Yes, insurance companies are making a killing over this law. If the population did not insist that every twinge get a full workup by a cardiologist, every ache and pain the full head to toe workup, or that little Susie should get the costs of travel to Geneva for treatment of her sadly incurable illness, the problem would not exist.
My attitude is simple and hard: You want it, you pay for it, either up front or in installments through an "insurance" program. Suck it up. Stop whining.
1. In my practice most people who have insurance do not abuse it.
2. I agree with your view about "entitlements" if you mean - The people who have free insurance "MEDICAID". As some of them in my practice are the ones that tend to abuse the system. They get free housing, free food stamps,free rides to the drs office and back and go the ER for any trivial reason. Most of them have no motivation to work as they feel that they are entitled to those priviliges.The more children you have the more benefits you get..there is no accountability.
3. If forcing the people to buy insurance who are above 26 yrs of age and below 65 yrs of age is not shared risk then what does one call it. The raise in the premiums and deductible by the insurance company to cater to the 1 % or 2 % of the population who have complications and overutilize the medical system from not taking care of themselves is indefensible. Hold them accountable and reward people who comply and take care of themselves.
4. Work ups to rule out cardiac problems or intracranial pathology even if 1 in a million chance of occurence is necessary, as much as I trust my judgement and my medical skills it stands no chance with a jury. Is it defensive medicine, maybe. At times I have been proven wrong when I thought it was defensive medicine and the patient did turn out to have a real problem. I have got burnt.
