Jump to content



Photo

How "Free" health care actually works.


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Rogerdodger

Rogerdodger

    Member

  • TT Member*
  • 26,885 posts

Posted 30 July 2008 - 03:03 PM

Oregon Offers to Pay to Kill, but Not to Treat Cancer Patient

By Tim Waggoner

SALEM, Oregon, June 4, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Lung cancer patient, Barbara Wagner, was recently notified that her oncologist-prescribed medication that would slow the growth of cancer would not be covered by the Oregon Health Plan; the plan, however, she was informed, would cover doctor-assisted suicide should she wish to kill herself.

"Treatment of advanced cancer that is meant to prolong life, or change the course of this disease, is not a covered benefit of the Oregon Health Plan," read the letter notifying Wagner of the health plan's decision.

Wagner says she was shocked by the decision. "To say to someone, we'll pay for you to die, but not pay for you to live, it's cruel," she told the Register-Guard. "I get angry. Who do they think they are?"

This past Monday morning, however, Wagner had reason to rejoice. A representative from the company that manufactures the treatment called the cancer patient to say they would give her the medication for free.

"I am just so thrilled," she said. "I am so relieved and so happy."

Dr. Walter Shaffer, medical director of the state Division of Medical Assistance Programs, which administers the Oregon Health Plan, attempted to defend the health plan's decision. "We can't cover everything for everyone," he said. "We try to come up with polices that provide the most good for the most people." Shaffer then addressed a priority list that had been developed to ration health care. "There's some desire on the part of the framers of this list to not cover treatments that are futile," he said, "or where the potential benefit to the patient is minimal in relation to the expense of providing the care."

According to an AP story on Wagner's case, local oncologists in Oregon have said that, despite the Health Services Commission's assertion that they were just clarifying policies already in place, healthcare practitioners have observed a sizable shift in policy in the way recurrent cancer is treated in the state. Increasingly, say local oncologists, sufferers of recurrent cancer are not receiving coverage for chemotherapy. They are always, however, eligible for state-funded assisted suicide.

Wesley J. Smith, a prominent conservative bioethicist, says that he was not surprised by the events.

"We have been warning for years that this was a possibility in Oregon. Medicaid is rationed, meaning that some treatments are not covered. But assisted suicide is always covered. And now, Barbara Wagner was faced with that very scenario."

Smith also mentioned a similar circumstance that had occurred in the past: "This isn't the first time this has happened either. A few years ago a patient who needed a double organ transplant was denied the treatment but would have been eligible for state-financed assisted suicide."

Edited by Rogerdodger, 30 July 2008 - 03:04 PM.


#2 Rogerdodger

Rogerdodger

    Member

  • TT Member*
  • 26,885 posts

Posted 30 July 2008 - 03:09 PM

An how about the UK's free medical care?


Man Kills Himself after Being Denied Cancer Treatment

Bioethicist Wesley Smith criticizes "quality of life" ethic that redefines killing as palliative care
By Tim Waggoner

EAST SUSSEX, U.K., June 25, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A U.K. man committed suicide after he was denied coverage for a drug that could have prolonged and improved the quality of his life.

Alex Baxter, a terminally ill bus driver, was suffering from renal cancer, a common type of cancer that affects the kidneys. His oncologist, Dr Fiona McKinna, prescribed a new miracle drug, Sutent, as his only hope. Trials of the drug have been successful, with results indicating it can prolong the lives of terminally ill kidney cancer patients for up to two years, as well as reduce the size of their tumors.

Unfortunately for Baxter, his local primary care trust (PCT) did not feel his life was worth the high cost of the drug.

The East Sussex Downs and Weald Primary Care Trust refused to cover the £25,000/year cost of the treatment, citing the expense and clinical effectiveness as reasons for doing so.

LINK

#3 Rogerdodger

Rogerdodger

    Member

  • TT Member*
  • 26,885 posts

Posted 30 July 2008 - 03:14 PM

Thousands of cancer patients denied drugs in UK

London, July 13 (ANI): A new report has revealed that over 120,000 cancer patients die early every year after being denied drugs that could have increased their life span.

The report, Paying for Cancer Care, by the oncologist Prof Karol Sikora, identifies 136,000 British patients a year who could benefit from 10 cancer treatments, which are commonly available across Western Europe, but rarely funded by the NHS.

According to estimates, less than 5 per cent are receiving the drugs, with many of those who get them paying privately.

LINK

#4 esther231

esther231

    Member

  • TT Member+
  • 1,336 posts

Posted 16 August 2008 - 09:19 AM

It's everywhere. 10 years ago a close friend of ours was diagnosed with stomach cancer. He was working but his job did not have a prescription plan so chemotherapy was not covered. He didn't have the money for it. He was young, just starting out in life. It took him six months to find a organization - I think it was the Knights - to cover the cost for him. It was too late - he was dead within a month or two of starting chemo.
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race. ~H.G. Wells

#5 Rogerdodger

Rogerdodger

    Member

  • TT Member*
  • 26,885 posts

Posted 16 August 2008 - 12:10 PM

Sad story.
All too often, in the US I hear complaints about the millions here "without health care."
The argument should be corrected to say "without health insurance."
There is a big difference.

19 years ago last Monday my sister-in-law was put in a body bad after a motorcycle accident.
But a nurse on the scene did cpr and got a slight pulse. So off she went to the hospital.
This girl had no health insurance but had the world's best health care including brain surgery, months in ICU, months more in rehab, months more in a nursing home and months more in assisted living.
She eventually was able to live on her own.

7 years ago she got ovarian cancer, has had several surgeries and several rounds of chemo and is now cancer free.

She had NO INSURANCE, but had the finest HEALTH CARE in the world and didn't have to wait months for treatment.

So at the least we need to be more exact in our discussion of health care problems in this world.

#6 mss

mss

    I'M WATCHING

  • TT Sponsor
  • 6,182 posts

Posted 16 August 2008 - 12:58 PM

Our daughter who has "non-smoking" lung cancer, the ALMOST no survival after five years type, has been on chemo four years. Her Doctor, head of the Southeastern Cancer Research clinic has recommended another type of chemo to go along with her other treatments. Her insurance provider has refused to pay the $11,000 tab per treatment once a month. After several months of attempts and law suit threats, to the insurance company, all to no avail, the drug company has agreed to provide the additional new chemo for free. Insurance is not always the answer and the drug companies are not always the problem. mss

Edited by mss, 16 August 2008 - 01:00 PM.

WOMEN & CATS WILL DO AS THEY PLEASE, AND MEN & DOGS SHOULD GET USED TO THE IDEA.
A DOG ALWAYS OFFERS UNCONDITIONAL LOVE. CATS HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT!!

#7 esther231

esther231

    Member

  • TT Member+
  • 1,336 posts

Posted 17 August 2008 - 09:16 PM

I'm glad that your daughter and Roger's sister in law were met with compassion. It's a blessing.
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race. ~H.G. Wells