Mandate Health Insurance?

Just to respond to an earlier comment about the UK and a woman worried about being 'sectioned'.

My wife has worked in the mental health field for many years, and sections about 3 people a week.

The sectioning process involves a mental health social worker, qualified and regulated in their field, a consultant physychiatrist, and a medical doctor. The section has to be approved by a magistrate (justice of peace?).

Many sections involve an armed police force because of the possibility of violence.

Sections can be voluntary or involuntary.

They are performed because the patient is a danger to themselves or to others. In a large population, there are a certain number of people who are severely disturbed. Excrement all over the walls, self abuse, drugs, psycotic episodes etc etc etc.

I have no idea about the case mentioned, but to take an example, if a mother was bleeding very heavily and an unborn babies life was in danger, but the mother refused a blood transfusion because of religious beliefs, there is a debate about whether she should be sectioned for the sake of the baby, who would die without blood transfusion. The mother can exercise choice, the baby cannot.

I would guess that if a mother is several weeks late, similar medical issues may be at stake.

If a person is already disturbed, then the circumstances can push them well over the edge and they are not in a fit state of mind to make decisions.

Does that make sense?

It is horrible work, but somebody has to do it.

I assume there are similar processes in the US.

First, this situation exists now, yet it's overlooked. So if that's a legitimate justification to not force everyone to buy insurance, why isn't it a legitimate justification to not force 80% of adults to buy insurance?

I'll tell ya why. Because it's a ridiculous concept. If your driving negligence confines me to a wheelchair for the rest of my life, i hardly think i'll be made whole by what you can afford to pay me.

Secondly, your response fails to account for the circumstance of people buying insurance subsidizing the people who don't.

Third, i'll say it again. People are 1000X more likely to ultimately use their health insurance than they are to use the car insurance....that they are mandated to buy.

The fact is, health insurance is, simply put, eminently unique beyond anything else we are required to deal with - so it needs solutions that are eminently unique beyond anything else that we are required to deal with. Originally Posted by Doove

First, It may be overlooked by you, but there are criminal and civil liability cases in every state on a daily basis, and that is a fact. There is no legitimate justification to force anyone to buy auto insurance, or the federal government would have already tried it. Having mandated auto insurance, or not, will not remove you from the confines of a wheelchair.

Secondly, the poor would get free insurance if mandated, paid for by the taxpayers which means you would have to increase taxes to pay for it. The net result would be the same costs, plus the beaurocracy created and the expenses to regulate it. Unless it works the same as Obamacare, where the insurance companies have free reign to rape everyone indiscriminately.

Third, you lost me. I am not mandated to buy auto insurance.

I agree it is unique, and should be handled simply by the government eliminating healthcare insurance, collecting taxes and paying for everybody's healthcare needs. If they are making it any harder than that, you can bet the poor are getting duped by the government again.

No point in continuing this wee rant as the law or, erm almost law is proper fucked! Kind of like the rabbit in the movie snatch. I don't have anything clever to say really. The whole situation is very sad indeed. I really thought I'd be able to finally have a healthcare situation that was better than the one in my "home" country (UK-England). Now I will get to treat a multitude of patients that have stage four and five Cancers that could have been sorted at a much earlier date. This law being thrown in the rubbish bin may save your wee constitutional rights but results in a massive set back as far as proper medical treatment. I wonder whether the conservative justices pondered the bit about "doing no harm"? And, doing nothing is in fact doing bloody harm! Game, set, match. Conservative twats win.

No point in continuing this wee rant as the law or, erm almost law is proper fucked! Kind of like the rabbit in the movie snatch. I don't have anything clever to say really. The whole situation is very sad indeed. I really thought I'd be able to finally have a healthcare situation that was better than the one in my "home" country (UK-England). Now I will get to treat a multitude of patients that have stage four and five Cancers that could have been sorted at a much earlier date. This law being thrown in the rubbish bin may save your wee constitutional rights but results in a massive set back as far as proper medical treatment. I wonder whether the conservative justices pondered the bit about "doing no harm"? And, doing nothing is in fact doing bloody harm! Game, set, match. Conservative twats win. Originally Posted by liberaldevil

Freedom does not come cheap my liberal brother, but it is worth it. However, there is nothing in America stopping you from giving all your wealth to the places that will help those that you care for the most. Of course you would have to steeply cut back on the hookers, but if you really care that deeply, I'd say go for it.

yes, it is so many sad monks debating how many angels can fit on a pin.

Constitution, constitution, fucking constitution, fuck the constitution, people are dying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUdaPNXC_68

Classic

yes, it is so many sad monks debating how many angels can fit on a pin.

Constitution, constitution, fucking constitution, fuck the constitution, people are dying. Originally Posted by essence

Bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, rubbish, cunt, fuck, shite! I'm gobsmacked at how this countries laws are passed! There are pros and cons of both your system and mine(Parlimentary) I suppose. However, I quite fancy being able to give an opposing political opponent a "right go" in a public venue. Such as the one we have in the UK. It seems there isn't enough confrontation in the US style of governing. Embarrassment is quite a useful tool to get shite sorted. Plus all of this goes on whilst BBC-2 is watching. No bloody where to hide from the public opinion! Looks like tomorrow will be interesting at work. The hospitalists like myself for socialized medicine V private practice physician banter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUdaPNXC_68

Classic Originally Posted by essence

You Legend Essence! Bloody fucking brilliant mate! Love that bit where he says, "Because we're fucking awake!" Classic!

All I can say is glad I have 3 Lions on my chest! And, lastly...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-6OMx3mCFs

Freedom does not come cheap my liberal brother, but it is worth it. Originally Posted by nwarounder

Liberaldevil, are people in Britain not "free"?

All Americans should pay the same tax rate, as equals. . Originally Posted by nwarounder

Everyone needs to pay something...That way they have a vested interest in the system. Originally Posted by boardman

A federal sales tax, that taxes all transactions equally, then a uniform refund per person to cover taxes paid on basic living expenses like food and shelter. Everyone pays based on consumption, all the riches in the world don't do anybody any good until they spend it. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

These quotes came from the fair tax thread but put in proper context that is very much like what Obama is trying to do with healthcare.

Try and insure everyone and make sure more pay equally.

Why then when it comes to the rich do some of you scream "Fair" and when it comes to the poor you same people scream, "Fuc'em!"?

Liberaldevil, are people in Britain not "free"? Originally Posted by Doove

God no! Citizens do not have the rights to initiate and pass laws absent of the government, among other things.

These quotes came from the fair tax thread but put in proper context that is very much like what Obama is trying to do with healthcare.

Try and insure everyone and make sure more pay equally.

Why then when it comes to the rich do some of you scream "Fair" and when it comes to the poor you same people scream, "Fuc'em!"? Originally Posted by WTF

A little early isn't it? (wink, wink)

These quotes came from the fair tax thread but put in proper context that is very much like what Obama is trying to do with healthcare.

Try and insure everyone and make sure more pay equally.

Why then when it comes to the rich do some of you scream "Fair" and when it comes to the poor you same people scream, "Fuc'em!"? Originally Posted by WTF

Except the Federal govt. doesn't have the right to tell us we must buy something.

The logistics of this i think would be impossible. Not having insurance doesn't mean you are unable to pay for medical treatment. What are we going to do, perform a credit check and require everyone to show their last 4 pay stubs before they'll get treatment?



You sound as if you're trying to be sensible, so i'll press this question with all sincerity. Given the dynamics of what responsibilities can be created from car ownership, would you have a problem with requiring people to purchase car insurance if circumstances were somehow such that everyone needed to have a car? Yes or no. Originally Posted by Doove

You would have to explain some scenario in which children need to own and are driving cars from birth for this to be an apples to apples scenario, also explain why mass transit no longer exists. The problem with your hypothetical is that its terribly farfetched. I cannot imagine a scenario in which I would be fine with the government being able to mandate having to buy something from another private citizen. Whats to stop them from then picking which citizens you have to buy from? Now I have a question for you, do you think most of the uninsured cant afford it or that they are too irresponsible to buy it?

One other point about the US vs Brit systems, the brits pay taxes for this medical coverage. They dont buy health insurance from private insurance companies. Thats the crux for alot of us and its being treated as though we are heartless because we dont want this particular expansion of government power. Giving this power up to the government even if its a good cause is shortsighted in my view.

Except the Federal govt. doesn't have the right to tell us we must buy something. Originally Posted by boardman

Semantics'

It is ok if they call it a tax, tax you and then buy it for you?

A little early for acid isn't it? Originally Posted by Iaintliein

Can't respond, taboo subject.