Health care outside the U.S.

[dcarrb]

All the clamor over the new film, "Sicko," (which I have not seen) has got me to wondering about how those of you who do not reside in the United States feel about health care where you live, particularly if your country uses a "single-payer" system.

1) Is routine care readily available?

2) Do you feel the quality of care provided is technologically and scientifically first-rate?

3) Is there a waiting list for hospitalization?

4) Is it common for physician-recommended procedures to be declined because the bureaucracy deems them medically unnecessary?

4) Do you personally know of anyone who has suffered undue pain, permanent disability, or death for want of appropriate, timely treatment?

5) If you incur out-of-pocket expenses, do you consider these costs reasonable?

6) Would you be willing to switch to a free-market, for-profit medical system in exchange for a reduction in taxes?

7) What are your complaints about your current system?

Thanks in advance.

dcb

[lhopp77]

Originally Posted by dcarrb

All the clamor over the new film, "Sicko," (which I have not seen) has got me to wondering about how those of you who do not reside in the United States feel about health care where you live, particularly if your country uses a "single-payer" system.

1) Is routine care readily available?

2) Do you feel the quality of care provided is technologically and scientifically first-rate?

3) Is there a waiting list for hospitalization?

4) Is it common for physician-recommended procedures to be declined because the bureaucracy deems them medically unnecessary?

4) Do you personally know of anyone who has suffered undue pain, permanent disability, or death for want of appropriate, timely treatment?

5) If you incur out-of-pocket expenses, do you consider these costs reasonable?

6) Would you be willing to switch to a free-market, for-profit medical system in exchange for a reduction in taxes?

7) What are your complaints about your current system?

8) What are your tax rates that pay for your health system??

Thanks in advance.

dcb

Fixed your post to add a key missing element.

[dcarrb]

Can't argue with that modification.

Lively topic, ain't it?

dcb

[NapaBavarian]

Bump?

[Crazy_pilot]

I haven't needed to visit a hospital in a long time, *knock on wood* but I hear horror stories of wait times here. The last time I went to a hospital was probably 9-10 years ago, for a broken arm. I don't recall a particularly long wait. My brother broke/dislocated his finger (by punching my other brother in the face) and the wait was "forever", according to my dad. The brother who got punched recently cut his head, and the wait was about 5 hours for a couple stitches.

That's walk-in type stuff. Major surgery is ridiculous. Hip replacement is something like 12-18 month wait.

Summary: Free, good quality, long waits. I'm not sure what I pay in taxes for it.

I like it this way. Reason being, if I end up needing emergency care, I don't want a 6-figure bill racked up while I was unconcious.

[Cynic]

My son has asthma,and it was severe when he was young. He gets "coughing" asthma whenever he gets a cold...when he was little this would be coughing til he couldn't breathe and turns blue. A scary thing for a new mother. The hospital would just admit him. No wait, in you go. Usually for a few days at least. We were running a B&B with a restaurant at the time, and self employed, so no employee benefit plan. We couldn't have afforded the care he got if it wasn't covered. That was in Nova Scotia, where there is no monthly premiums to pay either.

Since moving to the west coast, he has been hospitalized twice, once for a busted spleen and once for a severe concussion with subdural hematoma...he was in for a week each time, with CAT scans etc., neurologists, you name it.

I was sledding with him 13 years ago outside of Montreal (on vacation) when I broke my back. Ambulance to Montreal, 6-7 hours of surgery, 3 weeks in hospital, rods and metal in my back, body cast and check ups with surgeon for 6 months etc!

If we lived in the States, and as we are self employed, NONE of this would have been affordable to us. We had great doctors, surgeons, and care, and it doesn't matter what small amount of extra tax I pay, it will never equal what I would have paid if we didn't have our system.

There are problems and waits and scores of other things that are wrong and need attention. But I wouldn't go with a system like you have in the USA.

Oh, we have a great family doctor, for the past 13 years, who's on top of the new treatments, etc. Routine stuff is a breeze.

Didn't really answer your questions....

Cyn

[dcarrb]

Another go?

[Subie59]

Never been sick a day in my life. Never spent a day in the hospital until I went to the doctor for what I thought might have been asma. Turned out I needed a double bypass. Immediately put into the hospital for 3-4 days to wait for the operation. Incredibly good care. Out of hospital three days after operation because I asked to leave (feeling pretty good).
Cost $28 for tv rental.
Follow up visits with cardiologist etc no cost. absolutely no complaints.

The only reason there are long waits are for people who are not a priority. A hip replacement is not a priority.
For the guy who said he had to wait five hours for a few stitches in the head. You probably got caught at the emergency dept with a lot more priority cases. That's the way it goes some times. Your life was not at risk so you had to wait.
I took my daughter in for stitches a few years ago on a sunday morning and we had to wait about 20 minutes. big deal
I would not live in a country without universal health care. and to tell you the truth, my wife and I were thinking about going to the States for Holidays this year but are hesitant because of the US health care. We think we'll just stay here maybe go to quebec. But, if we do go, we will be stocking up on health insurance big time.

[svxistentialist]

Well here in Ireland we have a dual layer health system. It is complex when you start tinkering about the edges as to what you may or may not be entitled to get.

The common terms for the two levels are "Public" and "Private"

Everybody's income tax has an element called PRSI, Pay Related Social Insurance. Once you are paying this both you and your family are entitled to hospital and emergency treatment in a Public hospital. [Some hospitals look after both Public and Private patients. There are a few Clinics that primarily or totally deal with 'Private' patients only.]

The income tax payment for each earner is really pretty high. As an employee I must pay 13% of my gross salary in PRSI, and in addition my employer pays around 10% of my gross salary. The notional 13% that I pay is invidious, because it gets taxed twice. What I mean by that is it is calculated and deducted up front before your take-home pay is calculated. Then, when calculating how much you owe for income tax, they include the 13% back in the tax equation, like as if they never took it from you, rather than base the income tax equation on the actual 87% of salary you have left after social insurance deduction! The Revenue Department over here have lots of sneaky calculations like this to make the amounts they are taking from us look smaller than they actually are.

On a positive note the likes of my mother who is an old age pensioner is qualified for total medical care, not just A&E hospitalisation. She gets free medication, free visits to the local doctors, free hospital tests, whatever she needs.

On a negative note the 'Public' healthcare system is seriously backlogged. There are not enough hospital beds, so getting admitted to hospital can lead to many days waiting on a trolley in a hospital corridor. I know of one lady who died on a trolley waiting for heart treatment.

To get over the possible backlogs most families would pay for a Medical Benefit plan in addition to the automatically deducted PRSI. I have one that covers my wife and my two younger children and me. Having these plans means if any of us required elective surgery we could opt for the 'Private' system, particularly if the 'Public' system was gummed up. Like all such plans, the more you pay the higher up the medical food chain you can dine.

That sounds elitist, but the actuality is that Public care when you can access it is so good that you would not need to use the Private plan. It is a belt and braces approach to have both, that's the way most families operate.

Joe

[svxistentialist]

It looks like Canada is not dissimilar to our system.

To answer your questions in case I missed a point or two:

1) Is routine care readily available? YES

2) Do you feel the quality of care provided is technologically and scientifically first-rate? YES

3) Is there a waiting list for hospitalization? YES

4) Is it common for physician-recommended procedures to be declined because the bureaucracy deems them medically unnecessary? NO, NEVER

4) Do you personally know of anyone who has suffered undue pain, permanent disability, or death for want of appropriate, timely treatment? YES

5) If you incur out-of-pocket expenses, do you consider these costs reasonable? NEVER BEEN TO HOSPITAL. COSTS FOR TESTS ETC V. REASONABLE

6) Would you be willing to switch to a free-market, for-profit medical system in exchange for a reduction in taxes? NO WAY JOSE

7) What are your complaints about your current system? BACKLOGS AND INSUFFICIENT FUNDING. SERIOUSLY MANAGEMENT TOP-HEAVY NATIONAL HEALTH EXECUTIVE

8) What are your tax rates that pay for your health system?? 13% OF GROSS SALARY

Thanks in advance.

dcb

[lhopp77]

I think the point is that for what you pay we could buy some very high quality private insurance.

Lee

[Landshark]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

I think the point is that for what you pay we could buy some very high quality private insurance.

Lee

13% of my pay would buy get me a gold wheelchair if i needed it. no thanks.

[svxistentialist]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

I think the point is that for what you pay we could buy some very high quality private insurance.

Lee

And that works very well here for those lucky enough to be able to afford it.

Originally Posted by Landshark

13% of my pay would buy get me a gold wheelchair if i needed it. no thanks.

That's OK Alan if you are only looking after No. 1. You are not looking at the payment ratio on a social equality basis, that's for sure. [Ehhh, and I'm surprised?? ]

I'm assuming US unemployment rates are probably high right now, what are they? more than 10%, more than 15%?? More?? So who pays for healthcare for the unemployed? For pensioners? For children? For disabled vets? For any citizen who is not working and earning?

It's a system and it's relatively expensive to keep in place. But note none of the responders from Canada has said he/she would prefer to work without state medical care. For myself I'll be more than happy if I go to my grave at some stage and the only use I have ever drawn for all the money I've paid is dental care. Just the fact that it is in place lets me sleep nights if any unthinkable emergency or chronic disability happened to me or to any one of the five of us.

[And in fact my aged mother currently draws heavily on the system, as my late father did before he passed on]

Joe

[Trevor]

As I understand it, this was the very first country to introduce social security. The term may have even been activated here.

I am not a socialist, I firmly believe in free enterprise, but there are alternative commercial facts involved.

There are huge benefits from an insurance scheme which envelopes everyone. The only perceived disadvantage, is a lack of competition, which can have a negative affect on quality. But, an insurance scheme funded by everyone, is the ultimate insurance, on the basis of commercial fact. Be very sure it works. Strangely, public opinion and pride of purpose, do provide good quality control. After all it is everyone's business.

Humans being what they are, nothing is perfect. So what, the insurance afforded is still very, very good. The universal scheme covers everything urgent. I have private health insurance, so that will receive immediate attention, should I ever require a hip replacement, or what ever. Without it I would have to wait, but I would not be denied. One could class it as a luxury.

Fairly recently, there have been three occasions when I have required care due to accidents. The service and outcome was 100%+. My son suffered a severe injury playing football. The best of surgery and ongoing treatment, as well as accident compensation, to cover time absent from lecturing at university. Cost, zero. The ongoing treatment is now exceeding twelve moths. He has only now had metal straps and screws removed.

There is next to no corruption in N.Z. and this I am sure has a lot to do with the universal insurance schemes being viable. Currently and- ex member of parliament, (Thrown out of office pending investigation.) has been convicted of corruption. This being in the form of, do a bit on the side for me and I will make sure you get permanent residence. The ex minister now will have permanent residence in a jail.

[svxistentialist]

Originally Posted by Trevor

I am not a socialist, I firmly believe in free enterprise, but there are alternative commercial facts involved.

Interestingly Trevor, this is another point where you and I are birds of a feather. I'm not a socialist in the extreme left wing sense either. I consider myself to be a right wing liberal.

The attractive side of social security is that it puts a system in place to care for the poor, the weak, the disabled and the non earner. The society that does not care for or discards the weak members is a sick society on more than one level.

Simplistically as I see it there are two major inherent faults with the different care systems. In the free enterprise for profit model, the medicos and their business enterprise managers will charge you what they can get away with rather than what is an acceptable value for money fee. When you are down and have nowhere else to go they will put the boot in. More suitable for upper middle income earners.

With the social security model, we get shouldered with a bureaucratic civil service quango that is self serving and inefficient. We get treatment delays but excellent treatment. We get 5 managers for every 1 nurse.

Plenty of room for improvement with both types I reckon.

Joe