Health Insurance Reforms
After reading some 2,000 pages of legislation I have come to a few conclusions over why people have become so upset over these proposed changes to the law.
First to dispel a few myths: People have taken two separate paragraphs from HR 3400 and combined them together to equal nonsense.
First let’s deal with using information gained from research dealing with comparative care in order to provide the best treatment. Many people interpret this is as a way to deny treatment. No, they have confused using high tech with quality care. The two are not synonymous; a doctor wants to provide the best diagnostic care and treatment, however spending gobs of money is not always the best answer.
Secondly, a doctor will have control as to when the patient decides to discuss end of life measures. Wrong, a patient sets the date for that appointment in order talk about his or her options, the doctor well also provide information for free services in order to have a directive written for the patient. The reason it has been written into HR 3400 was to have Medicare cover it as a scheduled event ever 5 years if the patient chooses.
Next up what does the Public Option really mean?