Linking Health Care

Add a Comment

Comment by Bill Kovach on March 15, 2009 at 12:55pm

NOt a bad Idea Vince - I"ll check it out

Comment by Lee Gerber on May 21, 2008 at 5:27pm

Women struggle to pay for health care
May 21, 2008

More women than men say paying for health care is a challenge, according to a survey by the Guardian Life Insurance Company of America, a provider of employee and voluntary benefits.
For example, 58% of women were more likely to find paying for health care premiums and out-of-pocket costs a struggle, compared to men (47%).
"As women continue to make strides in the workforce and gain earning parity with men, this may help to lessen the gender discrepancy we see with paying for health care," says Tim Bireley, vice president of group medical at Guardian
In the survey, however, women (51%) are more likely, compared to men (42%), to have done some retirement health care planning.

Despite the findings, Bireley believes that the need and opportunity to educate consumers about health care transcends gender.

"We have to make sure that employees are fully absorbing information. We have to consistently surround the consumers and share information with them at several touch points until they have a solid understanding of their health care benefits," he adds.

Guardian, which surveyed 473 individuals employed either full-time or part-time, also found that two-thirds of workers admit that health care plans, coverage and benefits are difficult to understand.

Moreover, respondents believe that the rising costs of health care, in part, can be contributed to: profits of drug companies (28%), lawsuits against physicians (14%), poor health of the population (10%), physician fees and salaries (9%) and obesity (9%).

Comment by Lee Gerber on May 15, 2008 at 5:46pm

WASHINGTON, May 8 -- The American Medical Association issued the following news release:

The American Medical Association (AMA) urged Congress to take immediate action to avert looming Medicare physician payment cuts that will harm seniors'' access to care in testimony today to the House Small Business Committee. AMA Board Member Cecil Wilson, MD, highlighted the impact the cuts will have on the many physicians who are small business owners.

"There''s no doubt that the Medicare cuts will hurt seniors as physicians are forced to make practice changes to keep their medical practice doors open," said Dr. Wilson. "Half of the physician practices in the nation have less than five physicians, yet they account for 80 percent of all patient visits to the doctor''s office."

An AMA survey found that 60 percent of physicians would be forced to limit the number of new Medicare patients they can treat if this year''s 10.6 percent cut goes into effect this July as planned. Over a year and half the cut grows to over 15 percent, and the future for seniors'' access to care is dire - unless Congress acts.

Comment by Johnnie Mesaros on May 5, 2008 at 7:03pm

Hi Lee,
Great talking to you and I've looked at your website. It really offers a great value to many people.Good luck going forward.
Also I'd be honored to have you and the other members join my group at http://www.opennetworkers.info/group/onEntrepreneurs.
And I'd like to take pass on a very import message about an FDA recall on Digitek( a brand of digoxin). See my blog post for the full article http://pharmacyinsights.blogspot.com/
Thanks Lee,
Johnnie Mesaros RPh

Comment by Lee Gerber on May 4, 2008 at 8:13am

Even the Insured Feel the Strain of Health Costs

By REED ABELSON and MILT FREUDENHEIM
Published: May 4, 2008 New York Times

The economic slowdown has swelled the ranks of people without health insurance. But now it is also threatening millions of people who have insurance but find that the coverage is too limited or that they cannot afford their own share of medical costs.
Many of the 158 million people covered by employer health insurance are struggling to meet medical expenses that are much higher than they used to be — often because of some combination of higher premiums, less extensive coverage, and bigger out-of-pocket deductibles and co-payments.
With medical costs soaring, the coverage many people have may not adequately protect them from the financial shock of an emergency room visit or a major surgery. For some, even routine doctor visits might now take a back seat to basic expenses like food and gasoline.
“It just keeps eating into people’s income,” said James Corbin, a former union official who works for the local utility in Tucson.
Mr. Corbin said that under their employer’s health plan, he and his co-workers are now obliged to pay up to $4,000 of their families’ annual medical bills, on top of about $1,600 a year in premiums. Five years ago, they paid no premiums and were responsible for only about $2,000 of their families’ medical bills.
“That’s a big jump,” Mr. Corbin said. “You’ve just lost a month’s pay.”
Already, many doctors say, the soft economy is making some insured people hesitant to get care they need, reluctant to spend a $50 co-payment for an office visit. Parents “are waiting longer to bring in their children,” said Dr. Richard Lander, a pediatrician in Livingston, N.J. “They say, ‘The kid isn’t that sick; her temperature is only 102.’ ”
The problem of affording health care is most acute for people with no insurance, a group expected to soon exceed 48 million, but those with insurance say they too are feeling the pain.
Since the recession of 2001, the employee’s average cost of an annual health care premium for family coverage has nearly doubled — to $3,300, up from $1,800 — while incomes have come nowhere close to keeping up. Factor in other out-of-pocket medical costs, and the portion of the average American household’s income that goes toward health care has risen about 12 percent, according to the consulting and accounting firm Deloitte, and is now approaching one-fifth of the average household’s spending.
In a recent survey by Deloitte’s health research center, only 7 percent of people said they felt financially prepared for their future health care needs.
Shirley Giarde of Walla Walla, Wash., was not prepared when her husband, Raymond, suddenly developed congestive heart failure last year and needed a pacemaker and defibrillator. Because his job did not provide health benefits, she has covered them both through a policy for the self-employed, which she obtained as the proprietor of a bridal and formal-wear store, the Purple Parasol.
But when Raymond had his medical problems, Ms. Giarde discovered that her insurance would cover only $22,000, leaving them with about $100,000 in unpaid hospital bills.
Even though the hospital agreed to reduce that debt to about $50,000, Ms. Giarde is still struggling to pay it — in part because the poor economy has meant slumping sales at the Purple Parasol. Her husband, now disabled and unable to work, will not qualify for Medicare for another year, and she cannot afford the $758 a month it would cost to enroll him in a state-run insurance plan for individuals who cannot find private insurance.
She recently refinanced her car, a 2002 Toyota Highlander, to help pay for her husband’s heart medicines, which cost some $400 a month.
Experts say that too often for the underinsured, coverage can seem like health insurance in name only — adequate only as long as they have no medical problems.
“There’s a real shift in the burden of health care to people who happen to be sick,” said Paul B. Ginsburg, the president of the Center for Studying Health System Change, a research group in Washington.
Companies and policy makers have yet to focus on what the faltering economy means for employees’ medical care, said Helen Darling, president of the National Business Group on Health, a Washington association of about 200 large employers.
“It’s a bad-news situation when an individual or household has to pay out-of-pocket three, four or five times as much for their health plan as they would have at the time of the last recession,” she said. “Americans have been giving their pay raise to the health care system.”
Sage Holben, a 62-year-old library technician with diabetes who is active in her local union in St. Paul, says that in 2003 union members agreed to a two-year freeze on wages to protect their health care coverage. But for the union, which will begin talks on the next contract this fall, it may be difficult to continue that trade-off, Ms. Holben said. “It’s at the point where we’re losing, anyway,” she said.
“I live paycheck to paycheck,” said Ms. Holben, who makes close to $40,000 a year at Metropolitan State University.
When she took the job in 1999, she says, the health benefits required no co-payments for doctor visits. Now, her out-of-pocket cost per visit is $25, and she pays $38 a month for her diabetes medicine. She has not been to the eye doctor in two years, even though eye exams are crucial for people with diabetes and she knows she needs new glasses. Nor does she monitor her blood sugar as regularly as she should because of the cost of the supplies.
“It’s not an extravagant expense,” she said. “It just adds up.” And it comes atop the increasing cost of utilities, gasoline and food — and the few hundred dollars of repairs her 1994 Chevrolet Cavalier needs.
Many employers do recognize that their workers are struggling financially even as they are asking them to pick up more of their health-care bills.
“It makes the work we have to do even more challenging,” said Anne Silverman, the vice president in charge of benefits in North America for the publishing company Reed Elsevier. “Employees are being stretched in terms of their disposable income.”
Even so, more companies may see themselves as having little choice but to require employees to pay even more of their health expenses, said Ted Nussbaum, a benefits consultant at the firm Watson Wyatt Worldwide. And when a weak economy undermines job security, he said, workers may simply have to accept reduced benefits.
While Mr. Nussbaum and other consultants say it is unlikely that significant numbers of employers will simply drop coverage for their workers, the weak economy could prompt more of them to push for so-called consumer-driven plans. Such plans tend to offset lower premiums with higher annual deductibles.
And while these plans often allow employees to put pre-tax savings into special health care accounts, they typically end up forcing the worker to assume a bigger share of overall medical costs. About six million people are now enrolled in these medical plans.
Among employers, the hardest pressed may be small businesses. Their insurance premiums tend to be proportionately higher than ones paid by large employers, because small companies have little bargaining clout with insurers.
Health costs are “burying small business,” said Mike Roach, who owns a small clothing store in Portland, Ore. He recently testified on health coverage at a Senate hearing led by Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon.
Last year, Mr. Roach paid about $27,000 in health premiums for his eight employees. “It’s a huge chunk of change,” he said, noting that he was forced to raise his employees’ yearly deductible by 50 percent, to $750.
Around the nation, some workers are simply priced out of their employee health plans.
After Brian Falacienski of Milton, Fla., was laid off last year from his job as a surveyor for a construction company, he found another position. But the cost of his new health plan — $800 a month for coverage with a $1,000 annual deductible — was beyond the means of Mr. Falacienski, 38, who is married and has a 2-year-old daughter.
His wife, Marianne, started researching individual insurance policies and was able to find policies for her husband and daughter offering basic, if minimal, coverage, costing $161 a month for father and daughter. But Ms. Falacienski, 32, who has arthritis and the severe digestive disorder Crohn’s disease, is now uninsured. Because of her conditions, she said, four major insurers rejected her.
“I even applied for Medicaid,” she said, “but I wasn’t low-income enough.”

Comment by Lee Gerber on April 26, 2008 at 12:04pm

Vincent,

Thank you for the invitaton. looking forward to working with your network partners.
Lee