Health Insurance and Profits: Capitalism is not to blame

Today I read this article in the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/business/health-care-and-pursuit-of-profit-make-a-poor-mix.html?pagewanted=all

For those who read this blog and The Malformation of Health Care book http://www.amazon.com/dp/B009V37CXU  you already understand my position on what this article says (the author is preaching to the choir).

I find it fascinating that no matter how many discussions, articles, programs, books, take on this topic; these companies still have the audacity to continue acting in bad faith.

What will it take for incredibly high powered, well lobbied, excessively wealthy companies to become accountable for bad practices?

I'm sickened to say, probably "nothing".

Despite the claim that corporations are people, corporations (especially on this high of a financial level) do not have an internal moral compass. Most people who work for these companies are at the mercy of this corrupt system just as much as the customers who pay their premiums each month in hopes their policy will cover them should tragedy strike.

This is not capitalism. This is greed.

The reason I say this is because I know what the ideals of capitalism are, I grew up on them. My family owned a small hardware store for over 100 years. The reason the company lasted for 100 years was because of the pride taken in our services and products. We didn't force anyone to shop at our store, but we gained loyal customers, based on our integrity.

We offered competitive prices and guaranteed our products and our work. If a customer came in to the store and said a product was faulty and we didn't either exchange the product or fix the issue, we would have been run out of town. No customer would have shopped with us.

When a health insurance customer comes to the provider with a problem, many times they are ignored, avoided, or told of a previously undisclosed "loophole" that frees the insurance from all coverage obligation.

Capitalism only works when those servicing the population understand that first and foremost they are performing a service for the community. Profits come when that service is performed well. If that service is performed poorly, profits should be reflected.

That is capitalism.

That is not what is going on currently within our health insurance system.

"Obamacare is the law of the land"

"Obamacare is the law of the land"

That was one heck of a quote this morning from John Boehner, Speaker of the House.

Did we all know the Affordable Care Act "happened"?  Sure.

Did many people think if Mitt Romney became president that law would be gone? Yup.

So today hearing the top Republican concede that "Obamacare" is here and will not so easily be done away with, was fascinating.

Now he also quickly added that Republicans remain committed to repealing the law, but I don't know if the American public will be pleased if the next two years are spent with constant attempts to simply do away with the law rather than working to improve it.

There is no easy way out on this topic... these two very different parties are going to have to come together and actually work for the common good.

This will get interesting.

Tomorrow Will Preface History

Is anyone else excited about the presidential election tomorrow?

I can't help myself. Election day is very exciting for me. I love that the majority of our country is waiting to hear who will take the reigns of America for the next four years.

I love the passion shown from both sides during the campaign.

Watching the trend of some good presidents and some less than good-- the day before the election leaves us with uncertainty of what is to come so it offers cautious optimism about the future.

We don't know how well or not well the nominees will do once they hold the coveted position... but we have hope whomever it is will do amazingly wonderful things for us and our future.

Here's to hope!

Please get out and vote tomorrow! Be a part of this incredible process!

Who Will Make Insurance Companies Happy?

With the 2012 Presidential election just a little over a week away I can't help but wonder the fate of the Affordable Care Act.  I also can't help but wonder who some of the heavy hitting health insurance companies are hoping will win.

I read an interesting article today:

(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/28/insurers-nervous-obamacare-repeal-romney_n_2033580.html?utm_hp_ref=business)

The article began by saying the health insurance companies are afraid of a Romney win because he has guaranteed to overturn the law--without saying how. The fear is the insurance industry would lose the potential profits to be made from the individual mandate.  Along with the fear of not knowing what a Romney administration would do with health care because there has been no plan laid out for when they pursue repeal.


However, I can only imagine the uncertainty of an Obama win. Keep in mind the health insurance industry was not happy about this new law, they found ways to work with it, but they weren't fans.

I think deep down the industry, and most of us understand

This law is not in its final form. It is a starting point.

There's no putting the genie back in the lamp. Health Care IS a topic that will be addressed and addressed again over these next several years.

For now we all must vote for who we believe will do the best with our country and then sit and wait to see what will happen. If I were to guess, I don't think the health insurance market is too eager for either candidate to win this election. Their situation is on shaky ground.

Political Platform to Prevent Coverage

I don't know if you all saw the story of Jackie Curtiss, the 22 year old Republican who voiced her concern over the new party platform on abortion.

(http://www.buzzfeed.com/zekejmiller/meet-the-22-year-old-young-republican-who-challeng)

Here's what that article says:

"Curtiss made waves in the committee when she objected to an amendment to the platform banning medication "that terminates human life after conception." The amendment was aimed at RU-486 and other so-called “abortion pills," but Curtiss warned that it could potentially include the “morning after pill.”

"Nevertheless, the amendment passed and found its way into the party’s 2012 manifesto."

That is one slippery slope folks...

The reason I'm raising concern is not because I'm anti-Republican or because I'm voicing judgement on abortion at all-- but rather because I am pro- life for people who have cancer, RA, and other major illness.

Most chemotherapy medications have warnings that state women may experience spontaneous abortion while taking the medication.

This platform doesn't differentiate between drugs, it just bans all medication that "terminates human life after conception."

I understand what the Republican Party is trying to get at, but if we aren't incredibly clear when we document our ideas unintentional problems can and will arise.

Health Care or Political Football?

When you're getting ready to buy a car, it happens. When you're trying to have a baby, it happens. And apparently when a presidential election is about to occur, it happens.

You see what you want EVERYWHERE.

Perhaps you decide on a Honda. Guaranteed you will see more Civics on the road than ever before. Want to have a child? Your office will flood with pregnant women. Want health care? Every political discussion will taper back to your topic.

While I knew health care was going to be one of the political footballs used for punting in this election, I still find myself frustrated.

For the kick off -the political ad about the man who lost his job and then his wife passed away from cancer. The return- if that patient had lived in Massachusetts she wouldn't have died. The tackle- the person who put the Massachusetts law in place wants to repeal the federal equivalent. New line of scrimmage-- the little girl's father whose company let him go because his daughter needed a transplant.

These stories are hard to hear, and they seem to fire up both political parties. However, they are not new, they're not even unique. They happen every day, in every state.

Why is it that we are only interested in hearing about these horror stories when an election is on the horizon? We should be outraged and concerned even when political ads are not invading our favorite evening television program.

Did you hear the one about the 90 year old in the nursing home? How her coverage ran out? Probably not. It's not as powerful when we're talking about Grandma.

These political teams pick and choose the most effective stories to "expose" and while it is supposed to serve as an example of what is going on in our country, it seems like we as viewers get tunnel vision.

"This is the story I heard about, it's a fluke."

The "fluke" is that we are only hearing about a very small number of people struggling daily and until we decide health care is not a political football and make sure everyone in this country is adequately cared for, we just keep playing a game.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1139799717/the-malformation-of-health-care

"Obamacare"

I find it completely fascinating how so many people in our country are anti "Obamacare," not the Affordable Care Act. It seems many have latched on to the catchy phrase and divorced its meaning.

I don't know who convinced anyone that calling the law by its proper name equated to supporting socialized medicine... but there are some who believe this.

The Affordable Care Act, no matter what name you want to call it, has some good and some bad, but it is most certainly not socialized medicine. Last I checked, socialized medicine didn't have anything to do with privately held insurance companies being allowed to step in and charge. That's maintaining a capitalist system.

There are people who like President Obama and don't like the Affordable Care Act, just as there are people who can't stand President Obama but appreciate some of what the Affordable Care Act will do for them.  This is not a simple "Obamacare is socialized medicine" situation, and I'm offended by those who believe it is. 

Health care in this country should not be about who is president, and it should not be about catchy words. Health care should not be based on which party is in office.

In my mind health care should be about a sick person going to the doctor, paying for the service, and leaving with recommended treatment.

Currently that system is not what we have. 

Some people have the above scenario and others have this one:  

A sick person checks with their insurance company to see if their doctor will even see them based on accepted rates, goes to the doctor and listens to what treatments they need but may or may not be covered by their policy, the patient then appeals to the insurance company to please allow them to have the treatment their doctor prescribed, hires an attorney to step in when their final appeal is denied because paying for the treatment would cut into the insurance company's bottom line, and the patient potentially goes bankrupt while all of this goes on, because they are forced to decide between life and money.

I would like to refer individuals who believe "Obamacare" to be socialized medicine to a book by Wendell Potter called Deadly Spin. In the book he talks about how Public Relations companies and PR executives used the words "socialized medicine" any time privately held insurance companies looked like they would have to start being accountable for their actions. 

Don't buy in to catchy phrases... educate yourself and decide on your own what the catchy phrases are masking.

Kickstarter and The Malformation of Health Care

Have you thought about ways you want to change the world?

This blog and its facebook group counterpart ( https://www.facebook.com/groups/352009698155992/)

works diligently to try and do just that.  

I've found that the more we tell our stories about pivotal life experiences, the more others learn and the more positive change we can create!

With this in mind I have decided to launch a kickstarter campaign to further share my health care journey. In my book, I discuss some of the pitfalls in the American health care system, I offer tips on struggling through the system, and offer encouragement for others to use their experiences to help create positive effective change in our world.

Please take the time to view my kickstarter pitch here:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1139799717/the-malformation-of-health-care

If it strikes a chord with you, please share it so the campaign will have the potential of going viral and doing the most good.

Together we can do incredible things!!! Here's a small step :) 

Mental Health or Mental Illness?

Yesterday morning in Seattle a man shot and killed several people in two different locations. When he was found, several hours later, walking down the street and confronted by police, he then shot himself. According to ABC news, his brother was interviewed after the incident and said it was "no surprise" to his family and friends. Apparently the shooter was struggling with mental-health issues.

The reason I'm writing about this today is because I live in Seattle and yesterday was terrifying. No one knew where, or who this man was. They didn't know his motivation. They didn't know if there was more than one person involved. This was a completely random incident.

The question for me is if so many people were aware of this man struggling with mental health, what were the reasons behind him not getting the medical help he needed?

As a country we tend to brush off mental health issues. I don't know if it's because of shame, or societal expectations.  I don't know if it has gotten worse over the years, or if we just hear about it more now thanks to the media. What I do know is there are entirely too many people with mental illness who are not being treated.

The National Collation for the Homeless published a study showing mental illness in the top three causes for homelessness. I don't believe this particular shooter in Seattle was homeless. However, according to another story from Miami this week about a naked cannibal eating a man's face, that man was homeless and drug addicted which may mean he also was dealing with some mental illness. My point is, mental illness happens in every category of people, and not every category of people has the coverage to be treated for it.

Homeless people have little access to health care. Part time employees have little access to health care. Full time contractors, small business workers, some retail employees, all have little access to health care.  That's a problem.

Here's a bigger problem, most health insurance policies don't cover very well for mental health. Premium policies may have catastrophic coverage up to a million dollars if a person finds him or herself in a terrible accident. However, in the same policy they may only  cover (with a high co-pay) a few sessions of therapy for the mentally ill. Considering the cost of antipsychotic drugs, the policy's coverage might be lacking there as well.

My frustration is when a mentally ill person who has not been adequately treated, causes the catastrophic coverage to kick in for someone else.  Wouldn't it make more sense to not cut corners on mental health coverage and potentially avoid a catastrophic incident? Mental health is not separate from physical health and it should not be treated separately.