-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Woollet/Constitution/Here & Now - Long From: Joanne Bulley (islesannie@yahoo.com) Wed Jan 31 18:36:32 2001 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: Joanne Bulley: "Re: Woolley/Constitution/Here & Now - Long" Previous message: RModugno@aol.com: "Re: Preterm labor/transfer" In reply to: Robert J. Woolley: "Re: Lunelle/contraception coverage" Next in thread: Joanne Bulley: "Re: Woolley/Constitution/Here & Now - Long" Reply: Joanne Bulley: "Re: Woolley/Constitution/Here & Now - Long" Maybe reply: Robert J. Woolley: "Re: Woollet/Constitution/Here & Now - Long" Sorry about the length - Joanne Bob I see/read your point(s) (I think) - SO-O-O - Given the current state of affairs in the USofA - and your personal decision that you would not fight the current system ("such a case would fail, because the Supreme Court for all practical purposes gave up" etc) do you work with the current system? Or have you gone and hung your shingle out and do not participate in any of these awful insurance programs? In the "old" system - before insurance etc - the docs did charge different rates according to what the doc thought the patient/family could pay. So the Corporate President would be charged more to susidize the folks the doc thought worthy of getting free care. You could do that. There are a few docs here in NH that work that way - straight cash with bartering thrown in. If you participate as a provider with these insurance companies shackled by governmental laws, then it is like someone said, "If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem." I hear loud and clear what you don't like about the current system - how do you intend to change it? Perhaps you are already doing something - presumably by voting and related activities. Have you run for office to work toward any of this stuff? Docs have taken to being legislators for such reasons. I can definitely agree that there are pros and cons of insurance and governmental programs. I just do not think we can abolish it without some transition plan in place. So at the moment I work with the current system and have no wonderful plan for how to replace it. I am also of the opinion that it cannot possibly be less expensive to provide medical care by having all these folks at the insurance companies spending so much time overseeing patient care... At Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Robert J. Woolley wrote: > >As I explained earlier (are you actually reading what I'm writing?), such a case >would fail, because the Supreme Court for all practical purposes gave up no >holding Congress to its constitutional powers with the court-packing threat. So >now neither the Constitution nor the Supreme Court puts any significant check on >the ever-growing Congressional grab for power. But that appears to be the way >you want it. > > i do not * * * >7) Therefore, Medicare is an unconstitutional extension of proper Congressional >power and function. > >Now, since you disagree with my conclusion in (7), please explain which of the >preceeding premises or logical conclusions you consider faulty in arriving at >it, and why. > > >Once again, I have to wonder if you're reading what I'm writing. To whatever >extent we decide that we want to supplement the income of people we think are >too poor, it should be done with money, not with specific programs that provide >specific things. Let them decide what to do with it. If they want to buy health >insurance, fine. If they want to save it for a college education for their kids, >fine. If they want to blow it on a vacation to Aruba, fine. But then let them >have all of the good and bad consequences of their choices. That is, they can't >blow it on Aruba and then show up at the ER and expect free hospitalization and >a government scholarship for their kids to go to college. > >Bob Woolley -- Joanne Bulley, MD, FACOG Keene, NH, USA Next message: Joanne Bulley: "Re: Woolley/Constitution/Here & Now - Long" Previous message: RModugno@aol.com: "Re: Preterm labor/transfer" In reply to: Robert J. Woolley: "Re: Lunelle/contraception coverage" Next in thread: Joanne Bulley: "Re: Woolley/Constitution/Here & Now - Long" Reply: Joanne Bulley: "Re: Woolley/Constitution/Here & Now - Long" Maybe reply: Robert J. Woolley: "Re: Woollet/Constitution/Here & Now - Long"

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 04:47:08 2009

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.