 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Breast Cancer / October 2003Mastectomy Legislation
IN GOD WE TRUST. > MASTECTOMY LEGISLATION > > Important info for all women: Please forward this to everyone in your address book. This is a time when our voices and choices should be heard. This takes about 30 seconds to vote on this issue...and send it on to others you know who will do the same. > There's a bill called the Breast Cancer Patient Protection Act which will require insurance companies to cover a minimum 48-hour hospital stay for patients undergoing a mastectomy. It's about eliminating the > "drive-through mastectomy" where women are forced to go home hours after surgery against the wishes of their doctor, still groggy from anesthesia and sometimes with drainage tubes still attached. > Lifetime Television has put this bill on their web page with a petition drive to show your support. Last year over half the House signed on. > PLEASE!!!! Sign the petition by clicking on the web site below andhelp women with breast cancer get the care they need and deserve!! > There is no cost or monetary pledge involved. You need not give more than your name and zip code number. http://www.lifetimetv.com/reallife/bc/pledges/bc_mast_pledge.html > PLEASE PASS THIS ON. THANKS > > It's easy; you only have to give name and zip code. > > There's a bill called the Breast Cancer Patient Protection Act which will > require insurance companies to cover a minimum 48-hour hospital stay for > patients undergoing a mastectomy. There's always going to be a push and pull between those who provide services and those who pay for them, and sometimes the result will not be good. But do we really want legislation to cover the minimum hospital stay for each and every procedure? Don't we have enough laws on the books already? >There's a bill called the Breast Cancer Patient > Protection Act which will [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > for each and every procedure? Don't we have > enough laws on the books already? Yes we do but unfortunately, they aren't always the "right" laws when it comes to what is best for our medical care. I have already writtten to all my reps and senators and anyone else I think can help with this issue. Unless you have been a "victim" of one of those "drive through" fiascos, you may not be able to unappreciate the experience of the ordeal. Even with the best of doctors, it can be a very frightening experience for a woman. It at least should be left to the decision of the doctor and patient as to whether they feel they need the extra day, IMO and not in the control of the insurance companies. Bea <magna95@webtv.net> wrote in message news:27240-3F7A486B-613@storefull-> It at least should be left to the decision of > the doctor and patient as to whether they feel they need the extra day, > IMO and not in the control of the insurance companies. > > Bea Yes, but if there's to be a law surely it should say just that in a general way and not specify that for this particular procedure a minimum hospital stay of such and such is required. I know that we've been through this before, but here we are again. I once more would like to voice my opinion that I think that this is a BAD idea. Unless there is a medical reason why someone must remain in the hospital, I think that they should be released as soon as possible. The worst place to be is in the hospital among all those germs. My older sister is a nurse (and has been since the late '60s so she's been around a bit) and she helped get me free ASAP following my mastectomy. Perhaps people who have not had this surgery hear the word "mastectomy" and, not knowing what a simple procedure it usually is, think that a "drive through mastecotmy" is a travesty. It's a YMMV deal. Some people may have to remain hospitalized if they have problems but the majority will be able to go home very quickly. To vote in legislation that forces people to stay in the hospital for X amount of days just doesn't make sense, both for the patient and for the insurance industry. ...lisa >To vote in legislation that forces people to stay > in the hospital for X amount of days just > doesn't make sense, both for the patient and > for the insurance industry. >...lisa Lisa, the way I understood it was that the legislation is not to force people to stay in the hospital longer than their doctors decide upon but that the decision is "up to the doctor" and if he or she feels the patient needs that extra day then their medical insurance should pay for it. It also isn't fair that the insurance industry should make this decision and refuse payment if the patient needs the extra day. If the insurance industry would cooperate there would be no need for government involvement and that would be best for all of us. Bea For what it's worth, it's the insurance companies that don't want patients to stay any longer than necessary. They went through this with mothers giving birth and discovered if the mother opted to stay an extra day, they were less likely to be paying for visits back to the hospital, ER, or doctor because mother and baby went home too soon. Having legislation doesn't mean they have to stay, only that they can if they want. A lot of people require a very short stay due to a variety of factors. Others don't bounce back as well, have no one at home to help them, and would benefit from staying an extra night. I have been hospitalized three times, twice I felt I could have benifited from just 1 more day. Instead, they literally kicked me out telling me that my insurance company would not cover any additional time. :-) SssynSmrt wrote << I have been hospitalized three times, twice I felt I could have benifited from just 1 more day. Instead, they literally kicked me out telling me that my insurance company would not cover any additional time. It shouldn't be a blanket policy either way but on an individual case basis at the discretion of the physician based on the individual needs of that patient and any other involved, related circumstances. Period! > I have been hospitalized three times, twice I felt I could have benifited from > just 1 more day. Instead, they literally kicked me out telling me that my > insurance company would not cover any additional time. Dear God is this the American Way? Medical decisions taken out of the hands of the MD and made in the boardroom of some insurance company. I pray that I will no longer be practicing by the time this crap washes up on european shores..  Signaturemadiba |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.