August 28, 2009 - WOULD NATIONAL HEALTH CARE HAVE SAVED THIS MAN'S LEG?

As I have stated before, but some people might have missed it, I am a retired registered nurse who does medical transcribing for a local hospital.

One of the cases today went like this paraphrased:

A 45 year old man, who is a diabetic, lost his job and lost his insurance. He developed an ulcer on his left heel. Since he had no insurance, he put off going to the doctor.

Finally, he went to his doctor since the ulcer had gotten so bad that he could not stand it and it was too late. He had developed gangrene. He had a below the knee amputation in order to save his life. Afterwards, social services of the hospital applied to a governmental agency for some financial help and was told that it would take up to three months to get a response, either yes or no. The doctor and the hospital would have to wait and possibly "eat" the cost of removing his leg.

Would this have happened if we were on National Health Care? Who knows. If the care that is proposed is similar to Canada's health care, or some of the other countries national health care, he still might have lost his leg due to the "wait time" involved in getting care.

IT IS A FACT THAT HEALTH CARE NEEDS TO BE REFORMED BUT WE DO NOT WANT TO RISK TURNING BACKWARD IN GETTING QUALITY HEALTH CARE.

The problem with most of us who try to be informed and use our brains is that we are convinced that the proposed health care, at this point in time, will not provide quality and timely health care.

WHY CAN'T THE REPUBLICANS AND THE DEMOCRATS SIT DOWN AND COME UP WITH AN OPTION THAT WILL BE GOOD FOR ALL AMERICANS.

Noooooo, they have to compete, like players in a football game. All that matters is winning. It is more important for one of them to win than being concerned for the welfare of all the American citizens.

Feel free to comment just below this posting.