By Anonymous - 21/09/2012 04:51 - United States
Add a comment - Reply to : #
You must be logged in to be able to post comments!
how about a choice between smoking & drinking v. keeping your kids healthy? The problem is most people don't want to take responsibility for their own lives. No, we should steal from other people in the name of fairness. After all *I* deserve what everyone else works so hard for. *uses remote on iphone to start a macbook something to stream wireless music so I can play call of duty something on my gazzillion inch plasma*
If you can afford Internet, you can afford insurance for your child. And if you can't afford it, there are plenty of programs that will pay for it. It's incredibly irresponsible not to have health insurance for your child. What happens when she swallows a real tack? Or gets the flu so bad she needs IV? Or needs vaccinations?
Sounds like this is probably your first child. Once you have a few, you will relax and learn to ask the right questions in situations like this. Little children around this age are learning to play jokes, so maybe you should explain to him/her that it could have been a real emergency and that they can't joke about that kind of stuff. For some reason, parents feel like they can't talk to their children at this age but take it from someone with experience that those people who don't are stupid. Don't be one of them!
The thing is, she would have wasted _someone's_ money, even if it was the collective taxpayer. I agree that nobody should be prevented from seeking healthcare due to the cost and so I'm in favour of the NHS. However, it's "timewasting" situations like this where there is an argument that the patient should cover some of the cost rather than the taxpayer.
47 I'm glad you're interested in politics; just four more years til you'll be voting in the next presidential election! You are thinking of what's called universal health care / a single-payer system, where health care for everyone is taken out of taxes on your paycheck, and people who are unemployed would still have health care. The new health care changes haven't gone that far. Obama wants everyone to have coverage, but we will still pay hundreds of dollars each month to private insurance companies to buy our individual (or family) insurance plans. One of the most important improvements to health insurance coverage made during this administration is that insurance companies will no longer be able to deny people coverage. The previous / current law, until this new one goes into effect in 2014, lets insurance refuse to cover people with "preexisting conditions," which can be pretty much anything. Asthma, ADHD, diabetes, pregnancy and many more -- common ailments, things that affect millions of people in the US -- are all examples of "preexisting conditions" that currently prevent people from getting insurance coverage. Once the new law goes into effect in 2014, insurance companies will no longer be able to turn down these people or anyone else who wants to buy coverage, even those who have a disease that is very expensive to treat, such as cancer.
It is, but it's the way they avoid losing shit loads of money so it's also essential practice...that is unless universal healthcare is introduced in the US, in which case no one has to worry about their health insurance paying for treatment. In the UK you can also get health insurance but you don't need it; my Mum had health insurance which paid out when she got cancer and made sure we were financially secure during that period :-)
It's a difficult one there - should you have asked her "Did you really do that?" etc, or would that have caused the kid to feel the "correct" answer was to say she hadn't, even if in fact she had? It's a pain that you have all those extra medical bills but at least you have a healthy kid! Now, I guess it's time to emphasise how important it is not to joke about things like that.
A prick in the making.
This calls for a severe punishment :(