Another tale of government-run health-care success
posted at 8:48 am on March 10, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
How will our health-care system run once the government is in charge of it? People who have VA or Medicare already know the answer to that — and so do the people of Canada, whose model received warm praise from Barack Obama and leading Democrats early in the ObamaCare campaign. The Toronto Sun reports the story of Kent Pankow, whose brain cancer spread while their medical system tried to decide whether surgery fit within their comparative effectiveness models, and who ended up here in Minnesota in an effort to save his life. Now Canada won’t fill his prescription for a drug that they supply for other patients (via Newsalert):
Kent Pankow lives in Edmonton, in a province and a country that is trying to either kill him or bankrupt him.
No sense mincing words.
Suffering from brain cancer, Kent Pankow was literally forced to go to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. for lifesaving surgery — at a cost to family and friends of $106,000 — after the health-care system in Alberta left him hanging in bureaucratic limbo for 16 crucial days, his tumour meanwhile migrating to an unreachable part of the brain, while it dithered over his case file, ultimately deciding he was not surgery worthy.
Now, with the Mayo Clinic having done what the Alberta Cancer Board wouldn’t authorize or even explain, but with the tumour unable to be totally removed, the province will now not fund the expensive drug, Avastin, that the Mayo prescribed to keep him alive and keep the remaining tumour from increasing in size — despite the costs of the drug being totally funded by the province for other forms of cancer.
Kent Pankow, as it turns out, has the right disease but he has it in the wrong place.
Had he lung cancer, breast cancer, or colon cancer, then the cost of the drug — $4,555 per treatment, two times a month — would be totally covered by Alberta’s version of OHIP.
Let’s see if we can’t tally up the scandals in this story. First, instead of rushing Pankow into surgery, doctors waited more than two weeks to decide whether he was “surgery worthy.” Obviously, this was not a medical decision, as the Mayo Clinic didn’t take two weeks to make a medical decision on Pankow.
Next, Pankow returns to Canada to continue his treatment, having saved Alberta the $106,000 cost of surgery by bearing it himself, and asks for a cancer drug that is fully covered for other forms of the disease. In his case, though, the government won’t provide it. Why? Not because doctors don’t believe it to be safe or effective, but because government bureaucrats decided to leave it off the list. Nor is that the end of bureaucratic bungling. After CTV aired a segment on the plight of the Pankows, the Federal Health Minister claimed that Health Canada wasn’t the problem, while Alberta’s provincial health minister insists that the problem is at the national level. Instead of treating Pankow, he’s getting the bureaucratic runaround.
Some will say that the runaround happens in America, too, with private insurers. And they’d be right. However, people in America have the ability to move to different insurers when they get lousy service, and still get treatment in their own country. They don’t have to flee across an international border to get medical attention.
Kent Pankow wants to fight his cancer so that he can survive. Unfortunately, he’s having to fight a two-front war, with his own government trying their level best to help the cancer succeed. Maybe when Obama offers up the sob stories on the ObamaCare stump, he might consider discussing the Pankows and why people come to the US for lifesaving treatment. In the meantime, let’s remember this as an object lesson in who says no in a government-run health-care system.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Are those anything like “death panels”?
rbj on March 10, 2010 at 8:50 AM
Deathpanels
Electrongod on March 10, 2010 at 8:51 AM
But the important question is whether he has to wear his dead sister’s teeth.
The Reasonable Man on March 10, 2010 at 8:52 AM
Obama wants to turn Americas HealthCare
into the Canadian model!!
canopfor on March 10, 2010 at 8:54 AM
I’ve been assured by the speaker of the house that ObamaCare will be nothing like this. She also said that once the bill is passed, the truth will be revealed.
myrenovations on March 10, 2010 at 8:55 AM
He should sue Canada.
Oh wait, he can’t.
Just another reason their health care costs are lower. They don’t have lawyers run amuck.
And we don’t have doctors who deny patients life saving drugs, which make our costs higher, but in a good way.
NoDonkey on March 10, 2010 at 8:55 AM
Another lesson for Canada: If the U.S. institutes a similar scheme, where will you run to when your system fails you?
Not to worry though, the politicians will never have to worry about waiting lists or denials, their care will still be on-demand at the best facilities.
Bishop on March 10, 2010 at 8:56 AM
You guys are pathetic!! All you do is complain.
These are the very same folks who have run the United States Postal Service for the past umpty-leven years. What could go wrong???
/sarc off
GoldenEagle4444 on March 10, 2010 at 8:56 AM
This is exactly right. They will say that, they already say it now, and they are naive fools.
You cannot get away from the government. When the government is in control, you will have NO CHOICE. This is why the government should not be running ANYTHING. The government is intended to be the referee, not the only team on the field.
Why some people don’t seem to get this distinction – or why they think it’s not a big deal – is beyond me.
There is no other word for it but ignorance.
johnmackeygreene on March 10, 2010 at 8:57 AM
God help us everyone under this new health care bill.
jeanie on March 10, 2010 at 8:58 AM
Nancy meant it won’t be like this for her and her family. They’ll get whatever treatment they need, being government “elites” and all. The rest of us will just have to take whatever treatment they decide to allow us, because after all, they know best.
AZCoyote on March 10, 2010 at 8:59 AM
Does that man have both feet and his tonsils?
daesleeper on March 10, 2010 at 9:01 AM
Murder by government bureaucrats answering the call of politicians who ask, “Will no one rid us of these revenue draining people?”
Dusty on March 10, 2010 at 9:01 AM
OT: Rasmussen has Obama down to 43% approval.
I’m sure the rally in St. Louis today will turn things around though. The problem is he’s not talking enough.
Doughboy on March 10, 2010 at 9:01 AM
Yippppeeeee
more
Oblahblahma !!
macncheez on March 10, 2010 at 9:04 AM
So in America your good faith and credit still means something, even if you’re not from this country.
That will change.
Electrongod on March 10, 2010 at 9:04 AM
Sexist.
Bishop on March 10, 2010 at 9:04 AM
Can you imagine the chaos, the anguish, the frustration and the fatalities that a plan like this will bring Americans?
Obama only cares about his Marxist political ambitions.
kingsjester on March 10, 2010 at 9:05 AM
Fairness.
blatantblue on March 10, 2010 at 9:06 AM
This story illustrates why I personally am committed to seeing the B.O. Healthcare bill go down in flames.
My wife is a cancer survivor presently battling the disease yet again. If this idiotic bill were allowed to become law, chances are my wife would either be denied the treatment she seriously needs, or the decision to allow or deny treatment would be tied up in bureaucratic bundling while the disease would be spreading through her system. There is no way I will allow that to happen and this is why I vehemently oppose this bill.
I do not understand the reasoning of foolish so-called leaders right now in Congress who insist that this is what the American people want. Government controlled healthcare has failed miserably in every country it has been adopted in, and it will fail here.
These idiots are not just playing games with politics. They are playing games with lives!
pilamaye on March 10, 2010 at 9:08 AM
My uncle’s battles with the VA have been epic, some lating years. Unlike an HMO, insurance co- my uncle can’t sue the VA or Federal Govt. for the abuse it routinely doles out to those who have given it the most of themselves, sometimes literally.
abobo on March 10, 2010 at 9:08 AM
Silver bullet from U.S. states kills ‘mandatory’ Obamacare
36 legislatures fight for citizens’ rights to opt out of health-coverage demand
——————————————————————————–
Posted: March 09, 2010
8:54 pm Eastern
——————
At least 36 state legislatures are considering legislation that would allow citizens to opt out of a key component of President Obama’s health-care “reform” – an “individual mandate” requiring that all Americans have health insurance.
Both the House and Senate health-care bills require Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty. The House bill establishes a fine based on percentage of a person’s income, while the Senate version creates a penalty as a flat fee or percentage of income, whichever is higher. Those refusing to get insurance could be found guilty of a misdemeanor crime, punishable by another fine or even jail time.
======================================
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=127404
canopfor on March 10, 2010 at 9:08 AM
I’m working on a private plan with my dog’s veterinarian. If O-care passes, she’ll treat me and my Beagle at a huge discount.
cartooner on March 10, 2010 at 9:09 AM
I believe zero knows that Americans will die languishing in pain awaiting, MAYBE, perhaps, to be lucky enough to get medical treatment. I believe he knows this fact, embraces this fact and is okay with this fact. I believe he is evil; one of those humans born without a conscience and without empathy – a mentally devoid husk; a man who is a-okay with Americans dying if it fits his agenda. Isn’t this how every crazy dictator began their illustrious careers?
Ris4victory on March 10, 2010 at 9:10 AM
The states fight back, now what is PBHO going to do?
Maybe I shouldn’t ask.
Bishop on March 10, 2010 at 9:11 AM
I think it’s less of being evil, and being more obsessed with fairness
And fairness should be in quotes
blatantblue on March 10, 2010 at 9:11 AM
im currently uninsured
and i sure as hell dont want obarfio’s help
blatantblue on March 10, 2010 at 9:12 AM
Sounds as efficient as our wonderful Post Office!
search4truth on March 10, 2010 at 9:12 AM
He’ll send naky-naky Pelosi to threaten the Govs
macncheez on March 10, 2010 at 9:12 AM
The democrat’s plan: Don’t get sick.
Heh.
Mord on March 10, 2010 at 9:13 AM
I’m reasonably sure that, if he knew a politician or someone on the board, that we wouldn’t be having this discussion right now.
JeffWeimer on March 10, 2010 at 9:14 AM
A slippery slope. Most urgent care cries come from 9-1-1 calls. How can I get my care needs to the appropriate people if I can’t afford a phone. I want government to provide me with phone service.
Electrongod on March 10, 2010 at 9:14 AM
He’ll send naky-naky Pelosi to threaten the Govs
macncheez on March 10, 2010 at 9:12 AM
That is an image that will haunt me all day. I would rather set my hair on fire and put it out with a hammer that have to see that.
kingsjester on March 10, 2010 at 9:15 AM
FREE EVERYTHING!*
(*asterisk indicates certain terms and conditions that apply to the term “free” — WhiteHouse.gov)
blatantblue on March 10, 2010 at 9:15 AM
Well, not yet.
roux on March 10, 2010 at 9:15 AM
Yesterday, I was at the Mayo Clinic for the first time in my life. A lot of paperwork, but I was to find out why they are always ranked in the top 5 hospitals/clinics in America: My initial evaluation was fairly standard, but the doctor wanted to eliminate some concerns and look at some possible alternatives: at 9:00, he sent out a \”plan\” to Todd, who, in 15 minutes, had scheduled a blood draw, and EKG and an MRI, same day, starting at 11:00, finishing at 4:30! It was quite a procedure going from St. Mary\’s to the Clinic and eventually Methodist Hospital. Oh, and by the way, I also had scheduled a full hearing test at 1:00 with the original medical evaluation. All the other tests were scheduled around that test.Obamacare- HELL NO!!!
Amendment X on March 10, 2010 at 9:16 AM
bb- Any human that openly says that babies are punishments and old folks should be given a pain pill in lieu of a life extending medical device is evil.
Evil walks among us, always in human form – the Earth belongs to the evil.
I have an older brother that has zero conscience and zero empathy. It is like he has no soul; my ma says he was born this way, that he was like this since he was a tiny child. It breaks her heart every day and the dude is 43 now. It happens; but keeping these mentally devoid people from power positions is very difficult, as he happens to be a fracking genius, too.
Ris4victory on March 10, 2010 at 9:16 AM
Sur! Didn’t he vote to ignore babies born after botched abortions until they die when he was in the Illinois senate?
EVIL MAN-CHILD!!!
honsy on March 10, 2010 at 9:17 AM
That is already handled. The IRS will collect the fine. No state will be able to stand between your money and the IRS as a practical matter.
Aviator on March 10, 2010 at 9:17 AM
Ed, don’t forget…
They also have the important right to sue an insurer that fails to abide by contract terms.
Try that when the government is making the decisions.
And don’t also forget…
Medicare turns down roughly 3 times more people than the worst insurer.
BTW, check out http://hindenblog1.blogspot.com/. I’d love to have everyone’s comments!
Ragspierre on March 10, 2010 at 9:18 AM
Do you actually believe that’s the case? Do you think Obama is even moderately concerned about health care beyond taking it over and creating a perpetual reelection machine for the Democrat Party?
Rode Werk on March 10, 2010 at 9:18 AM
perhaps you are right
blatantblue on March 10, 2010 at 9:19 AM
Bureaucracy, public and private, is killing people every day in all of these health care systems. But “government by horror story” is not the answer.
My father was probably killed as a result of Medicare bureaucracy. He was 89 and probably didn’t have much longer anyway, but I would like to have seen him before he died. In fact, he would have died 5 years ago after a mild heart attack had he not been a retired physician who was able to take control and find a doctor who would perform the bypass surgery he needed. The Medicare docs at his local hospital all told him he was too old and would not survive.
rockmom on March 10, 2010 at 9:22 AM
Some will say that the runaround happens in America, too, with private insurers. And they’d be right. However, people in America have the ability to move to different insurers when they get lousy service, and still get treatment in their own country. They don’t have to flee across an international border to get medical attention.
=========================================================
I’ll add,that my wifes brother,who had heart surgery in
Petosky,and my wifes over-night stay,well,a few days,were
impressed with the service,professionalism,and how polite
and friendly,the entire staff was,as well as the Doctors!
So,from Helicopter e-vac to Petosky,and back to the Soo,
its was beyond the call of duty,the nurses and doctors
provided exceptional service!
If Obama pass`s this HealthScareCare,I`m afraid,that the
quality of service,will litterly go down the tiolet,and
it would be no different than a Candain Hospital!!!
Thats whats really at stake!!
canopfor on March 10, 2010 at 9:23 AM
This is a lot more serious than it looks. Canada is a country with a smaller population then US — this sort of “deathpanel” could make even lesser diseases fatal in our case due to the fact that cost considerations will kick in at a lower level for less serious diseases; in short the “deathpanels” will withhold treatment for lymphomas, colon cancer, lung cancer, etc. until it’s “too late to operate.”
AND THEY know this and they are counting on this to “control costs!”
rebuzz on March 10, 2010 at 9:23 AM
But Party members in good standing go to the front of the line under Barry’s plan, so that is an option…..
Vashta.Nerada on March 10, 2010 at 9:23 AM
Move? Yea, right.
State government have made the insurers virtual monopolies. I spent $250,000 in premiums out of my own pocket over ten years and was lucky to be well off enough to pay for all the treatment they didn’t cover.
IlikedAUH2O on March 10, 2010 at 9:23 AM
It’s really not a difficult concept, yet so many are unaware.
When everyone is tapping into the same pool of water, scarcity arises. When scarcity arises, many are told to do without.
So instead of taking, to subsequently do without, we should be allowed to make, and subsequently do with.
blatantblue on March 10, 2010 at 9:24 AM
Exactly correct. It needs repeating over and over that this “Health Care Reform” is all about power and control.
Aviator on March 10, 2010 at 9:25 AM
Oh GOODY!!!!! I can’t wait! Obama is going to take care of me, just like he’s putting gas in my car and paying my mortgage!!!
Oh Happy, HAPPY DAY!
ladyingray on March 10, 2010 at 9:25 AM
Since I did defense work for insurance companies I can assure you that politicians and the ruling class get special treatment now.
IlikedAUH2O on March 10, 2010 at 9:27 AM
canopfor on March 10, 2010 at 9:08 AM
The states fight back, now what is PBHO going to do?
Maybe I shouldn’t ask.
Bishop on March 10, 2010 at 9:11 AM
Bishop:Thats a h*lluva good point,maybe thats what Hopey`s
Civilian National Security Forces are for!:)
canopfor on March 10, 2010 at 9:27 AM
Oh GOODY!!!!! I can’t wait! Obama is going to take care of me, just like he’s putting gas in my car and paying my mortgage!!!
Oh Happy, HAPPY DAY!
ladyingray on March 10, 2010 at 9:25 AM
ladyingray!!:)
===========================
Obama Is Going To Pay For My Gas And Mortgage!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI
canopfor on March 10, 2010 at 9:30 AM
We didn’t elect a president, we anointed a king. Healthcare and amnesty with insure a one party system and term limits are things of the past.
volsense on March 10, 2010 at 9:30 AM
Obama and the corrupt Democrats look forward to the day you have to beg them for medical care for yourself or a loved one. That’s the real power the crave. The power of life and death of their subjects.
TheBigOldDog on March 10, 2010 at 9:31 AM
I believe that 30-40% of Mayo’s patients are from out of the country which means that Mr. Pankow’s case probably isn’t that uncommon.
deidre on March 10, 2010 at 9:32 AM
It’s a start, but contrary to WMD, it’s nowhere near a silver bullet. Assuming both the federal and state laws go forward, these will only be lines in the sand drawn by the states.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for these states drawing these lines in the sand and will love to watch the fight between state statutes vs federal statute, state courts vs federal courts, etc. The best that can be said of this is that an injunction will be placed on enforcement of the federal statute until the outcome is determined and that it will last past January 2013.
Dusty on March 10, 2010 at 9:32 AM
The idea that government can somehow legislate “fairness” or mandate equality of results is one of the most outrageous fallacies ever promoted. Is it fair that some people are born smarter than others, that some are born better looking or taller than others, that some have innate musical or artistic talent and some don’t, that some will develop horrible diseases and debilitating conditions, while others won’t? Life isn’t fair. It never has been, and it never will be. Some people are always going to be better off than others, whether through a willingness to work harder, or because of some natural talent or ability, or just due to plain dumb luck. The Left’s belief that government can, or should, try to legislate away that fact of life is one of their most annoying and destructive conceits.
AZCoyote on March 10, 2010 at 9:33 AM
Actually the Federal Minister is correct in saying that it is the responsibility of the Province (the richest in the nation btw) to cover the costs of the drug.
The big misconception south of the border is that there is “National” health care in Canada. Not true. All actuall health care is provided by the individual provinces and territories, with massive payments by the federal governement to cover the costs.
Confused yet? It gets better.
The drug he needs may very well be covered for his condition next door in Saskatchewan. But since he does not live there, he cannot get the treatment there, even though the costs are all covered from the same national health care budget. What gets covered and to what degree is done on a province by province basis, not to a national standard.
So, instead of a massive overarching system like they have in the UK with the NHS, up here we get 13 smaller versions of it.
A couple years ago, the feds tried to exert a bit more control over standards of care and costs, since they (aka we the taxpayer)were actually footing the bill. The provinces lost their collective minds and the feds gave up on the idea.
Be afraid my American brethern. Be very afraid…..
Jim708 on March 10, 2010 at 9:37 AM
I guess my question is, if this does end up happening in American, will the American people “take it?” They are use to suing to getting what they want, they are use to getting what they want even if they have to pay out of pocket. I’m not sure Americans will just sit by and not do anything about this, especially since we’re so use to the best medical care we could ever get.
deidre on March 10, 2010 at 9:37 AM
Why does any of this really matter? We are all gonna die soon enough when the oceans rise.
/s
TheSitRep on March 10, 2010 at 9:38 AM
As Friedrich Holderlin put it
“What has always made a hell on earth has been that man has tried to make it his heaven.”
blatantblue on March 10, 2010 at 9:38 AM
Indeed, former Prime Minister Jean Chretien used to fly himself and his family members to the Mayo on a regular basis.
And yes, they flew there on CAF aircraft.
Jim708 on March 10, 2010 at 9:38 AM
Look at any decent sized hospital in the US near the Canadian border and you will find a sizable number of Canadians.
Aviator on March 10, 2010 at 9:41 AM
Couple of interesting points in that data. The number of people who Strongly Disapprove of Obama is the same as the total number of people approve of him. 43%.
Obama’s approval is evenly divided between Strongly Approve and Approve, 22% and 21% respectively.
His disapproval is Strongly Disapprove 43%, Disapprove 13%.
It’s not normal for the strong vs. weak ratios to be this lopsided.
In my opinion we got us a Bradley affect going on here. There are a lot of people who actually Disapprove of Obama, but they don’t want to tell a stranger that, so they select Approve.
Why would they be afraid, I see three major reasons:
1) Don’t want to be called a racist.
2) Strongly supported Obama during the campaign and don’t want to admit they messed up big time.
3) Racial solidarity.
Regardless of the reason, it’s going to take a lot of effort to motivate these people to come to the polls and vote for the Democrats this Nov. and in 2012.
MarkTheGreat on March 10, 2010 at 9:41 AM
You know, that sounds remarkably like… a ‘death panel’ in action.
Midas on March 10, 2010 at 9:42 AM
Canada and Britain have “death panels”, but this plan is different? We call ours “end of life counseling”. Strange how just changing the verbage to a liberal solves any problem.
volsense on March 10, 2010 at 9:47 AM
My sister lives in the UK and suffers from almost debilitating rheumatoid arthritis. She’s been on several different medications over the last few years to try and give her some sort of mobility and life. Last year she started on a new drug which really worked and she was able to start driving and getting herself around much more easily. Then at the beginning of this year she could no longer get a prescription for the drug because the government had “banned” it. The reason for the ban? Was the drug found to be dangerous? No. Toxic? No. Addictive? No. It was banned because it’s too expensive. My sister’s now back in a wheel chair.
Trafalgar on March 10, 2010 at 9:47 AM
Of course they do. It’s just like the VIP treatment (lower interest rates, waiver of fees and expenses, etc.) that crooks like Chris Dodd received when they applied for mortgage loans. Insurance companies want to make sure they’re on the right side of legislators who have power over how their companies are taxed, what sorts of expensive and burdensome regulations and licensing requirements they’re subjected to, etc., — just like banks and other companies do. And that’s going to be even more true if this POS healthcare bill is passed and the federal government gets even more power over health insurance companies (not to mention hospitals and other HC providers) than they already have. If people think our current HC system is “unfair,” just wait until they see what we’ll get with Obamacare!
AZCoyote on March 10, 2010 at 9:47 AM
.
Really? With a brain tumor and guaranteed treatment liability of 10,000 per month? Puhleeeeze.
ronsfi on March 10, 2010 at 9:50 AM
Don’t worry, under ObamaCare, drug companies will be forced to sell all drugs at a price the govt is willing to pay.
Which will of course, drive all drug companies off shore, or out of business.
MarkTheGreat on March 10, 2010 at 9:52 AM
It could be for his type of cancer, the Canadian govrernment does not think that his chances of recovery are worth 9,110 a month of their money.
Of course, when you get right down to it, whether or not Kent Pankow lives is not nearly as big a deal to the Canadian government as it is to Kent Pankow. That is why it does not make any sense to invite the government to this paricular party.
I want to live. I will shell out big bucks to make that happen, and be happy to do it. If I’m smart, I will enter into a voluntary contract with an insurance company, to bind them to a agreement whereby they will shell out even bigger bucks, if it becomes necessary.
But the government doesn’t give a damn, either way. Frankly, if I’m not going to pay taxes in the future, as far as the government is concerned, the quicker I am dispatched, the better. So why would I want to let government make the decisions?
gridlock2 on March 10, 2010 at 9:54 AM
And to think, there are still people who believe that the answer to any problem they see in the free market, is to give govt more control.
MarkTheGreat on March 10, 2010 at 9:55 AM
hey! It was only two weeks of dithering. It won’t bother the One at all. How many died while he took four months to dither on Afghanistan?
skatz51 on March 10, 2010 at 10:00 AM
I don’t follow this part. Isn’t one of the central parts of the debate that pre-existing conditions make it impossible to change insurers? If a private insurer does something like this to a cancer patient (or if they lose their job and thus their coverage), how can they just switch insurers?
tneloms on March 10, 2010 at 10:03 AM
I depend upon the VA for my health care. I can tell you that the most difficult part of it is the bureaucracy you have to wade through. There are some very fine doctors, and exceptional nurses there, but a VERY large portion of the patients are treated by Physician’s Assistants to save money. Also, the VA has a rather restrictive pharmacy and many drugs available for civilian use are not available through the VA. The doctors will happily write you a prescription for the drugs not covered, but you will have to pay out of pocket for it at a civilian pharmacy. I do that with two of my meds and together that takes up $450.00 a month.
I am a diabetic. I wanted to see a podiatrist at the VA. Fine, only I have to see my primary care physician first, so HE can make the referral. It will be at least 3 months before I can see my Primary care physician, and likely another two months to get into the Podiatry clinic.
It’s a similar situation for eye exams, or any other request. Then there is all the paperwork, and I mean paperwork, layers of forms that will be rejected back to you if something isn’t filled out exactly right. That means the process starts all over again after they get back the paperwork from you. You lose your place in line and start again at the back.
I am happy to have health care, because otherwise I wouldn’t have any. However, I pray to God that no one else in this nation has to accept the same things that Veterans have to for health care, because it makes you feel like a number, another piece of meat in a medical factory.
Do whatever you have to to keep the government’s hands off of your health care.
AW1 Tim on March 10, 2010 at 10:04 AM
Most U.S. hospitals near the Canadian border have expanded over the last 2 decades to accommodate these Canadian patients – from Seattle to Maine! Billions of dollars have flowed over the border from Canada – money that rightfully should have remained in the Canadian economy!
honsy on March 10, 2010 at 10:05 AM
Really?
I wouldn’t want to swap our health-care system for theirs but what if you have a pre-existing condition, like my wife who’s a cancer survivor? Or me with my diabetes and bad heart?
Or your insurance is provided by your employer and you can’t afford to leave the plan and “go-it-alone” when you get “lousy service”?
Or the company you prefer is not allowed in your state?
I’m the last one that wants the government to have anything to do with my health-care or, for that matter, any aspect of my life. The less government the better.
However, we all know that this same situation as been played out over and over with the insurance company standing in for the role of bad guy.
As much as we may despise the fed’s push to control our health care and should do everything we can to stop them, we should not lose sight of the fact that our system, as preferable as it is, has problems that still need to be addressed.
Rod on March 10, 2010 at 10:07 AM
The Canuck Death Panel gave Mr. Pankow a thumbs down.
.
When the government decides what care is going to be given, an individual is no longer seen as a father, a son, a brother, a friend, a husband or anything else of value to other members of society—he will be merely reduced to a budget line item, a faceless cost which can be stricken from the rolls when the cost (cancer care) provides no further value to the government.
Government intervention into individual decisions is a perversion of the societal relationship between a government and the people of society.
Great example, Ed–thanks.
ted c on March 10, 2010 at 10:10 AM
Bureaucrats making life and death decisions is made possible by abortions. When you kill the most innocent amongst us and call that murder ‘choice,’ then you pave the way for bureaucrats to apply the same reasoning about ‘choice’ to you. You’re just an adult version of the baby slaughtered in the womb. If that baby wasn’t worthy of life, what makes you think that you are when you’re critically ill? Like the baby, you’re not.
How did we get to a state in which bureaucrats decide whose cancer gets which drug—who gets to live? Simple. First we were allowed to decide if the unborn child should live (choice). If we have that power over the baby that should be safe in our bodies, in the nanny state, the bureaucrats have that power over us because we are their wards—they make choices for us and direct our lives. In a world without any constraints on taking the life of the innocent, weak, and defenseless, the refusal to save a life becomes the norm.
SilentWatcher on March 10, 2010 at 10:17 AM
Perhaps he should just locate the slimy little bureaucrat that made that decision and offer him a deal he can’t refuse. What’s he got to lose?
Oldnuke on March 10, 2010 at 10:24 AM
So you have cancer and you don’t like the treatment from your insurer so you take your cancer and shop it out to the competition? Heh!
BL@KBIRD on March 10, 2010 at 10:25 AM
Plus, we’re being told that it’s precisely BS like this that ObamaCare is supposed to fix. It’s because stuff like this supposedly happens with insurance companies that it’s necessary to bring the government into this problem.
If it even brings us the same level of care we’re currently getting with private insurance companies, then it’s already a failure.
Esthier on March 10, 2010 at 10:28 AM
That’s how I would handle it.
orlandocajun on March 10, 2010 at 10:29 AM
If a private ensurer refuses to provide care that they are legally obligated to provide, they can be sued. If that refusal to provide, even a refusal to provide on a timely basis, results in injury or death, that size of the judgement can put the company in danger of bankruptcy.
Not to mention that the bad publicity will cause them to lose millions of customers.
MarkTheGreat on March 10, 2010 at 10:31 AM
Obviously not, but it’s not as though insurance companies don’t have to tell you what they will and won’t cover before you sign up.
Esthier on March 10, 2010 at 10:38 AM
Sure there is; Collaboration.
It happened in the ’40′s in France, and it’s happening in the US today. Same impetus; Greed and the desire for Power.
wearyman on March 10, 2010 at 10:39 AM
I would not envision this ending well for bureaucrats making these types of decisions in this country. I believe you would have to change the term “going postal” to “going bureaucrat.”
chemman on March 10, 2010 at 10:39 AM
My wife is a cancer survivor presently battling the disease yet again.
~~~
These idiots are not just playing games with politics. They are playing games with lives!
pilamaye on March 10, 2010 at 9:08 AM
Deepest prayers for your wife.
As an older brother myself, this really cuts deep. Prayers for your family, and your brother, in particular.
KinleyArdal on March 10, 2010 at 10:40 AM
No, once you’ve got a diagnosis of brain cancer (or any of a few hundred other acute or chronic conditions) the only way you will EVER get another insurer to cover you is by changing jobs into a very large organization. You’re uninsurable; the best you can hope for is to be a health-insurance-slave.
I’m no fan of all-encompassing government bureaucracies, but let’s not pretend that in a situation like this what we’ve got is any better in terms of paying for treatment.
The difference here is that when government takes over the doctors, denial of payment means denial of treatment.
If a private insurer denied coverage, it’s highly unlikely that you’d get redress through any sort of appeals process in less than 16 days. The best you could hope for is to pay for it up front and hope you can shake the money loose later. Even that option’s foreclosed in the Canadian system.
JEM on March 10, 2010 at 10:47 AM
If Obamacare passes, look for low priced medical tourism destinations to sprout up all over the Caribbean.
Need a bypass? Get one for cheap and recover in a room with an ocean view.
John Deaux on March 10, 2010 at 10:51 AM
My daughter has military insurance, which is great if you happen to live on base, but they don’t. She is expecting her third baby and had to go to an “in network” doctor, which is fine, but went for her first visit and just got the bill – the insurance is not paying for ANY of the routine first visit tests! Not even the urine test! And last pregnancy,they refused to pay for the ultrasound, even though it is considered routine – they didn’t like the way the doctor’s office coded it.
I’m sure you can guess what she thinks of Obama Care.
Queen0fCups on March 10, 2010 at 10:58 AM
Obama-care will be a great economic boon to Mexico as it develops even more low cost medical programs -especially near the border- to treat Americans that are being left in the lurch.
Mason on March 10, 2010 at 11:02 AM
And we still have some polls saying 43% want this kind of health care? We have a lot of sadists in this country, don’t we?
capejasmine on March 10, 2010 at 11:23 AM
So a bureaucracy decided he was “not surgery worthy.” Thank goodness they don’t have death panels. Who knows what they might have decided. Of course, actual “death panels” are not always needed. I have a friend who trained to be a doctor in England. According to him the standard treatment for anyone over 70 who had a heart attack is 2 aspirins and bed-rest for 12 hours in a hospital corridor. They are then sent home to get better or worse on their own. There is not even the chance of a death panel being involved. It’s all been reduced to a regulation.
Fred 2 on March 10, 2010 at 11:30 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »