Posted on 02/05/2014 6:20:04 AM PST by grundle
The Los Angeles Times reports that once Obamacare customers navigate the confusing websites and pay the (often higher) premiums, they face a new problem: many doctors do not accept Obamacare insurance policies. It tells the story of a cancer patient who was turned away at the oncologist's office, and was only seen by a doctor once state regulators came to her rescue. Her story is not alone: millions will face the same problem.
There are two reasons patients will be turned away: one that President Barack Obama hid, and one that he lied about. The first is that there is a shortage of doctors. There simply are not enough doctors (or nurses) to see a population of patients that grows bigger, suddenly, by some 30 million people (in theory). The second reason: insurance companies have to cut certain doctors and hospitals out of their plans in order to keep prices within a reasonable range while still covering all the things the law requires. So you can't necessarily "keep your doctor."
The LA Times' story about a cancer patient is particularly ironic, considering that Obama used cancer as a prop to sell the legislation--both to tout the law's coverage for pre-existing conditions, and to tell misleading stories about how his own mother was abandoned by insurance companies when she was being treated for cancer.
As the Washington Examiner and Breitbart News reported last December, as many as 70% of California doctors will not participate in Obamacare. That is a reality many patients are discovering as they lose insurance policies they once enjoyed and discover that the doctors in their new Covered California policies are little more than "phantom networks." They are victims of Obamacare's cost controls--and they are finding out "what's in it."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
We’re in some serious doo doo.
LIB/DIM philosophy: They’re going to die anyway so what’s the problem?
They can just call their congressman. Oh, wait.
It has been said all along. Obamacare is not about healthcare. It is about votes, power and control.
Forget healthcare. The libs did, way before this horror story was enacted.
death panels
Well, hal, you may not be too far from wrong on that one. Millions less older folks (I am one, BTW) will do dhimmicrap wonders for the Social Security system, Medicare, and a bunch of other fedgov pogroms.
What’s not to like? Let ‘em die. Take the stress off the socialist system. Is a sarc tag really needed?
“We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.” Anybody still in the dark about what’s in it?
I think Obamacare was designed to kill off as many older native Americans as possible so businesses would pressure for more immigrants who will then vote Democrat.
I guess this is the form of geriatic “cleansing” (i.e. death panels) we dreaded...
Oh, cancer treatment is “technically” covered, but patients must jump through every hoop in front of them to access it.
I hope hell has a special place in store for every congresscritter and senaturd who voted to foist this pile of crap onto this country.
We knew this was a way to tax people from the gitgo. Anything they don’t have to pay out is something they get to keep. Obamazombies, do you think he really gives a $hit about you or your health? He just wants your obedience and your money. He suckered you. You got conned. Hello are you libs listening? I know you visit this site and post as conservatives from time to time.
I have previously described this as the "rubber meeting the road" part of Obamacare. Sooner or later, a patient would seek treatment, a doctor's office or a pharmacy would seek a payment for services rendered, and they would be denied.
I hope that these Obama supporters are waking up to just how bad this new "healthcare" really is.
.....”I hope that these Obama supporters are waking up...”
Nah....Many are giving him a pass saying that Obama didn’t mean for Obamacare to turn out this way. They do not hold him accountable at all.
Zeke Emanuel would approve of this. He often said we should be allocating (or as I call it, ‘rationing’) scarce resources on those we CAN save and who could further contribute to society. (See Complete Lives System)
“The complete lives system also considers prognosis, since its aim is to achieve complete lives. A young person with a poor prognosis has had few life-years but lacks the potential to live a complete life. Considering prognosis forestalls the concern that disproportionately large amounts of resources will be directed to young people with poor prognoses. When the worst-off can benefit only slightly while better-off people could benefit greatly, allocating to the better-off is often justifiable. Some small benefits, such as a few weeks of life, might also be intrinsically insignificant when compared with large benefits.”
-From The Lancet, Volume 373, Issue 9661, Pages 423 - 431, 31 January 2009, Emanuel writes:
I won't even begin to go into those who buy into his BS.
If you voted for Obama; if you supported Obamacare, then you deserve anything that is hapening to you!!
What the government needs to do is set up some Potemkin clinics and hospitals. In CA, they can use some old Hollywood Western sets.
You watch. A law will be passed where the doc’s will be forced to accept that insurance that will or not pay them timely if at all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.