Who/ How will Doctor's be convinced to take new Medicare patients when many are already refusing

[waterscalm]

new patients? I know of several clinics and doctors in my area who have already recently stopped taking new
Medicare patients and I am sure some of you do also.

Also, its a whole year before anyone without insurance now can enroll in this Senate plan. NOT GOOD AT ALL. --for the indivduals and families.

NOR is it good politically with the upcoming 2010 mid term elections.

And what about those who are under 55 years of age? At least the House plan had the "high risk pool" beginning in 2010.






http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/democrats-trade-opt-out-for-trigger-medicare-buy-in-and-more.php

............hat buy-in option would initially be made available to some uninsured people aged 55-64 in 2011, three years before the exchanges open. For the period between 2011 and 2014, when the exchanges do open, the Medicare option will not be subsidized--people will have to pay in without federal premium assistance--and so will likely be quite expensive, the aide noted. However, after the exchanges launch, the Medicare option would be offered in the exchanges, where people could pay into it with their subsidies. It appears as if liberals lost out on a Medicaid expansion that would have opened the program up to everybody under 150 percent of the poverty line. That ceiling will likely remain at 133 percent, as is called for in the current bill.................





http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/09/AR2009120904636.html?hpid=topnews


....................

Lawmakers remained wary of the objections of hospital and doctor groups, which have considerable influence on Capitol Hill. The groups believe their members could be the big losers under the proposal to allow people as young as 55 to buy into Medicare, because the program pays providers at much lower rates than private insurers, and because older Americans are the greatest consumers of health-care services.

Hospital representatives said the idea also would violate a deal they reached with the White House this year to give up $155 billion in Medicare payments over the next decade. The concession helped to lower the cost of a health-care package that promised hospitals a pool of at least 30 million newly insured customers.

"Such a policy will further negatively impact hospitals, after we have already agreed to contribute the maximum level of sustainable reductions that community hospitals can reasonably endure," the Federation of American Hospitals said in an e-mail to its members. The American Hospital Association urged the 5,000 facilities and 37,000 individuals in its membership to lobby senators "to reject expansion of Medicare."
American Medical Association President J. James Rohack warned Wednesday on his blog that expanding Medicare would jeopardize access to physician services not only for near-retirees, but for millions of people older than 65 who already are covered by the federal plan..................

[waterscalm]

1. My my, an Unrec already. Care to say why you would not want to

discuss these important issues?

[grilled onions]

2. Have Already Experienced Refusals Because I'm On Medicare

You call their office and you get as far as "What insurance do you have?" I reply Medicare and they say "Sorry he/she isn't taking any/more Medicare patients. It's never at this time either. No exceptions. You have a chance if you had the same doctor before you go on Medicare but if you had no doctor you may discover you still don't! I did not notice this problem years ago and I have heard from others that their doctors even dropped long time patients "overnight" leaving many faithful customers out in the lurch for a new doctor.

[waterscalm]

4. Your story is familar. I too, have relatives in the

same boat. Now one drives about an hour and half just for an appointment (3 month wait).

[knitter4democracy]

7. According to everything I've read, doctors have to worry about their percentage.

If they have much above 50% Medicare patients, it really cuts into the bottom line. Medical Economics (memag.com) always warns about keeping an eye on your percentage of Medicare patients. The payments are low (Medicaid's worse), so doctors can lose money on a Medicare patient, depending on what they do.

[area51]

3. Medicare reimbursement

I've heard about Medicare reimbursement rates being low, and some doctors not taking in new patients. Considering that no cost is too great in waging two wars of choice, there's no excuse for not paying a decent amount of money into Medicare. Our most precious resource in the U.S. is our citizens; it's vital that we have a healthy populace.

[Kdillard]

5. I thought they were looking at changing the reimbursement rates

Because it has been a problem.

[waterscalm]

6. The House did-Pelosi pushed it but it failed in the end. I do not

think the Senate looked at it but maybe they did. Per the OP article it does not seem to be on the radar of the Senate.

[WeCanWorkItOut]

8. There's the option of more nurse practitioners

Part of the problem is that many people underrate NPs,
probably due to lack of access. If more people were allowed
to see them instead of GPs, I believe they'd soon find
that often NPs provide quality care at a better price.

And given how many MDs are going to be retiring soon,
it seems unreasonably greedy of them to object
to more NPs.

I don't think people should be forced to see NPs.
But when there's a choice between an experienced
NP and a long line for an inexperienced GP, it's silly
and expensive to deny people the NP option, as happens in many states.

Unfortunately I haven't heard Congress talking about that.

[DrToast]

9. Private insurance doesn't allow you to visit any doctor

What's the difference?

[xsquid]

11. The private insurances I have had do, just cover more at certain ones.

When you call all of a certain specialty dr in your city and none take medicare you will see the difference. When you go through the whole phone book and find 2 primary care dr's that will take you as a patient because you have medicare you will know. It's just lucky these 2 were new and needed patients. I know I only need one, but there's a lot of dr's here for that many not to take them. Big difference over private insurances I have had, I have blue cross with medicare and pretty much everyone takes it. I can't afford to use it alone though, with big medical problems (disabled).

[xsquid]

10. Excelent topic

I know here there are an increasing number of physicians that do not take medicare, I have rhumatoid arthritis and all of the rhumatologists have dropped their medicare patients (they all used to take it). Even dr's that do take medicare, most of them are taking no new ones at this time. I moved here a year ago and had to travel and wait 10 months to see a rhumatologists and only the newest internal medicine docs are taking new medicare patients. Nothing wrong with them at all, just had to call about all to find one. It's getting really hard.

[Clear Blue Sky]

12. Think it's bad now?

20+% Medicare cuts on schedule as of Jan 1. Medicare will become the new Medicaid.