Quote:
Originally Posted by AKA_Monet
When you don't have enough licensed trained clinicians, how many patients are treated per day? If less patients are treated, less pay is in returned. The way health insurance is done these days is by patient volume. However, the quality of care goes down precipitously...
The clinicians at the VA is are really good, there is just not enough of them to treat all the personnel that need to be seen in due course...
Private or civilian clinics are more abundant and could be reimbursed for treatment options. But, people have varying views. Sure, someone will get seen at the VA, but that may be awhile, opposed to a high volume location that sees a constant barrage of patients daily...
It's not like I am for this bill, I just question the feasibility of one plan over another.
|
But the thing is, as I understand it, the proposal didn't really address private treatment, just who would get billed for who the VA treated.
It wouldn't do anything to address the number of clinicians or the quality of care they could provide.
ETA: I grew up as a military dependent and my experiences and those of my family are the principle reason that I don't think a single payer system or even a heavily governmentally run system will result in a net gain in the area of health care for most people. I think we may need to subsidize care for more people at the bottom end of income, and we may need to pass laws that require private insurers to cover more people or laws that require people to purchase insurance, a la Romney. But we don't need a general private system that functions like the military system. (Or like the English system if you saw the news reports this week about one of their facilities that patients described as "third world".)
If the Obama policy had instead said that the VA would pay for private treatment of combat injuries, I probably would have entirely celebrated that.