July 26, 201313 yr I've seen reports that the infant mortality rate in the US is 2 to 3x higher than the top countries in the world. One of the reasons is that about 40% of females do no thave health insurance for them or their children. Obamacare would provide that healthcare specifically for mothers and their infants. If it is proven that greatly decreases the infant mortality rate would you put aside your other issues and support it?
July 26, 201313 yr I've seen reports that the infant mortality rate in the US is 2 to 3x higher than the top countries in the world. One of the reasons is that about 40% of females do no thave health insurance for them or their children. Obamacare would provide that healthcare specifically for mothers and their infants. If it is proven that greatly decreases the infant mortality rate would you put aside your other issues and support it? No. Because the same coverage could be provided without the rest of the bill being needed. This is kind of like when a defense bill is up for a vote and a senator or congressman sticks something in for their district that may be controversial. Then when others vote against the bill because of the addition it is spun as a vote against the troops. This bill does not need to be approved because there are some good parts to it. The good parts need to be enacted without the rest of the bill which by most accounts is going to be a nightmare for the US economy.
July 26, 201313 yr Okay, I'll bite. I don't think anyone is denying that there aren't benefits to access to healthcare through insurance. The question has always been, how is the best way to go about getting everyone it. Advances in one area may cause a regression in others.
July 26, 201313 yr Author Both of you are 100% correct. Positives and negatives. Let's say Congress continues down the road that they've been on for a while and they can't really change it much. So, as bad as much of the concoction might taste is this one very big positive make it worthwhile?
July 26, 201313 yr But, if some businesses elect to reduce either the number of employees they have, or reduce the number of hours they allow for each employee...how do you take that into account in the grand scheme of things. Is potentially having more people on unemployment or eligible for welfare a worthwhile exchange? (And I'm trying not to belittle anyone's (especially a child's) life.)
July 26, 201313 yr The bigger issue with infant mortality IMO has to do with parenting, drug use and poverty. Free Medical Insurance is already available in KY, why would we need Obamacare. Kentucky: Kids Health - What is KCHIP? The Kentucky Children's Health Insurance Program (KCHIP) is free or low-cost health insurance for children. KCHIP is for children younger than 19 who do not have health insurance and whose family income is less than 200 percent of the federal poverty level. For example, a family of four can earn up to $47,100 a year and qualify for KCHIP. This is available now in Kentucky and I would bet several other states have a similar plan for children's insurance.
July 26, 201313 yr The question is a fallacy ... 40% dont have insurance ?? Oscar Mayer Bologna. Edited July 26, 201313 yr by Randy Parker Rule 8
July 26, 201313 yr Medicaid is available for every mom out there . All my small staff ( even the ones with health care I pay 100% for ) have medicaid as a secondary for maternity plus like 12 -18 months .
July 26, 201313 yr Author The question is a fallacy ... 40% dont have insurance ?? Oscar Mayer Bologna. Might have been 38%. Saw it somewhere on cable today. But let's say it's less. We still have 2x to 3x the rate of other developed countries. Edited July 26, 201313 yr by Randy Parker
July 26, 201313 yr Might have been 38%. Saw it somewhere on cable today. But let's say it's less. We still have 2x to 3x the rate of other developed countries. Insurance isn't the reason, as stated above it is available for free already. This is smoke and mirrors it seems to get sympathy for the bill. Parenting and/or lack there of is the biggest issue in this country, IMO.
July 26, 201313 yr Author Found it. I didn't quote it accurately. It wasn't that they didn't have insurance. It was that they DID have health insurance BUT had insufficient maternal insurance. ACA makes maternal care an essential health benefit.
July 26, 201313 yr Author The bigger issue with infant mortality IMO has to do with parenting, drug use and poverty. Free Medical Insurance is already available in KY, why would we need Obamacare. Kentucky: Kids Health - What is KCHIP? This is available now in Kentucky and I would bet several other states have a similar plan for children's insurance. Medicaid is available for every mom out there . All my small staff ( even the ones with health care I pay 100% for ) have medicaid as a secondary for maternity plus like 12 -18 months . The issue actually isn't with the ones you reference above. It's with those that have private insurance that isn't covering enough of the cost of the care.
July 26, 201313 yr Author Insurance isn't the reason, as stated above it is available for free already. This is smoke and mirrors it seems to get sympathy for the bill. Parenting and/or lack there of is the biggest issue in this country, IMO. It's those with insurance, not as I originally stated, that are having the issues.
July 26, 201313 yr Author Here's an article that details the challenges faced by any women/families who do have insurance today. The Potential of Health Care Reform to Improve Pregnancy-Related Services and Outcomes
July 26, 201313 yr Found it. I didn't quote it accurately. It wasn't that they didn't have insurance. It was that they DID have health insurance BUT had insufficient maternal insurance. ACA makes maternal care an essential health benefit. Many states have Pre-Natal care as part of their Chip program and all states have it as part of Medicaid.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.