Tag Archives: healthcare

Just Words.

My company offered a great incentive recently. Answer a few questions, go through a health screening, get your blood pressure, cholesterol, and your glucose checked. At the end of it all, they put a few extra bucks into my flexible spending account, which I can use to pay for things my medical plan doesn’t cover (like the co-pay on test strips).

So I went for my scheduled screening about 20 minutes after my lunch. I informed the screener that I was Type 1 so he wouldn’t have a cow when he checked my BG. He went through all of the tests, including the glucose check (with a One Touch meter).

The result: 160 mg/dL

So I’m thinking
, “Hey, I’m at 160 only 20 minutes after lunch? Brilliant!”.

And that’s when the screener said: “Sir, of course you know this because you’re type 1, but you should always maintain a blood sugar below 140”.

Me: “But I just finished eating a little over twenty minutes ago”.

Screener: “Yes, but FDA guidelines suggest that you should keep your blood glucose at 140 or lower constantly”.

Me: “Okay, first of all, I’m pretty sure that’s incorrect, and second, I just ate… wait a minute… you just came back before I sat down right?”.

Screener: “That’s right”.

Me: “Did you just eat?”.

Screener: “Yes”.

Me: “Go ahead and test yourself. I’ll bet you’re at 160 or higher right now”.

Screener: “Sir, what my blood sugar is doing is not…”

I stopped him right there. I don’t usually like to interrupt people, but I had to do it right then. I stopped him mid-sentence, and said “My point is this: Everyone, every situation is different. When you paint everyone with a broad brush like that, you’re going to scare the crap out of some people who may not have diabetes, and you’re going to make some people with diabetes feel bad”.

Maybe I overreacted. He was just doing his job. Just repeating what he’s told to repeat. They are just words, after all. I was just thinking that I don’t want the next person who sits down after lunch to worry unnecessarily, or feel bad about themselves.

As I was finishing up, he handed me a flyer with some general health information. Among the other items in the 3-sided pamphlet was this nugget, near the bottom of the page:

Hey, it’s just words, right? And maybe I’m a little over-sensitive to these kind of things now. But last time I checked, there wasn’t anything I could do to prevent my diabetes. Or anyone else’s Type 1. And eliminating my diabetes? Sorry for the cliche, but that’s a little like reversing pregnancy.

I know it’s just words, but I did get the e-mail address from the vendor doing the screening, and I sent an e-mail telling them that they should rethink the way they’ve worded their little handout. Again, it could make people feel bad. People who develop diabetes, or have already developed diabetes, could think that they’ve failed somehow. When really, they didn’t have anything to do with it.

Hey, it’s just words. But words can hurt. Or they can heal. Your choice.
 
 
 

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Still Here.

You may have heard that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States yesterday.

That’s an understatement compared to the avalanche of media coverage on this subject just since the ruling was handed down. Let me add a couple of things, and then we can all breathe and relax for the weekend.

     

  • Despite how you may feel about the reach of our government, the law still has some provisions that mean a lot to People With Diabetes (PWDs) and parents of Children With Diabetes (CWDs). If you’re a parent, you can cover your child up to age 26, whether or not they live with you, whether or not they have other coverage available. So if your coverage is better than their coverage at work, they can stay on your plan up to age 26. For adults beyond 26, it means an end to insurance companies, employers, and labor unions denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions like diabetes (in 2014… let’s hope we don’t get sick before then). And yes, I have had to make a decision not to take a job because my pre-existing condition would not be covered.
  •  

  • The law stands today, thanks in part to the Supreme Court’s decision. But if the republicans take congress and the White House in the November elections, the law will be repealed. All of it. All of the good parts and bad parts of the legislation gone. Back to square one. I’m not making a political statement. I’m proud to be politically independent. I’ve voted for republicans and democrats over the years. I’m also repeating what I’ve heard many times from many republican candidates.
  •  

  • Assuming the law stays, don’t expect it to remain in its current state in perpetuity (like that big word?). Like almost all federal laws, it will change over time. Often with the political landscape. Provisions will be added, and new challenges will be brought before the court, and after those decisions, more tweaks will be made to the law. If it holds, this law will look different 10 years from now, and still different 20 years from now, and different again 30 years from now. So let’s not get so hyped up over what this means over the next four plus months until the election.
  •  
    I just hope I’m still around in 30 years. And regardless of whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (or Obamacare, if you like) is still here then or not, I really hope that our citizens can get the care they need, when they need it, without a lot of bickering and hatred. Just because it’s right. For everyone. No exceptions.
     
    I think that’s something we can all agree on.
     
     
     

Are you listening, America?

I like to tell people that I’m fiercely independent.  I’m not a republican or a democrat (note the non-use of capital letters).  I don’t subscribe to political ideology, and I plan to stay that way until the end.

So now the Supreme Court is considering one of the most politically charged arguments in decades:  the case for, or against, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.  Or, at the very least, the case for or against the provision in the law that creates a federal mandate that requires everyone to purchase health insurance.  There are a lot of other things in the law, which can be argued forever, but if you’ve been following the news at all recently, you know that the questions are:  Is the mandate constitutional?  And if the mandate is unconstitutional, is the entire law unconstitutional?

I know that one side of the political spectrum wants the law abolished, and the other side would like to keep it.

Well, I don’t know how the court will decide.  But I do know how to add and subtract.  And I have a pretty strong sense of fairness about things.

I know that if the law is struck down, the federal deficit will go up.  Why?  If I’m not paying a premium on insurance that covers me, or me and my family, what happens when we get sick?  We go to an emergency room at a public hospital, and the government picks up the tab.  And that’s before we talk about Medicaid.  Did you know that in 2009, 5 million people lost their health insurance?  And at least 3 million of those people became eligible for Medicaid.  In 2010, another 5 million lost their coverage.  Estimates are that about 2 million of those became eligible for Medicaid.  Who pays for Medicaid?  Our state and federal governments do, thanks to our payroll deductions.  That means that if the law goes away, the people who claim to hate deficit spending and all of the supposed “freeloaders” using up entitlement money in the budget will be responsible for putting, or keeping, millions on Medicaid.  I don’t know politics, but I know that adding 5 million potential Medicaid recipients won’t close the budget gap.  Especially if at least some of those 5 million could be paying for their own insurance, if they could get coverage at a decent cost.  I read a quote somewhere recently:  the arithmetic trumps political ideology.

Then there’s the question of fairness.  I’m enrolled in what I think is a great plan through my employer.  Even with my employer-sponsored coverage, I still have a sizable out-of-pocket expense every year.  I can’t even imagine what the cost is to deal with getting coverage on your own, or paying all of the expenses of your care yourself.  Those of us with type 1 are fully aware that there’s nothing we could have done to prevent this disease from invading our bodies.  And we know that we really don’t have a choice when it comes to things like how much insulin we need (need, not want) how many test strips we need, how often we need to see a doctor.  How fair is it that because of where you live, or because of your employer’s financial distress, or because of your “risk factors” concerning a disease you can’t predict, you are denied care while I am not?

I mean, I worked hard to get where I am, and I’ve earned what I’ve received.  But couldn’t we talk about how to make things a little more fair, without breaking down into hate mongering?  We’re not going to make things perfect… but we can’t make it better unless we strive for better.  For everyone.  No exceptions.