such a long time; this money has generated powerful lobbies that spend millions a year to keep the status quo at the expense of 8 millions of uninsured kids and 45 million uninsured adults in America. Those who can supposedly pay get soaked and those who can't are forced to use sub-par options (the emergency room) and don't get fully adequate care.
Health care IS affecting our economy; we need to think outside of our individual context and realize that if we don't fix this soon, it will drag down more and more companies and put the economy into a longer and more painful tailspin.
@bassangel@xanga - "Real" information, huh? Both of those articles read incredibly biased to me. If you want to post links to support your beliefs, more power to you, but don't tell me they contain unbiased fact.
For the other side to those articles:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08081101.html
I know what Obama claims to support and what his voting record shows. Unfortunately the two do not agree.
I don't have TV and I don't regularly listen to the radio, so I haven't seen or heard many of the campaign ads. I make my decisions based on who the two candidates are, how they have voted in the past, and what ideas they support for the future. You are free to make your own educated decisions, but by posting those links you kind of shot your own argument in the foot.
@deh1974@xanga - excellent points - I'll confess that I didn't think of how the Clinton adminstration really did step in before it was such a big issue too bad that the problem - like so many other issues and other administrations before - couldn't have been solved earlier. Alas hindsight is 20/20...
Healthcare is affecting our economy I'll agree. I know that my in-laws do not have coverage because it would take almost half of my father in laws paycheck. I know that many companies are suffering from this problem.
Heathcare is not the primary problem though, and to me it is not the priority. There are so many other contributors to the economy, but I really don't have time to cover them all... thanks for the reply and it is making me think again about my opinions on the subject.
@MlleBaroque@xanga - While I don't agree with some of the things you have stated, I do agree that the amounts that those who are insured pay and those that must pay out of pocket are grossly different. Following our daughters heart surgery we received numerous statements showing the breakdown of the costs. Because our insurance company had caps on the cost, our bill was reduced by almost 50,000 dollars.
Mind you, her entire bill was well over 300,000 dollars for just that procedure, but had we not been insured, we would have been hit with another 50,000 dollars owed. I don't think that is fair for those that are not insured and feel that there has to be a better solution than the one we currently have. I can only imagine how my daughters story might have changed had we not had the insurance available for her care. I can promise you, the ER would not have been able to save her life and we would have then been left with the heartache of a lost child and a very large medical bill.
Our total costs in the first eight months of her life are near 1 million dollars. Had we not had insurance, our family would have been financially wiped out. Every child deserves health insurance and unfortunately, not every family can afford the monthly costs. Something has to change and offering a tax credit for those that can't afford the premiums in the first place is a halfhearted effort at best.
@bassangel@xanga - First, I am very sorry about your brother. My precious angel was also born with Down syndrome and a serious heart defect. She had her repair at 8 months old and has been doing wonderfully. Much like your parents, there were no choices when it came to having her. She is our daughter and I wouldn't have it any other way.
@bassangel@xanga - I'm just going by Obama's voting record and things HE has said himself. Not what McCain is saying about him. I'm not making accusations, just stating facts. I know they lie about each other and I am NOT a McCain fan... just picking the most pro life candidate. That's all. I've made an informed decision and am not about to change my mind.
@MlleBaroque@xanga - Umm, I'd hardly call that site "unbiased" - from their "About" page: "LifeSiteNews.com's writers and its founders, have come to understand that respect for life and family are endangered by an international conflict. That conflict is between radically opposed views of the worth and dignity of every human life and of family life and community. It has been caused by secularists attempting to eliminate Christian morality and natural law principles which are seen as the primary obstacles to implementing their new world order. "
That's most definitely from a biased viewpoint.
That aside, why is our system "so much better" that socialized medicine? the US government pays over 40% of the health care costs in the US right now ANYWAY - that's covering the uninsured, programs like Medicare etc.
In other words, the taxpayers STILL have to pay a ton of money for the system we have, 45 million people are uninsured, the access to care is pretty bad, and our drug prices are ridiculous! Go anywhere else in the world - you'll probably pay less than your co-pay for the same drugs that are NOT subsidized by any health care insurance.
If "socialized" is bad, is "capitalism" good right now? Doesn't seem to be working for the banking system at all and it certainly isn't working for the health care system. Well, I guess it works for drug companies and HMOs, but it doesn't work for the average person.
My husband is a physician in private practice and the medical director of an ER. He did his residency in an Army hospital. EMTALA law requires all patients be seen regardless of their insurance status. The average wait in his ER is 30 minutes. Another facility in the area has a much longer wait time.
Our experience with socialized medicine, and make no mistake, that is what our Military and VA hospitals provide, was a living nightmare. You want to talk about wait times, many personnel waited MONTHS for routine appts. I remember one fellow having a heart attack and dying while waiting in the Ophthalmology waiting room. It had taken him months to be seen ,and he wasn't going to leave without being seen. Though our Military Hosp. are , no doubt, socialized, the system itself has CHAMPUS insurance which allows personnel to seek medical care in private facilities. This acts a release valve to an incredibly overtaxed system. Should our country go to a system similar to Canada, this luxury would not exist, as private care is outlawed.Universal health care to all children would result in all children receiving poor care. Hawaii has recently scrapped their experimentation into Universal child care due to lack of public funding. This is a sensitive issue that often elicits emotional though not very practical solutions. The "anything is better than what we got" reaction to a less than perfect system could very well be the undoing of the best medical-care system in the world.@bassangel@xanga -
Obama is 100% pro-abortion and is also pro-infanticide.
Here is the pdf of Obama voting NO on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (Bill 1663) on the Judiciary Committee on March 5, 2002 in the Illinois State Senate:
http://www.jillstanek.com/Senate_Committee_Vote_3502.pdf
Obama is 3rd from the bottom and his vote of no is indicated by the checkmark.
Obama also voted NO again on the State Senate floor on April 4 2002.
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/srollcalls92/920SB1662_04042002_014000T.pdf
Obama is in the 2nd column at the bottom.
So this is proof that Obama is radically pro-abortion and also pro-infanticide.
@lucysmama - LOL, I didn't say it was unbiased.
I was just giving the other side of the bias to the commenter's side. I know it's biased. 
*deeeep breath* Okay, well, at least I'm not known for leaving short comments, right? Why start now?
When it comes to important things, like picking a leader, I like to go straight to the horse's mouth. So here... Obama's thoughts on health care per his webpage. McCain's "truth about their health care plan" page. Do I need to state the obvious about the two sites? Obama's page states *gasp* the facts of what he would like to do for our healthcare system. In the first paragraph they clarify that what they want to do is not "socialized health care". McCain's first paragraph? Loosely translated, "Obama's a liar! Nanny-nanny-boo-boo!" That tells me just so much about McCain's policy. Guess what? It's politics. And the Republican party is now leading liecount.com by more than 50%! Oh, the irony...but I digress...
Obama doesn't want the government to pick up the tab for all of our health care, he wants to make it affordable so that people like Iowa_Deb don't have to pay out of pocket...don't have to make a choice about how much her life is worth based on her income.
Jenna, you can probably verify this, is our best chance at beating most - if not all - diseases not early detection? Those tests are expensive if paid out of pocket. Not all employer health insurance plans cover things like colonoscopies, for instance. Tim was supposed to have one done two years ago. He hasn't. Why? Because his insurance through his old job didn't cover it and he couldn't afford to pay for it out of his own pocket. He looked at independant health care plans and guess what? They were either going to rape him on premiums or flat-out refused to cover him based on his "pre-exsisting condition" (diabetes). Obama wants to stop that, too. And that's extremely important to ALL of us.
Why? You've got a cushy job with good benefits provided by your employer. No worries, right? Have we missed all lay-offs and job-cuts being done lately? The economy is not in a great condition. Come next year, next month or next week? Whose to say that you'll still have that cushy job with great benefits? Let's say you do get cut and end up doing contractual labor - which is great for the smaller companies that so many seem to be worried about; they pay you and you do your own taxes and figure out your own health care. No extra cost to them. (Obama would also offer them a tax break for offering insurance to their employees to help with this situation, but let's just keep running in the same direction with this for a sec...your only means of work is contract labor...) Let's say you've also had a c-section in the past. There's a good chance, with the way that things are currently set up, that you won't be able to get independent health care coverage. You're a "risk" to them. If you become pregnant again, odds are very high that you will need another c-section. Those cost insurers money. So, now you can't get insurance. Let's now say that you do get pregnant again. "Average hospitalization charges (price) for all types of delivery in the US were $8300 in 2003 - ranging from $6200 for uncomplicated vaginal delivery to $15,500 for C-section with complications." And that was 2003, so I'm sure that's gone up by now. (Sorry, that's coming from the first page of Google results...I'm sure someone out there has a better source, somewhere, but I do have a life outside of here.)
AND? That $15k? That's just the trip to the hospital to have the baby. That's not factoring pre-natal care, ultrasounds, blood tests...and if you need anything specialized? If you or the baby have any additional health complications? Yikes. I hope that contract job was really, really lucrative... Read some of the other comments left here; if you don't have health insurance? You will be billed and because you're a private individual, there's no cap on how much they can bill you...no discounted rate like the insurance companies recieve. It benefits us all to have insurance. To able to afford it.
Obama uses the term "affordable" and some wonder what his idea of "affordable" actually is. McCain uses the term "reasonable" and I would like to know what his idea of "reasonable" is. Personally, I look at Obama's financial background and feel like he might have a clue as to what "affordable" is for my income bracket. I look at McCain's background and cringe to think what his idea of "reasonable" might be. What do you use as your biggest referrence point in life? On anything. Is it not usually your own personal experience? Does McCain have any experience living on a budget by your definition?
Everyone is up in arms about the abortion issue...I'm still a little confused as to how that came out of a question about health insurance, but whatever...we'll run with it...my dinner still has to simmer for a few minutes... NOBODY (at least not without some huge mental defect) has ever said, "Abortion is a great thing! Everyone should have one!" Obama has definitely not said that. He is not spending his days camped out infront of OB's offices trying to recruit women to have abortions. If you don't believe in abortion, guess what? Your right to choose not have one is still being protected! In a perfect world, we wouldn't have to be pro-life or pro-choice...it'd be a perfect world so there'd be no need for abortions. In this world? Tough choices have to be made. Incest. Rape. Medical conditions which threaten a mother's health, a fetus' health, or both. I find it silly to make your choice for president based only on their personal stance on abortion. The president is not the absolute and final word on whether or not it's a continued practice.
@MlleBaroque@xanga - If you had read the entire article then you would have realized it is not biased. And there are many reasons to vote for or against legislation. In fact if the legislators in Nebraska would have read into their bill that allows any child to be dropped off at a hospital then they wouldn't have teenagers abandoned at hospitals. You can agree with a bill and vote against it.
I am not saying he is a saint... in fact I am not entirely sure he would do the job well. I am not sure McCain would do the job well. But I tend to look at all of their policies and integrity instead of one thing. I guess that is why I can't make up my mind. If it was as simple as abortion then I would vote for McCain... because I agree with him. Then again I don't agree with Palin's views so that makes me hesitant... I just don't think a candidate should only be chosen based on one attribute and with misinformation about that attribute. Read from top to bottom. And then read all about McCain/Palin top to bottom and you will see it is not biased at all.
If you want good information about healthcare proposals and real information about that go to dividedwefail.org which is unbiased and promotes going across party lines to find a solution.
@filtered_sunlight@xanga - I totally agree that we need a definition of affordable. Is it based on income? Because we all know that doesn't work.... Right both my husband and I have insurance, if we were to have a major accident or illness then I don't know if we would be able to afford those bills. Right now everything is in my husbands name and it worries me that if anything happened to him would I have to move out of our house? Lose our cars? Where would I go with four dogs, three cats and a hedgehog? Those are all things I worry about. And we are healthy! I can not imagine what others worry about that have health problems.