For people like your fiance, I would think a system whereby healthcare insurers and/or providers get a direct 100% writeoff for philanthropic donations (like the wheelchair) might be effective, given conditions where the recipient has such a condition.
(Assuming you are male due to screen name): Her preexisting condition is much more serious than mine. It is not out of bounds for the government to encourage or even subsidize behavior on part of private industry to help out in such cases. But due care would have to be exercised to be certain that the philanthropic tax breaks are not abused by the companies or by individuals.
I do not agree that the previous system was badly flawed if it is viewed from the average person’s viewpoint. I do agree that the boundary cases revealed significant issues that needed outside the box solutions - which were not provided for. But “hard cases make for bad law”, and rather than looking for solutions to the hard cases without overturning a system that worked for the vast majority, Obamacare blew up the apple cart in order to make everyone suffer equally.
No system can work for everyone equally, and those of us who exist at the margins (such as with preexisting conditions) cannot be the driving force defining “fair” for all people without pricing many others out of the system, IMO. In my view, that is where we now are, thanks to Obama, Pelosi, and Reid.
Congratulations on your impending marriage, my FRiend.
I remember a newspaper article from our local paper when ACA just got started. A 50 something male had taken early retirement and was living off his retirement annuity. It was not enough to buy health insurance, so he went without instead of getting a part time job. Along comes ACA, and he gets heavily subsided insurance for $50 per month. This guy thinks it is great. A working lady in her mid 50’s had her $400 a month policy cancelled. The new policy was over $800 for similar coverage. Something is wrong with that picture.