How can this be in the United States?

[whitneygh]

Originally posted by Details
I don't think so - these are other modern, industrialized countries. I think the issue is that a lot of them have universal health care. Here, while I'm treated great, and just about living at the doctors office due to some issues, if I didn't have health insurance and money, I wouldn't even be seeing a doctor much at all, and my problems probably would have gone undiagnosed. I think we've got the two tiers - those with health insurance, with a great fetal survival rate, and those without, who have a bad one. In the article they mention that there are race and other statistical variations that point a lot towards the simple issue of money and insurance.

I completely agree, Details. Wonderfully worded.

Originally posted by KrazyKollectorPerhaps not all Americans value life as they do in other countries?
What was the ratio of drug use/smoking/eating correctly as compared to other countries.

This article discusses pregnant women smoking in Japan and concludes that "smoking prevalence during pregnancy was 10.4%."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=15893780&dopt=Abstract

This article cites the percentage of United States women who smoke while pregnant to be 10.2%.
http://www.childtrendsdatabank.org/indicators/11MothersWhoSmokeWhilePregnant.cfm

Based on that, it seems like Japanese women are slightly more likely to smoke while pregnant. I don't know about the drug use and nutrition, but I would venture to say, IMO, that these modern countries are probably very similar to the US in those areas, just as the Japan and US statistics for pregnant smokers is only at a .2% difference.

 

[Amraann]

Medicare is for older Americans. Medicaid is for the poor, and there are rules for being eligible, etc.

We have more minorities and poor than those other countries listed, and probably much less consistency in health care due to the fact that millions of Americans are without health insurance.

Also, if you don't think to get your maternity coverage ahead of time, you aren't covered on your plan.

There is probably an entire layer of women who don't qualify for Medicaid, but aren't rich enough for expensive health insurance, or just don't have jobs (no insurance).

I blame the insurance companies, lack of access to health care by the poor or in-between, lack of education and good health, etc., and our demographic make-up for most of the differences.

I can't speak about all states but children in Florida are covered by medicaid if their parents don't have insurance.
No child is denied. This includes preventative medicine as well.

 

[christine2448]

I can't speak about all states but children in Florida are covered by medicaid if their parents don't have insurance.
No child is denied. This includes preventative medicine as well.

Hiya Amra! I believe, not 100% sure, but think here in GA they have something called Peachcare for kids, and if you can't afford insurance this will cover. Now, you may have to be low income, or prove that you can't afford, so maybe not auto coverage.

 

[CyberLaw]

With high risk factors, like being a minority, poor, young, living in a poor area, lack of regular health care and pre natal care, lack of access to proper nutirition, drugs, income, poverty, lack of universal health care, education these are all factors in the rate of newborn survival.

Japan has one of the lowest teen birth rates:

www.unicef.org

The average number of births for every 1,000 girls aged 15 to 19 is approximately 15 in the countries of the European Union. The United States – with 64 births per year for every 1,000 girls aged 15 to 19 – has the highest rates.

Teen pregnancy has far-reaching consequences both for mother and child. Mothers face higher risks of complications in childbirth and their infants are at greater risk of prematurity, low birth weight, death in the first year of life, and developmental problems.

Japan also has a medical insurance plan, that ensure all people especially the elderly have access to "necessary" medical treatment and that the insurance is affordable to all citizens of Japan.

They also have a "higher" education system, which seems to surpass the US and Canada.

So there are several factors, involved in newborn deaths.......

Notice how Canada is at spot 9 and the US is at 10. That does not thrill me, but again, Canada and the US have a higher rate of poverty and other social issues that some countries with a lower newborn morality rate have either aleviated or reduced to a lesser degree.

Canada has a Universal Health System, so that is not the only factor
involved here.........

There is quite a cultural difference between Europe and North America, in terms of EVERYTHING. It is no surprise to me that the top 3 countries are in Europe. The "cultural difference and "attitudes" are far different than North America.

Sweden has a 2.6 percent poverty rate, while Canada has 15.5 and the USA has 22.4% of people living in poverty.

So you can see the "correlation" of child newborn deaths in a country with a "high" social expendature and less poverty, then with countries with "lower social expenditure" and more poverty.

 

[sharpar]

Insurance and health care coverage is a touchy area for me right now. We have good insurance, but are still facing losing everything we own, because insurance doesnt pay enough. We "make too much" to qualify for help, yet dont make near enough to pay the medical bills we are facing.

Our very first evaluation was NOT medical, but financial. We had to prove we could pay before we ever got back to see the medical staff. No $$ = no heart transplant. Thats the cold hard facts.

I certainly dont claim to have any answers, but I can say what we are doing now doesnt work when there is any type of serious medical problems. My husbands expenses for the first year will run around $687,000...even if we only have to pay 10% of that we will be wiped out. His medications will run over $26,000 year for the rest of his life. Again, our cost shares will leave us struggling to do this year after year. Of course, we will do what we have to do, even that means we lose everything, but, IMO, it should not be this way. He has worked since he was 17 years old. Served his country for 20 years, and his state for 13...yet we face a future of barely being able to pay our bills.

Timex you are so right - we are also in this position. If you arent able to buy health insurance and earn any income at all you dont qualify for state or federal assistance. To get medicaid in my state the maxium income for a couple is $800 a month. I couldnt believe it, you hear about all this assistance but its mostly a myth. We have received some help and are grateful for it but we still are financially ruined and will never recover. I have bill collectors hounding me and its all medical expenses which my sole income cant cover. My dh applied for disability 10 months ago and still no decision
and if he does get it, its a tiny fraction of what he was earning. I have heard hundreds of times you make to much money to qualify for assistance. Even if you do have health insurance there is a lifetime limit on your policies and once you hit that you are truly out of luck. A major medical event can hit that limit very quickly. We did in less than three months.

 

[Marthatex]

I can't speak about all states but children in Florida are covered by medicaid if their parents don't have insurance.
No child is denied. This includes preventative medicine as well.

Do you mean children, or the unborn (pregnant mothers).

We're talking prenatal care, safe delivery and postnatal care.

 

[Marthatex]

With high risk factors, like being a minority, poor, young, living in a poor area, lack of regular health care and pre natal care, lack of access to proper nutirition, drugs, income, poverty, lack of universal health care, education these are all factors in the rate of newborn survival.

Japan has one of the lowest teen birth rates:

www.unicef.org

The average number of births for every 1,000 girls aged 15 to 19 is approximately 15 in the countries of the European Union. The United States – with 64 births per year for every 1,000 girls aged 15 to 19 – has the highest rates.

Teen pregnancy has far-reaching consequences both for mother and child. Mothers face higher risks of complications in childbirth and their infants are at greater risk of prematurity, low birth weight, death in the first year of life, and developmental problems.

Japan also has a medical insurance plan, that ensure all people especially the elderly have access to "necessary" medical treatment and that the insurance is affordable to all citizens of Japan.

They also have a "higher" education system, which seems to surpass the US and Canada.

So there are several factors, involved in newborn deaths.......

Notice how Canada is at spot 9 and the US is at 10. That does not thrill me, but again, Canada and the US have a higher rate of poverty and other social issues that some countries with a lower newborn morality rate have either aleviated or reduced to a lesser degree.

Canada has a Universal Health System, so that is not the only factor
involved here.........

There is quite a cultural difference between Europe and North America, in terms of EVERYTHING. It is no surprise to me that the top 3 countries are in Europe. The "cultural difference and "attitudes" are far different than North America.

Sweden has a 2.6 percent poverty rate, while Canada has 15.5 and the USA has 22.4% of people living in poverty.

So you can see the "correlation" of child newborn deaths in a country with a "high" social expendature and less poverty, then with countries with "lower social expenditure" and more poverty.

Kind of ironic for a rich nation that gives alot of lip service and political muscle toward protecting the unborn.

You have to put money where the mouth is, unfortunately, and that means taxpayers money.

 

[tennessee]

Oh man. I have been avoiding this thread but here goes.

Tennessee tried it own version of national healthcare, only it was at the state level. Our state's uninsurable health pool (which paid rather high premiums) was done away with, as was Medicaid. If you had no insurance, you could get TennCare. Premiums were income based. All pregnant women without other coverage qualified for TennCare. All prescriptions were paid.

We had prolife groups bringing girls into Tennessee and enrolling them on TennCare. Employees were not partaking of their company's healthcare benefits because they could get TennCare for free. We had people from other states on our state's insurance plan.

TennCare almost bankrupted our state.

Our governor, Phil Bredesen, has finally stood up and said no more. We cannot afford to insure everyone. Changes must be made. Thank god! My only complaint about this man is that he signed into law that everyone must get generic drugs, even those paying their own private insurance premiums.

Also, I agree with CyberLaw, teen pregnancy rates are horrible. I cannot count the number of girls in my daughter's high school who have given birth this year or that are pregnant now. Something has to be done to curb this. Are people still so afraid to discuss sex with their children or have facts given to them by a qualified sex educator? I just can't believe that all these pregnancies are planned.

I remember a time that when you got sick you went to the doctor, got your meds and got well. There wasn't a person sitting at their computer telling my doctor that they would not pay for treatment. I say take the managed care out of health and leave it to the doctor and patient to determine what best benefits the patient. Especially if they are paying their own premiums.

I don't have the answers. I am not sure anyone does. But there has to be a better way.



JMHO

 

[Nova]

Oh man. I have been avoiding this thread but here goes.

Tennessee tried it own version of national healthcare, only it was at the state level.

Great post, tenn. I think it amply shows why we need some sort of system on the national level, to solve the problem of people shopping across state lines to get a better program.

And there will have to be some way to make sure companies continue at least their current level of contribution.

 

[Marthatex]

The teen birth rate has been going down steadily for some years now. But we still have the highest teen pregnancy rate in the western world.

http://www.coolnurse.com/teen_pregnancy_rates.htm

 

[Amraann]

Do you mean children, or the unborn (pregnant mothers).

We're talking prenatal care, safe delivery and postnatal care.

Actually both. Pregnant women without insurance can get care either by applying for medicaid or going to the health dept.

 

[Details]

How much care is the issue. I have gestational diabetes - without a really good doctor, it could have gone undetected, or once detected, they could have just said to try to eat right and prescribed meds rather than setting me up with extra ultrasounds and tests to monitor me and the kid. Without that, she could have had major medical problems for the rest of her life or not been born due to uncontrolled gestational diabetes. Then the liver problem popped up - again, I got really lucky we found it, without them finding this (and there are no symptoms), me or her or both of us could have died.

Two potential fatal or long term medical conditions avoided because I have good medical care in one pregnancy. Medicare isn't like that - it's pretty minimal. That's the difference between real health care, and a safety net you go to when you are feeling bad.

 

[Marthatex]

Actually both. Pregnant women without insurance can get care either by applying for medicaid or going to the health dept.

Many women fall in a gray area between income eligibility for medicaid and having enough income for health insurance. Now there was an attempt in 2001 to expand the CHIP program to cover more women, but that may vary by state.

I have a feeling alot just show up at the delivery room door.

 

[CyberLaw]

But Details makes a very good point, pre natal care is vital to the health and care of the mother and child.

That is why, if a women just shows up at the hospital delivery room door, and she has had "minimal" care on a state funded health care(which I assume is for low income people who cannot pay private premiums), well it is safe to assume she did not get the level of care that Details had during her pregnancy, all for the sake of private vs. public insurance.

What is the old saying: Ignore a problem, invite a crisis. Well the "state offers minimal" care, the mother is treated as a lesser person with less necessary health care because of her income level. Now she and her "child" are paying for being poor. Sometimes with their lives.

You see in European countries, women are not "punished" for being poor, they are given the same level of care as any one else, with equal treatment and equal benefits, as some countries see the devestation to families and society as a whole by leaving some "citizens to live in poverty. NA just does not care........never has and never will.

But since Canada is in position 9 and the US is in 10, and Canada has a "fairly sound" Universal Health Care for all women from cradle to grave, then health care is not the only factor in play, as the US and Canada are "similar" in the North American cultural norms and GWB and PM, Steven Harper.

They delegate the poor to the very last rung of the latter........and treat them as if it their fault that they are poor, or a migrant, or whatever.........

In Europe, the attitude is more liberal and progressive........and equal.

 

[tennessee]

What is the old saying: Ignore a problem, invite a crisis. Well the "state offers minimal" care, the mother is treated as a lesser person with less necessary health care because of her income level. Now she and her "child" are paying for being poor. Sometimes with their lives.

This is such a true statement. And, it doesn't only apply to pregnant women. I have personally seen this treatment of people on TennCare. The arrogance of some "professionals" when they find out someone in on TennCare is disgusting. Just because someone doesn't have multiple degrees, drive a new Lexus or have a stock portfolio doesn't mean they are less deserving of the care and repect you would give the haves.



JMHO

 

[eve]

Timex, I feel for you! OMG, what an ordeal. I don't think anything is going to get better with our health care system until the state and national legislators have to put up with the same medical coverage issues that we regular joes out here do. That ain't happenin' anytime soon. It makes me sick (hopefully I won't need hospitalization). I'm a teacher and our coverage gets significantly worse (and pricier) every year. Also, I have read Japan has the highest smoking rate AND the highest longevity rate. Go figure.

Eve

 

[Amraann]

Many women fall in a gray area between income eligibility for medicaid and having enough income for health insurance. Now there was an attempt in 2001 to expand the CHIP program to cover more women, but that may vary by state.

I have a feeling alot just show up at the delivery room door.

I can only talk about Florida but The health dept charges on a sliding scale.
There are also many OB clinics that are funded by Medicaid or other federal dollars that women can go to. This would include even those employed but possibly not covered by insurance due to the 10 month delay in covering pregnancy for new insurance plan members.
THe payment for each visit is similiar to that of a co-pay.

For those that just show up at the delivery room door..
I have to question if that is an insurance issue or something else?

 

[Amraann]

But Details makes a very good point, pre natal care is vital to the health and care of the mother and child.

That is why, if a women just shows up at the hospital delivery room door, and she has had "minimal" care on a state funded health care(which I assume is for low income people who cannot pay private premiums), well it is safe to assume she did not get the level of care that Details had during her pregnancy, all for the sake of private vs. public insurance.

What is the old saying: Ignore a problem, invite a crisis. Well the "state offers minimal" care, the mother is treated as a lesser person with less necessary health care because of her income level. Now she and her "child" are paying for being poor. Sometimes with their lives.

You see in European countries, women are not "punished" for being poor, they are given the same level of care as any one else, with equal treatment and equal benefits, as some countries see the devestation to families and society as a whole by leaving some "citizens to live in poverty. NA just does not care........never has and never will.

But since Canada is in position 9 and the US is in 10, and Canada has a "fairly sound" Universal Health Care for all women from cradle to grave, then health care is not the only factor in play, as the US and Canada are "similar" in the North American cultural norms and GWB and PM, Steven Harper.

They delegate the poor to the very last rung of the latter........and treat them as if it their fault that they are poor, or a migrant, or whatever.........

In Europe, the attitude is more liberal and progressive........and equal.

Cyberlaw although I think you make a good point I dispute that its substandard care. Let me rephrase that..
I dispute the substandard care was based on insurance alone.

I had the best insurance money could afford when I was pregnant with my daughter .. Her being my first and me not having anything to compare it to I did not realize unil later just how awful the Dr was.
WIth my second child I had the same coverage only I found a new DR and the care was night and day.

My sister had no insurance while pregnant with my niece. She applied for medicaid and even though she had serious health problems and my niece was 2 months premature ... They both recieved very good medical treatment.

There have been times when I lived in towns that my insurance HMO(provided by hubby's employer) was the same one provided to those who's children were on Healthy Kids (Florida's insurance for all children who don't have it) During those times there was once or twice where the receptionist did have some tone and made reference to Healthy Kids ... Just presumed that was my coverage say.. while looking up a referal Dr the Primary has suggested.
I will concede that the tone certainly did change once I explained that my children were covered by hubby's insurance not Healthy kids.
Again that was the Receptionist .. never the DR.

 

[Nova]

How much care is the issue. I have gestational diabetes - without a really good doctor, it could have gone undetected, or once detected, they could have just said to try to eat right and prescribed meds rather than setting me up with extra ultrasounds and tests to monitor me and the kid. Without that, she could have had major medical problems for the rest of her life or not been born due to uncontrolled gestational diabetes. Then the liver problem popped up - again, I got really lucky we found it, without them finding this (and there are no symptoms), me or her or both of us could have died.

Two potential fatal or long term medical conditions avoided because I have good medical care in one pregnancy. Medicare isn't like that - it's pretty minimal. That's the difference between real health care, and a safety net you go to when you are feeling bad.

Great example. I'm glad you and your child are well. (Our daughter had the same problem. Everyone's fine now thanks to excellent medical care.)

 

[CyberLaw]

Thanks for the enlightenment.......I would like to clarify my point...

Medical care may and very well could be a very important factor in the health of newborns and their mothers, but......

there are all of the other "issues" to contend with and those are "very" grave social issues that are are "standard" in North American, but not European countries.

For example: Poverty, if you look at the poverty rates of the top three countries, they are far below the poverty rate for women in North America. A higher degree of poverty, the worse off society as a whole is.

That means if a child growing up in a single mother household in Europe, she will not be subjected to "dire" poverty while she is growing up. That means her "health" will be better, less likely to use or abuse drugs, can obtain a "higher" education and all of those factors will lead to an "eventual" healthier baby.

There is a lot more "different" attitudes and social policy that will enable a women to have a healthy baby...........not beg for "medical treatment" as I assume it is a "checkboard" of services through medicare from state to state.

She may be a minority, living in a "horrible" area with guns and drugs, she may also be a "victim" of the Father who may not want to be a Dad. She may realized that there is a "serious" problem with her health or the health of the baby, but not receive adequate or timely medical services.

She may not make "healthy" choices during her pregnancy because of her "problems" and the area she lives in.

So she has poor nutrition, poor medical care, a not nice area to live in, live in poverty, inadequate housing...........

But in Europe: She is less likely to have lived or does live in poverty, there are "social" programs in place to help her and encourage her to have a healthy baby, she has adequate medical care, proper nutrition and supports in place to ensure a safe and healthy delivery of a baby.

She is not "vilified" for being pregnant.......

Women, and especially women who are pregnant are treated the same and equal as other members of society.

In Canada and the US.....it is a far "bleaker" picture.....women are not "valued" in North America and children especially children of poor or minority mothers are "vilifed" for becoming pregnant and given the "resources" that come with that "label".