Do you want an universal health care system in which you are forced to have mandatory check-ups?

[Colobo]

Simple question.

[daninthemoon]

1. Ounce of prevention

[democratsin08]

9. what about choice?

this is a little scary. this sounds like a payoff to big health care. do they own edwards?

[rodeodance]

20. well, I suspose some will choose to let health problems go unchecked until

their is damage----just for the sake of the sacred cow of choice!

[Hieronymus]

43. The question was about single payer, wasn't it? If you don't want to

have medical exams get private insurance.:eyes:

[rzemanfl]

2. Even though I have insurance, I avoid check ups. Like most men

I need to be forced or sick before I go to the doctor.

[keep_it_real]

8. Forced check ups are good for the health of the body . . .

Individually and collectively. A colonoscopy should be mandatory for everyone at 50 or over. A polyp in the stomach after a year turns to cancer. Nothing like a ASP test for prostate cancer. Or a good diabetes test. It's all good.

[rzemanfl]

28. PSA not ASP, but I get your point. n/t

[2rth2pwr]

37. Edwards campaign slogan- "Forced colonscopy for all!"

http://www.southparkstudios.com/downloads/display_sound.php?ep_number=101&ep_name=Cartman%20Gets%20an%20Anal%20Probe&snd=http://media.southparkstudios.com/media/sounds/101/101_aliencontrol.wav&snd_name=I%20know%20it%20was%20just%20a%20dream,%20I%20know%20I%20didn't%20have%20an%20anal%20probe...

It's all good.

[EFerrari]

3. I haven't had a physical since the late 80s.

Hell, yes.

[Timmy5835]

4. It would NEVER happen

Too expensive.

[More Than A Feeling]

5. Why don't you just write "OMG! 3v1L g0v3rnm3n7 c03rc10n!" on a 2x4

and jack us in the face repeatedly with it?

It'd be more subtle than this poll question.

[Forkboy]

7. LMAO

This story seems to be today's outrage du jour.

[smalll]

23. No, just this week's gaffe from the Edwardses.

They have a special talent.

[Forkboy]

26. If you say so,dear.

[kdmorris]

27. ROFL

I'm not even able to answer the idiotic question, I'm laughing so hard.

That was funny!!!

[Nutmegger]

30. LOL isn't that the truth!

:rofl:

[renie408]

54. Here's the thing....It's easy to get your panties in a wad because somebody wants to tell you what

to do with your own body. But..if I want to keep the warranty on my car, I have to take it in for routine maitenance. People who ignore physical problems until they are critical cost the healthcare system a bloody fucking fortune. If being proactive and responsible about my healthcare is what it would take to get free medical insurance, then yeah, I would be willing to do it.

[Raven]

6. I would just as soon not pay for other peoples' irresponsibility.

Everybody should get a yearly checkup. I figure if my government is going to provide me with decent healthcare, I should take some responsibility for my own health. It's not big brother, it's common sense and preventative healthcare.

[rodeodance]

21. Nicely said.

[Catchawave]

32. Plus, Edwards plan covers your Well Visit too, most

private insurers don't.

[lligrd]

33. This Is Pure BS

People who live longer cost more. Therefore, I would be the one paying for your responsiblity.

[jmp]

34. Sounds like the GOP case against welfare.

...

[plusfiftyfive]

38. Do you think this should apply to 18-30 year olds males?

Many of them do not have insurance, many of them go for several years without visiting a doctor.

I wonder why we would require EVERY body to get a yearly check-up, I would say after 30, or after 40, a yearly check-up might be wise. But for younger people, maybe every two years?

Just a thought

[enough already]

41. I for one don't trust the government with my health records

Maybe it would be ok if a Democrat was in office, but we know that the pukes will get their hands on them at some point.

[GreenArrow]

45. the mandatory Romney plan in Massachusetts

already allows for that. So long as the moneyed interests are involved, it's safe to expect that Edwards' will too.

[scrinmaster]

10. What happens if someone doesn't want to go to the doctors?

Do you force them? Fine them? Arrest them?

[CTyankee]

13. Guess what? Medicare already does fine you if

you don'thave coverage and decline their Part B coverage, when you do sign up, you're charged more. The "fine" is a much higher monthly rate for coverage. If you decline because you already have coverage (as I do) then you let them know and that's okay. You can sign up later, after you no longer have the private plan and not be penalized with higher fees.

So let's all calm down about mandatory coverage. There is already a mechanism in place to discourage people from not going on Part B just to avoid paying anything and then getting in really bad shape. This way, you pay for your own damn irresponsibility.

[lynne]

11. Not enough info at present to really know -

- How often are the check-ups required? What do the check-ups entail? Blood work, urinalysis, MRI, EKG, etc? How much does the check-up cost and what portion am I required to pay? Who is authorized to do these checkups - my regular doc or a physician certified to do just these checkups? Will these check-up medical records become property of the government and who else has access to them?

Not willing to say "YES" until much more info is available.

[Tom Rinaldo]

12. Provide a true universal coverage single payer national health plan

...and I would probably agree to this as a precondition to receive "Free" (as in Michael Moore's common sense definition of "free") coverage. But if what is being talked about is a patch work quilt of incentives and tax write offs and employer provided health care plans with hefty employee co-payments, all designed to help the private sector insurance providers stay fat, then I think my answer is no.

[annabanana]

57. If it puts the HMO's and other thieving insurance scams out of work

maybe.

[Richard D]

14. I'm uncomfortable . . .

1. would a person be able to choose their own doctor?
2. What tests would be done? Drugs?
3. Who would be able to see these records?
4. Would any privacy regulations be in place?

Sounds like more record gathering abuse potential to me.

[havocmom]

15. So long as none of the lab work evaluation and medical transcription is outsourced

and that information is actually protected and secure, sure.

Not such a simple question when one actually thinks about what all can be done with medical information they think is kept private.

The outsourcing of a lot of medical processing work seems to be opening a lot of private information up for exploitation by corporations. That is not such a simple yes or no sort of consideration.

edited for clarity

[TwilightGardener]

16. Hell no. I don't want to be forced to do anything but pay taxes and die.

And I don't even like THOSE activities very much, LOL!

[LWolf]

17. Other:

I want universal, single-payer, NOT-FOR-PROFIT health care, which is not offered by Edwards, Clinton, OR OBAMA.

Simple answer: I want HR 676.

[xchrom]

18. yep.

[riona]

19. It wouldn't be anything new to me

I've been to plenty of offices that won't renew my prescriptions (which are only good for a year) until I have a check-up.

[rodeodance]

22. As of today I am a proud Edwards supporter. YUP. Preventive care is KEY

to decreasing future suffering and costs.

[lligrd]

24. Absolutely Not

I want my freedom and privacy back. Why the hell is everyone so willing to give these basic American rights up? Universal health care, yes - Forced health care, hell no.

[niyad]

25. NO, NO, NO!!!! for all the reasons stated below, and for the fact that western medicine has tried

to kill me three times. not giving them a shot at a fourth.

do the universal health care systems in the civilized countries have this requirement?

[AnotherGreenWorld]

42. Under Edwards's plan

we would almost certainly see doctors killing even more patients than they do now--currently killing at a rate of about 100,000 per year.

Maybe we would also see more murderers becoming doctors, because, hey, that's where the action's at. Plus, when you kill with an MD by your name, you get called a philanthropist.

[Crunchy Frog]

51. Apparently not.

At least not according to the Canadian, Australian, and Japanese posters that we've heard from. Americans seem to have a more authoritarian mindset though.

[LWolf]

29. And another other:

I want people who support plans to make for-profit insurance "more affordable" to quit calling their plans "universal health care."

[Greyhound]

31. Even as skewed as the question was purposely phrased, the answer is yes.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[cobalt1999]

35. No, I don't like being forced to do anything.

I especially don't like doctors.

I get hit by a bus, okay, take me to the emergency room. Otherwise, I'm not going near a doctor.

[supernova]

36. Except that it's a

standard preventative medicine technique, getting a check up every so often. We make newborns do it. We make you do it for certain jobs and for sports in school.

If you are talking about universal coverage, then it's a good idea to have everybody has healthy as possible, and get problems taken care of sooner, not just waiting until there is someting wrong with you to go.

To constantly whine that you don't have enough money to see the doc, then get the opportunity to go to the doc but still don't go because "somebody makes me," is nutso.

[SaveElmer]

39. Too big brotherish, and unecessary...

Will make it harder to sell the program, and the truth is not everyone needs a yearly exam...

I had a physical when I was 25, and the Doctor told me I wouldn't need another till I was 30...

Forcing yearly checkups for everyone would make the system cost more unnecessarily...

And the plain fact is, Americans don't like to be told what to do when it comes to personal stuff like that...it'll never fly...

[tokenlib]

40. If that were the prerequisite to get single payer--yes!

It would be a small price to pay for the greater good.

[GreenArrow]

44. correction to your title line

Edwards' is not "universal health care" it's a Mandatory Insurance Plan, meaning that it wouldn't simply be mandatory for you to get a checkup, it would be mandatory for you to participate in the plan. And it's horseshit.

He pushed this same shit back in 2004, 'cept then he only limited the mandatory part to children.

It's part of the same "personal responsibility" crap the Republicans have been using for decades to cast doubt and disdain on any kind of social program. Romney wanted to pull this shit in Massachusetts, but not even he went that far.

It's ass backwards. His plan would mandate that you, the consumer, er citizen, er schlep, buy into an health insurance plan, when the correct approach is to mandate that the government provides health care for you, the citizen.

[Cameron27]

52. Yep

[Savannahmann]

46. I don't like anything that is mandatory

For discussion, what happens when someone doesn't attend their annual physical? Are they thrown out of the universal health care system? Are they punished? Fined? What happens if you have to work that day, self employed, an emergency, whatever. You can't attend, do we arrest those who are refusing to attend?

Additionally, what about treatment options. Let's say for the sake of argument that you are diagnosed with cancer. You look at your options and tell the Doctor that you don't like the chemotherapy approach, it is too scary for you. You prefer radiation and other medication. Does the doctor now have the authority to over-rule your choice? Can he say "I think you'll be going to the chemo, the survival rate is better."

Mandatory anything takes the freedom of choice from us, and choice is what freedom is all about. If we take the huge step of mandatory physicals, how long before it's mandatory treatments as dictated by the doctor?

[AtomicKitten]

47. "Mandatory???????????"

You're kidding, right?

That will go over in the GE like a lead balloon.

Bravo!

[1932]

48. For people who pay a fortune to see a doctor after waiting months only to find they have late stage

cancer, I'm thinking the answer might be yes.

[yurbud]

49. is this test marketing for the anti-single payer campaign? If so, it's pretty lame

[napi21]

50. I believe check-ups should be covered by a national HC system, but

I don't think it should be mandatory for everyone to get one! That would be foolish and simply a windfall for all the GP's in the US.

[avrdream]

53. I don't mind the mandatory check-ups as much as the penalty for not doing them.

It just doesn't seem right to me as a doctor to punish patients for taking their time to come in and get care.

And what am I supposed to do, just turn them away because they won't be able to make that massive penalizing payment?

If patients know that they are going to have to pay this massive bill because they didn't get the MANDATORY check-up, do you think they are then going to come in and get seen? And, if they DO decide to suck it up and come get seen, who is going to pay that massive bill when they patient either dies from waiting too long or decides to just not pay?????

The current system allows patients to walk away from their bills and not a DAMN THING HAPPENS. Why do you think John Edwards' system will work?

:grr:

[renie408]

55. Let's think about this...

If the patient doesn't have medical insurance to being with, then they are going to have to pay a 'massive' bill if they go to the doctor for just about anything. So, really, your non-check up patient is pretty much in the same boat they were in when they didn't have insurance. AND most people will be incented to get check ups which will save their lives and over all save money.

[avrdream]

56. See my previous posts about the Australian system.

Nothing mandatory, just universal health care, available when you need it. Is there something wrong with offering that to Americans?

Sorry, but my overwhelming frustration with the U.S. system is coming through in my posts. I moved down here to practice because I was so sick of this government and the way it ignored the plights of not just patients but also those in the health care profession.

It just doesn't have to be mandatory, is all.

[ArkySue]

58. Sounds vaguely Stalinesque, but

I don't know the particulars. "Mandatory" anything by the Government worries me.