Sunday School

[Unseen]

@Robert

For me, with my rent and food costing more and more, saving money is a major consideration. I make the sort of decisions one on a small income has to make.

Aside from diabetes, I have other health issues and work with several different specialists for vision, cardiac care, podiatric care, a history of intestinal polyps (so far, benign), and suspicious lesions on my vocal cords, I am seeing a doctor once or twice a month, typically. I also need dental and vision care.

Anyway, below is a link to the plan I’ll probably go for in 2023. It’s much the same plan I have now.  Probably just go and look on pages 15-18 where the plan is laid out in a chart format. BTW, this plan is one of two 5-star plans, the other being Kaiser-Permanente who I was with last year, also 5-star. What tipped the scale was that Providence is practically giving insulin away largely, as I said above, for the cost of shipping.

https://tinyurl.com/mry8b3cy

You’ll see that I get a lot of coverage for not that much money. I just don’t have the out-of-pocket oomph to switch to a Medicare Supplement Plan. If I did, I’d likely go for it.

[_Robert_]

Yeah, everybody’s situation is unique. When it is time, I will do a huge spreadsheet to evaluate all the options. I have a financial sheet that calculates all my investments daily and projects 30 years into the future based on current data.

Right now, we still have a subsidized Obamacare plan and we are very happy with it. Too bad we can’t just stay on it.

[—]

Unseen wrote:

Regarding We don’t want your Catholic god in charge of our healthcare. Under my Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage Plan), which is run by a local healthcare network backed by The Cuddly One’s riches, I’m better off going to one of their hospitals than to the local Christopher Hitchens Memorial Hospital basically because there isn’t one.

There are likely no atheist or humanist organizations that have amassed the absurd amount of wealth as the Catholic Church. There are individual donors and patrons such as Bill and Melinda Gates, though they came up in a time where private donors were more useful in funding expansions and upgrades for existing health care systems rather than establishing their own.

Most hospitals in the US are secular. Of the hospitals affiliated with or owned by religious organizations, the Catholic Church does hold the largest share. But even if few Catholic hospitals are for profit, that doesn’t mean they are running their hospitals at a deficit. They receive government funding and, of course, insurance payments.

If these hospitals ran like any others without discrimination, it might not be an issue. But when it comes to things like women’s reproductive health, medical aid in dying, trans care and others, Catholic hospitals are known to discriminate.

The article Reg linked is pay-walled for me so I can’t read it. From the snippet I could see and from the author’s social media, I gather the concern was the Catholic church acquiring secular health care facilities or possibly receiving public funding to build facilities when they are allowed to discriminate against various segments of the population.

If there were once a charitable aspect to the construction of Catholic hospitals, those days might have largely been left behind us. I am sure they are not wholly evil and that they do some good, but as long as it comes with discriminatory strings attached, it’s a cause for concern.

[jakelafort]

And there are crosses, big fat ugly crosses, in each room. Fuck them and the horse they rode in on but exempt the horse from bad treatment. I like horseys. nnnnnnnhhhhhhhhhhh.

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

Once again I am not sure why the WP article is pay-walled for you as it is fully available to me (not all are) and I have no sub to it. So I did a copy&paste and embedded most of its links.

……………………………………………………………………………………………

Let’s say a patient is considering a tubal ligation after a planned Caesarean section because she doesn’t want to get pregnant again. Here are some factors that pertain to that decision: her vision of her reproductive future, her doctor’s advice, state regulations, the recommendations of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the latest scientific research.

Here are some factors that, for most patients, do not pertain: “God’s purposes,” “God’s will,” “the truth that life is a precious gift from God.”

But if our hypothetical patient happens to be in a Catholic hospital, those factors — precisely those words — will be controlling the decision, whether or not she or her doctor believes in God’s plan. It’s plainly spelled out in the ethical directives of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops: “Direct sterilization of either men or women, whether permanent or temporary, is not permitted in a Catholic health care institution.” She won’t get the operation no matter how medically safe and legal it is, no matter what she wants.

Clearly, she should have picked a different hospital. But with the expansion of Catholic health systems all over the country, that might not be an option. A 2020 report by Community Catalyst, a non-profit health advocacy group, found that four of the 10 largest health systems in the country were Catholic. The Catholic Health Association says that Catholic facilities now account for more than 1 in 7 U.S. hospital patients.

That number is likely to grow, as Catholic health systems expand by merging with or acquiring secular hospitals and networks. This consolidation is happening near me, in the Albany, N.Y., area. As the Times Union recently reported, one of our large health systems, St. Peter’s Health Partners, part of a Catholic network, has begun merging with the secular Ellis Medicine, which will ultimately put “God’s will” in charge of Ellis Hospital and the Bellevue Woman’s Center, which provides pregnancy and maternity care.

That would mean no tubal ligations for contraceptive purposes. It would also mean no abortions, vasectomies, IUDs or in vitro fertilization. It would most likely constrain choices in end-of-life care and end gender-affirming care.

A patient deciding where to have her C-section — even if she still had a choice of hospitals — might not even know this. Why would she assume that a nonprofit hospital, buoyed by large infusions of state and federal funds, could legally withhold health care from its patients?

But that’s exactly what happens when the church has the ultimate say in medical decisions. Not just at hospitals, either: Urgent care centers and physicians’ practices that are part of a Catholic network might well refuse to prescribe birth control, or to provide abortion services or counseling.

New York State has taken pains to protect reproductive rights, beginning with the 2019 Reproductive Health Act, which codified the right to abortion. As state after state passes abortion bans in the wake of Roe v. Wade’s fall, I often think, selfishly, thank goodness I live in New York.

But I still live in the Commonwealth of Religious Deference, where rules can be broken and citizens can be denied basic services as long as someone has decided that’s the way God wants it.

Some lawmakers are pushing back. One recent bill sponsored by New York state Sen. Michelle Hinchey, which has passed the Senate and awaits an Assembly vote, would require that hospitals publish a list of “policy-based exclusions,” detailing the care they will not provide, on their websites. In Oregon, a new law gives state officials the authority to block hospital mergers that would result in restricted health-care access.

But beneath these efforts lies unchallenged the notion that Catholic hospitals are within their rights to deny care. That religious organizations, despite their public funding, do not have to abide by secular standards.

Blue states? Secular country? Doesn’t matter. The most shocking recent evidence that even New Yorkers live in a State of God Knows Best is a devastating New York Times report on the state’s Hasidic schools, which teach Jewish law and tradition but little English or math. In 2019, 99 percent of the thousands of Hasidic boys who took state standardized tests failed. Meanwhile, New York’s yeshivas receive plenty of education funding — “more than $1 billion” in government money over the past four years. Religious leaders systematically denied their students the constitutionally protected opportunity for a “sound basic education,” and political leaders let it happen.

Or at least they did. The New York State Board of Regents recently voted to require private schools to prove they were teaching basic subjects or else risk forfeiting public funding. Whether that rule will be enforced remains to be seen. But it’s a start.

I’d like to see the New York State Department of Health take the same approach to health networks: Prove you are providing patients with all the care that modern medicine has made possible, state law has made feasible and the Affordable Care Act has deemed essential, and you’ll get your tax exemptions and your Medicaid payments.

And if you happen to have a patient who believes contraception contravenes the will of God? She can choose not to get her tubes tied.

[Unseen]

jakelafort wrote:

And there are crosses, big fat ugly crosses, in each room. Fuck them and the horse they rode in on but exempt the horse from bad treatment. I like horseys. nnnnnnnhhhhhhhhhhh.

Crosses? Not my experience. Rather Father So-and-So comes in to ask if I’m one of the flock. I say no and he goes away. Haven’t seen any nuns, either.

[jakelafort]

It is exactly as one might expect. Goody two shoes with conditions on their largesse; plus policies that interfere and obstruct the doc/patient relationship and the expectation of secular policies. It is arguably unconstitutional to have the feds giving money to the religious hospitals.

Fuckerz. It is never live and let live. It is how can i impose on you the nonbeliever?

[jakelafort]

Ok Unseen. That is news to me. I assumed cuz i had seen it in two Catholic hospitals that it was universal. Teaches me to paint with a broad brush.

[Unseen]

@Reg

Many sites don’t start enforcing their paywall until you’ve read a certain number of stories, like two or five. I run into that all the time. Then I just look for other sources quoting them.

[—]

Unseen wrote:

jakelafort wrote:

And there are crosses, big fat ugly crosses, in each room. Fuck them and the horse they rode in on but exempt the horse from bad treatment. I like horseys. nnnnnnnhhhhhhhhhhh.

Crosses? Not my experience. Rather Father So-and-So comes in to ask if I’m one of the flock. I say no and he goes away. Haven’t seen any nuns, either.

I’ve seen crosses inside patient rooms in Catholic hospitals, but I also know some have elected to remove them. I’ve read accounts from people where religion was quite pronounced during their stay, and others where people hadn’t the slightest clue they were in a Catholic hospital until after the fact. I’d assume it’s quite varied.

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

I do some non-medical work in various hospitals. In the past when walking around an Irish hospital one would see a large wooden crucifix in almost every ward and hallway, with a small church on site and “sisters” everywhere. Priests would just wander into any room they wanted to and start preaching or praying at you. Well Fuck that.

In one hospital I worked in, I had use of a small office beside the public prayer room. It is now open to all faiths to use with no iconography. But before that happened it was just for Catholics. It is a bit secluded from the main wards areas so when I would walk by it, I would pretend to get an electric shock and stagger a bit. The guy I worked with hated me for this but I kept it going (Yes, very mature of me :-)) as he would not shut up about his Jesus to me.

Once, because it was now a habit of mine, I did this when passing it on my own. I looked left to see 2 nuns glaring at me. I kept the faux painful look going and they seemed very confused. Priceless!

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

Give him a fair trial and then lock him up!

[—]

jakelafort wrote:

It is exactly as one might expect. Goody two shoes with conditions on their largesse; plus policies that interfere and obstruct the doc/patient relationship and the expectation of secular policies.

What’s shitty is in some hospitals they won’t even give referrals so patients can get the care they need elsewhere in a timely manner. If even that is morally objectionable, then one just can’t be in the business of running hospitals.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-reproductive-catholic-hospital-idUSKCN10R2D2

It is arguably unconstitutional to have the feds giving money to the religious hospitals. Fuckerz. It is never live and let live. It is how can i impose on you the nonbeliever?

There was a recent case in California where a Catholic hospital refused care to a transgender man seeking a hysterectomy. The refusal was found to be in contravention of California’s non-discrimination statutes. However, the Supreme Court declined to review the ruling (which might have been for the best for the time being).

https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/supreme-court-declines-review-ruling-favor-patient-who-was-denied-care-being

 

[—]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:

I looked left to see 2 nuns glaring at me. I kept the faux painful look going and they seemed very confused. Priceless!

Shame they didn’t ask you what was going on. You could have told them it was nun of their business.

[_Robert_]

Autumn wrote:

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:

I looked left to see 2 nuns glaring at me. I kept the faux painful look going and they seemed very confused. Priceless!

Shame they didn’t ask you what was going on. You could have told them it was nun of their business.

[Author]

Posts