MVNHS© and Medicaid vs Babies

The Much Vaunted National Health System© continues its war on children. This time, a preemie was "left to die alone in a sluice room at an NHS trust plagued by clinical errors and bad staff attitudes."

In case you're wondering, a "sluice room" is "where used disposables such as incontinence pads and bed pans are dealt with, and reusable products are cleaned and disinfected."

For the MVNHS© "disposables" now includes babies, apparently.

Great system over there.

And lest we forget, our own version leaves much to be desired, based on this cautionary take from Florida:

"Kim and Richard Muszynski love Florida ... in September, the couple left the Sunshine State ... because they think Abby's health insurance was killing her."

The kicker?

"Like nearly half of all children in Florida, Abby has Medicaid"

Leaving aside for the moment that appalling statistic, it may be instructive to note that, as with the Much Vaunted National Health System©, Medicaid is not not insurance (after all, who pays premiums?) but taxpayer-funded health care. And, again as with the MVNHS©, who pays the piper calls the tune.

[Hat Tip: Holly R]

MVNHS© Struggling

Britain's Much Vaunted National Health System© is "on its knees:"

"[T]hanks to migrants from the European Union (EU) taking advantage of free movement rules.

Cancer treatment can cost up to £200,000 for the UK’s socialised healthcare service, and under Brussels law Britain must offer it to all EU nationals."

Long-time readers may recall co-blogger Mike's post on the Schengen Convention, which required  "that persons seeking an entry visa to a signatory country must have adequate medical insurance of their own." At the time, this was apparently vigorously enforced. Now, not so much:

"NHS Trusts were not prepared for the millions of EU migrants who have poured into Britain because the Government estimate was nowhere near the reality."

Sounds familiar, no?

The result, of course, is that the already shaky national health care scheme has become even less stable, as the government (really the British taxpayer, of course) scrambles to provide even modest levels of care. Add in the ever-increasing provider shortage ("less than 20 per cent of students wanting to become GPs") and you having the makings of an impending total collapse of the system.

But don't get too confident about our own, since we're facing pretty much the same (bleak) future under ObamaCare and open borders.

My favorite part of the MVNHS© saga, though, is this gem:

"Britain is attracting thousands of health tourists from across the EU who cannot get certain drugs or treatments in their home country so come to Britain and demand them as EU citizens."

"Health tourists." Yeah, go with that.

[Hat Tip: Co-blogger Bob V]

MVNHS©: "We could tell you, but then..."

You can't make this stuff up (well, you could try, but then reality's still going to trump you):

"NHS chiefs are trying to keep plans to cut hospital services in England secret ... Managers were even told how to reject freedom of information requests"

Of course, now this particular cat's out of the bag, so it'll be interesting to see how successful MVNHS© bureauweenies will be in fighting off those FOI requests. And just what are they trying to cover up?

Well, according to leaked information, the cuts include the closure of at least one hospital in London, maternity and stroke services country-wide, and the forced merger of four hospitals in Merseyside, to name a few.

There are actually quite a few services and facilities on the chopping block, which is interesting because we've been told that nationalized health care schemes deliver better care than ours at a fraction of the cost, effectively bending the cost curve down.

How's that working out for the Much Vaunted National Health System©?

[Hat Tip: Ace of Spades]

MVNHS© vs Autism

If you, or a loved one, is on the autism scale, you need to be very afraid of ObamaCare's ultimate goal of Single Payer.

Why is that, you ask?

Here's why:

"The euthanasia of Nancy Fitzmaurice, a severely disabled child who was not dying, has made international waves ... Nancy’s mother had requested that her daughter be killed and was granted approval by the British legal system."

As we've mentioned before, "who pays the piper calls the tune." And while this may the most egregious example of that we've seen, even by the standards of the Much Vaunted National Health System©, it's absolutely how Single Payer works, how it has to work. And of course, little Nancy's only advocate was the one who petitioned for this outcome.

When an unelected, unaccountable Star Chamber is given free rein to make these kinds of life-and-death decisions, and when the cost of life becomes the value of it, well, that's what we're headed for here.

Now, some would argue that this isn't about the MVNHS©, per se; that it's about the British legal system. And they'd be right - up to a point. That point is that regardless of the agency which murdered this little girl, it was the state that ordered it done.

Be careful what you wish for.

[Hat Tip: C. C. Pecknold]

"Junior" Fights Back: Tales from the MVNHS©

Earlier this year, we reported that "junior doctors" employed by the Much Vaunted National Health System© had engaged in a pretty severe work slowdown, in protest over "pay and working conditions." In fact, these "junior doctors" comprise up to half of all doc's in England.

As with almost all government-run enterprises, the folks in charge heard the junior doc's pleas, and agreed to a mutually beneficial resolution.

Er, no:

"U.K. Junior Doctors Withdraw Emergency Care in ‘All Out Strike’"

On the one hand, the work stoppage lasted a mere nine hours, but of course that impacted tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of patients (for better or worse is another question entirely, of course).

Under proposed MVNHS© regs, junior doc's would be required to work weekends and evening at "regular" pay scale, not "premium" (aka overtime, one presumes). This is necessary, of course, in order to rein in out-of-control healthcare costs.

Whoa there, Henry, wait just a second:

It is a well-known fact that government-run health care schemes systems are far more efficient than our own, and that they're able to keep strict control of health care costs with zero impact on quality or quantity of care.

Um, not so much:

"[T]he British Medical Association, the union for doctors, has countered that it will stretch an already-overburdened workforce even thinner, endangering patient safety."

Oh.

Good thing that can't happen here.

[Hat Tip: FoIB Holly R]

MVNHS© Taking on Water

Last time we checked in with Britain's Much Vaunted National Health System©, we learned that new mums with breast cancer don't fare very well, healthcare-wise. Turns out, that was just a harbinger of things to come.

To wit:

"UK now has one of the worst healthcare systems in the developed world, according to OECD report"

Now what in the wide wide world of sports would prompt that pronouncement?

Oh:

"Hospitals are now so short-staffed and underequipped ... Staff are too rushed to improve levels of care ... obesity levels are “dire”

In other words: Thursday.

Here's the best part, though: all those folks bemoaning how we spend so much money on health care with poor results, and point to schemes like the MVNHS© as models to follow?

Guess what:

"Mr Pearson said the UK was spending “considerably less” than many OECD countries and that “you get what you pay for” in healthcare."

So if spending more doesn't help, and spending less doesn't, either, then maybe (just maybe) there are other factors to consider?

Wonder what those could be...

MVNHS© claims another one

It's almost as if nationalized health care schemes are designed to kill off their intended beneficiaries:

22-year-old dies of rare cancer after doctors mistook disease for pregnancy

To be fair, her initial pregnancy diagnosis was due to elevated hormone levels. But as time went by, and her pain continued unabated, one would think that her "care" providers would have at least tried to nail down a cause. By the time they finally got around to that, it was too late:

"[I]n February, doctors at Addenbrooke Hospital in Cambridge found Wright actually had adenocarcinoma— an aggressive form of cancer that affects multiple organs and was diagnosed as terminal. On Feb. 23, Wright passed away"

Well played, Much Vaunted National Health System©.

Ducking the MVNHS©

As we noted a few weeks ago, many (most?) countries with national healthcare schemes also have robust private insurance markets.

For the naysayers (via email):
 

<Click to embiggen>

And just how does it work?

So glad you asked:

"If you are taken ill, can you rely on the NHS to ensure you recover quickly?

Private medical insurance (or health insurance) is designed to cover the costs of private medical treatment, so that if you happen to have the misfortune to suffer from a disease, illness or injury you can rest assured that you will be well cared for to help you on the way to a full and speedy recovery.

While we are fortunate in the UK to have the NHS, the reality is that you can often wait months for diagnosis and treatment. Private healthcare not only enables you to receive treatment quickly it also offers you far more choice as a patient. You can choose everything from what treatment you receive to where you are treated."

"While we are fortunate..." Heh.

The site acknowledges something we've maintained for many, many years: that under the Much Vaunted National Health System© care may be free, it is strictly rationed. The most common rationing method is, of course, long wait times, where the beancounters in charge can be sure that at least a few of their fellow countryfolk will succumb to attrition.

But hey, it's free.

MVNHS© Plays Grim Reaper

At first glance, this concept appears to have some merit:

"Mothers of children with fatal defects will have the option to give birth. Once the infant has been declared stillborn, doctors will remove its organs. They will then be used to save the lives of other children who are currently being placed on 7,000-strong waiting list"

After all, if the baby isn't itself viable, and could save the lives of others who may be, that's potentially a good thing, no?

The problem is, the Much Vaunted National Health System© hasn't shown itself to be particularly concerned with ethics, which leads folks to (justifiably) call into question the rationale behind this effort, not to mention the motivations of those tasked with implementing it.

This in particular raises moral hackles:

"Amid a chronic shortage of donated organs, mums will be 'supported' to have the baby at nine months so that the child's vital organs can be taken for transplant"

Law of supply and demand seems particularly tempting here; so who makes the call as to whether this or that baby is the viable one, and which is to be sacrificed? After all, these are the folks responsible for the (notorious) Liverpool Pathway.

Thus far, this is only in the "proposal" stage.

Thus far.

[Hat Tip: Co-blogger Mike F]

Mid-Week Linkage Roundup

■ From the "Everything Old is New Again" Department: My late mother had Post-Polio Syndrome, a result of childhood exposure, but (thankfully) she never had the full-blown version of the dread disease. A common treatment for those that did was the so-called "iron-lung." Fortunately, we've long since eradicated polio, but FoIB Allison Bell warns that we may have to dig those old machines out of mothballs:

"Zika May Be Polio All Over Again ... the CDC concluded, “after careful review of existing evidence,” that “Zika virus is a cause of microcephaly and other severe fetal brain defects” in newborn infants."

Heads' up.

■ Co-Blogger Mike thinks that Belgium might be catching up to Sweden in the Bizzaro World medical tourism race:

"Euthanasia tourists are flocking to Brussels to get a lethal dose. Doctors at hospitals and clinics at Belgium’s capital are seeing an increase in number of euthanasia tourists who are travelling from across the world"

Supply and demand.

■ FoIB Jeff M first alerted us to troubles brewing for North Carolina's Blue Cross franchise back in May. Today he shares this update in the continuing saga:

"The N.C. Department of Insurance announced Monday it will broaden its investigation into Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, citing “disagreements” with the insurer."

At issue are continuing IT and claims processing issues.

Gotta love the tech.

■ And finally, via FoIB Holly R, this sad (and highly unusual) case from Great Britain (and for once, it's not about the MVNHS©):

"[A] 61-year-old British bagpipe player who developed a dry cough and breathlessness that worsened over a period of seven years ... He died several weeks after entering the hospital"

Turns out, several different - and deadly - fungi had taken up residence in his bagpipe, which he had neglected to clean. Truly sad, but perhaps a helpful warning to fellow pipers.

Death by Amazing Grace?

MVNHS© Update

It's been a while since we've checked in with those fun-loving rascals running the Much Vaunted National Health Service©. Last time we checked, those silly pranksters were busy ignoring the desperate pleas of a woman left to die by her "caregivers."

But that was then, and this is now, and they've moved on to much more productive things.

Such as denying necessary (if not urgent) surgeries, including hip replacements and cataract procedures. It's not they're they're being intentionally negligent, it's just that - get this - they've run out of money.

Hunh.

If you're a government-run health care system and you go broke, that's a problem, no?

But no worry, it'll never happen here.

But it's not just "routine" procedures getting tanked, ER's are taking hits, too:

"Shortage in emergency doctors leading to A&E crisis ... We have reached a crisis point"

So say the folks in charge of United Lincolnshire Hospitals.

Oh, those rascally nationalized health "care" schemes.

[[Hat Tip: FoIB Holly R]

Thursday Morning LinkFest

■ From the Everything Old is New Again Department:

Way back in Aught-Six, we reported on a groundbreaking plan called PACE, a self-funding option for small group:

"ACMG has developed a unique new product that brings the benefits of ERISA plans and the “stability” of fully insured plans to the small group market."

Almost a decade later (yesterday, to be precise), FoIB Jeff M alerted us to a "new" program called Level Funded Health:

"Level funded health plans appear like a hybrid between a traditional group health insurance plan along with a form of self-insurance."

LFH is available for groups with as few as 5 employees; being self-funded also means being able to duck some major ObamaTax requirements (which should help to keep the price down).

Methinks these types of plans will become more and more attractive as small group plans keep getting squeezed in the marketplace.

■ From the Annals of the MVNHS©:

"Tumors force 11-year-old boy to undergo mastectomy"

Turns out, this young lad apparently had several benign tumors in his chest, and recently became "the first child in the country to undergo a mastectomy."

He seems to be making a speedy recovery.

■ From the Medicinal Alcohol & Yogurt Department:

"A craft beer made with ingredients from kefir — a fermented milk drink that resembles yogurt— may sound a little gross. But drinking it could bring health benefits"

What benefits, you ask?

Well, reduced stomach inflammation and ulcers, for starters.

The bad news is that its effects have so far been tested only on rats, who apparently have no problem with the mixture.

Tastes great, less ulcers?

Sausage making at the MVNHS©

There's an old saying:

"Laws are like sausages: Better not to see them being made."

This seems to apply to how (at least one) nationalized "health" schemes work, as well. We've blogged on the shortcomings of the Much Vaunted National Health System© for many, many years; one thing we've consistently pointed out is that perhaps the most insidious form of health care rationing (and under any national health care scheme care is rationed) is the use of wait times to "cull the herd" of the most needy.

But don't just take our word for it; thanks to co-blogger Bob, we have access to "A Guide to Health Cover for the Self-Employed." Don't let the title fool you: the critical issues addressed apply equally to those who work for someone else.  And what's the Number 1 issue?

"Waiting times to see a doctor are lengthening – 70% of GPs surveyed for the Royal College of General Practitioners said patients will have to wait longer to see them over the next two years"

[ed: And don't be getting too smug about that; the ObamaTax has it baked into the cake]

Now, there's a double-whammy for self-employed folks: the obvious (and shared one) of 'care delayed is care denied,' but there's the additional onus that "[w]hile an employee with a sympathetic employer can easily take the time off work for appointments, it’s not so easy if you are self-employed."

Lotta truth there.

I was also bemused by this little observation:

"[T]he service we remain so justly proud of is cracking under the strain of an increasing population and a curb on expenditure"

Denial: not just a river.

MVNHS© Infighting: "Vultures" vs Rats

First up, the scavengers:

"Vulture lawyers bleed the NHS for £418m: Their sickening fees in one year are enough to hire 19,000 nurses"

As here, British barristers often append outsized fees to relatively modest awards. In some cases, they've been willing to (dramatically) reduce their "take," but only after being "forced to accept" the lower amount.

Meantime, those who actually provide the care that's under scrutiny are abandoning ship in droves:

"More than four out of 10 doctors are planning to practise medicine overseas and levels of workplace stress have risen across the profession"

Of course they are: under nationalized health care schemes such as the Much Vaunted National Health Service©, doc's are limited as to how much they can earn, and often forced to work longer hours. Why wouldn't they start looking elsewhere?

And of course, if they're going to end up being sued for the care they do provide, where exactly is the incentive to tough it out?

[Hat Tip: FoIB Hilly R]

MVNHS© vs Cancer: You win!

If one wishes to see the (near) future of health care here in the US, one need only look Across the Pond to the Much Vaunted National Health Service©:

"Thousands of cancer patients to be denied treatment

Common drugs for breast, bowel, prostate, pancreatic and blood cancer will no longer be funded by the NHS following sweeping cutbacks"

Over 5,000 victims "beneficiaries" of that nationalized healthcare scheme will no longer receive the life-saving meds they need, and for which they relied on (apparently worthless) government promises. Round after round of cuts have been imposed as the system becomes increasingly unsustainable.

And why is that?

Well, one reason is the "sudden" influx of folks with no previous (or current, apparently) skin in the game. Another is a long-standing, downward trend in the actual delivery of care.

Something about getting what you pay for....

[Hat Tip: Co-blogger Bob V]

Un(?)Intended Consequences: Deathwatch edition

Last spring, we noted a new Golden State law essentially legalizing assisted suicide. At the time, we remarked only that it served as a convenience for those so inclined to save the airfare to Switzerland.

But of course, slippery slopes are, well, slippery, and now we have an insurance carrier who took the new law to its logical (if macabre) conclusion:

"[O]ne young mother says her insurance company denied her coverage for chemotherapy treatment after originally agreeing to provide the fiscal support for it, but indicated it would be willing to pay for assisted suicide instead."

This really shouldn't come as any great surprise: after all, it's simply the logical outcome of the ObamaTax's IPAB provision. How's that, you ask?

Well, as we've noted before, that feature is really just our version of the MVNHS©'s Liverpool Pathway. Admittedly, that's actually the heavy hand of government implementing the law as written, but is it demonstrably different in this case? After all, the insurer is simply following the guidelines set forth by the state as to whom is worthy of life-extending treatment.

O Brave New World, indeed.

[Hat Tip: Ace of Spades]

MVNHS© *still* hates young people

To be fair, they hate old folks, too, but The Much Vaunted National Health Service© seems to have a special place in the spot where their hearts should be for young people:

"A newlywed in Leeds, Britain, died about 18 months after developing a relentless itch all over her body, which doctors mistook as scabies or allergies but was actually a symptom of bile duct cancer"

And for the record: no, lotions and balms won't cut it versus chemo. By the time these rocket surgeons finally figured out that it was, in fact, cancer, it was too late and the poor woman passed away soon after. And lest we turn a cold eye, it would be well to remember that this type of health "care" scheme is the end goal of The ObamaTax.

Sleep tight.

MVNHS© circling the drain?

Earlier this month, we noted the financial difficulties facing the Much Vaunted National Health Service©, and observed that if you're a government-run health care system and you're going broke, that's a problem. But it's not the only problem - lack of self-awareness is also strong:

"Yet oddly, rationing is not entirely dead. It is alive and well and making a comeback in our “precious” National Health Service." [emphasis added]

Just now noticing that, Jeremy? Had you been a regular IB reader, you'd have seen examples for years. Better late than never, one supposes. And he does, in fact, make an extraordinarily brilliant point:

"In a tax-funded health care system, the normal, self-limiting rules of supply and demand don’t apply."

Which is exactly right, and we're already seeing signs of it here, with only a partially government run health care scheme:

"A majority of new enrollees are considered high risk, meaning insurers will have to spend more money on people in poor health and requiring expensive  care."

Mr Warner goes on to point out three "new elements" that have entered the picture: mass communication, an aging society, and ever-growing, ever-changing tech. Notice the elephant in the room that he doesn't mention?

[Hat Tip: FoIB Peter K]

The MVNHS© Strikes Back

Emphasis on "strikes:"

"Tens of thousands of junior doctors, a term that covers medical professionals with as much as a decade of experience, were believed to have refused to work, providing only emergency coverage because of a dispute over pay and working conditions"

This is the oft-overlooked truth about nationalized health care schemes: the providers become employees of the state ("who pays the piper calls the tune"), and are thus subject to said government's whims. In this case, some 4,000 elective procedures, including hip and knee replacements, were put off; one wonders how many patients' symptoms are now even worse.

And I certainly didn't know this, despite being a long-time student of the Much Vaunted National Health Service©:

"[D]octors are officially required to work a 48-hour week"

So let's see: the government tells doc's how much they must work (and that's a pretty heavy load), and how much they'll be paid. Seems like there should be a term for that.

But, hey: Free health care.