If the number of providers willing to accept Medicaid remains limited, won’t this expansion make it harder for the program’s original recipients– poor children and families– to access medical care?
There’s plenty of talk about wait times increasing in general, but it seems to me that this falls disproportionately on Medicaid children.
“most physicians do not believe these systems come close to creating new efficiencies or sharing data with multiple providers or improving patient care”
If doctors do not believe in this new system, how can there possibly be an improvement in patient care. As a need in staff increases and physician productivity decreases, there needs to be a fix that physicians can get behind.
I heard an argument that can relate with the article on Medicaid for inmates. A friend told me: “senior citizens were builders of society; they did something productive during their lifetime and helped America advance. Many of them are abandoned by the state. Many are homeless, don’t have medical coverage, and live with the minimum. Inmates, on the other hand, harmed society; they are guilty of disturbing the peace of the nation and are being punished for their crimes. Yet, they receive all the benefits from the state, shelter, three meals a day, healthcare coverage, a relatively good standard of living.” My friend concluded: “we should treat our elders like we treat inmates, and treat prisoners like we treat poor senior citizens.” After reading this article it made sense. There are some people that are receiving benefits from the state that don’t deserve it, while there are some who deserve those benefits that don’t get them.
“Accenture, the contractor urgently tapped to help fix the federal health-insurance website, has a history of troubled projects and allegations of ethical lapses.”
“You assume everyone comes with baggage. The fundamental issue is, I hope the government did sufficient research to find out who the most qualified firms were and to weigh the positives and negatives.”
This is likely the most reasonable response to such a news headline.
“Johnson referred to one study showing one-third of the new Medicaid enrollees will be inmates, parolees or people just released from prison.”
So as the Obama Administration brags about the number of Medicaid enrollees, what they seem to leave out is prison inmates are a big chunk of their enrollees. How comforting for all of the taxpayers.
“Supporters argue that by making sure inmates have coverage when they are released, it will make them less likely to re-offend and end up back in jail.”
While I could assume that some inmates would not end up back in jail from this, I highly doubt health insurance plays a major part in recidivism if many of the prisoners are young or healthy.
As far as I know, there is no verified evidence to prove that a health insurance plan can prevent these inmates from be recidivism. We can make some assumptions regarding to this issue, but we cannot assert it is true before testing it.
Accenture might not be the best company to operate healthcare.gov but it is better than when the government tried to run it. Give the company some credit; it accepted a visible job that will place them under the spotlight. Very few companies are willing to take their chances with a project as tough as this one.
There are things that don’t go well together. It seems as if the EHR doesn’t go well with healthcare providers. When someone is forced to do things they don’t want to do, there will hardly ever be positive results. When changed is not made by own desire the change is not well received and the goals it sought will not be met.
If the number of providers willing to accept Medicaid remains limited, won’t this expansion make it harder for the program’s original recipients– poor children and families– to access medical care?
There’s plenty of talk about wait times increasing in general, but it seems to me that this falls disproportionately on Medicaid children.
“most physicians do not believe these systems come close to creating new efficiencies or sharing data with multiple providers or improving patient care”
If doctors do not believe in this new system, how can there possibly be an improvement in patient care. As a need in staff increases and physician productivity decreases, there needs to be a fix that physicians can get behind.
“We used to see 32 patients a day with one tech, and now we struggle to see 24 patients a day with four techs. And we provide worse care.”
I bet they cringed when they read that line. The lack of cost effectiveness is astounding.
I heard an argument that can relate with the article on Medicaid for inmates. A friend told me: “senior citizens were builders of society; they did something productive during their lifetime and helped America advance. Many of them are abandoned by the state. Many are homeless, don’t have medical coverage, and live with the minimum. Inmates, on the other hand, harmed society; they are guilty of disturbing the peace of the nation and are being punished for their crimes. Yet, they receive all the benefits from the state, shelter, three meals a day, healthcare coverage, a relatively good standard of living.” My friend concluded: “we should treat our elders like we treat inmates, and treat prisoners like we treat poor senior citizens.” After reading this article it made sense. There are some people that are receiving benefits from the state that don’t deserve it, while there are some who deserve those benefits that don’t get them.
“we should treat our elders like we treat inmates, and treat prisoners like we treat poor senior citizens”
Amen to that.
“Accenture, the contractor urgently tapped to help fix the federal health-insurance website, has a history of troubled projects and allegations of ethical lapses.”
Like the government who hired them?
Hah – great point. Two peas in a pod!
“You assume everyone comes with baggage. The fundamental issue is, I hope the government did sufficient research to find out who the most qualified firms were and to weigh the positives and negatives.”
This is likely the most reasonable response to such a news headline.
“Johnson referred to one study showing one-third of the new Medicaid enrollees will be inmates, parolees or people just released from prison.”
So as the Obama Administration brags about the number of Medicaid enrollees, what they seem to leave out is prison inmates are a big chunk of their enrollees. How comforting for all of the taxpayers.
“Supporters argue that by making sure inmates have coverage when they are released, it will make them less likely to re-offend and end up back in jail.”
While I could assume that some inmates would not end up back in jail from this, I highly doubt health insurance plays a major part in recidivism if many of the prisoners are young or healthy.
As far as I know, there is no verified evidence to prove that a health insurance plan can prevent these inmates from be recidivism. We can make some assumptions regarding to this issue, but we cannot assert it is true before testing it.
Accenture might not be the best company to operate healthcare.gov but it is better than when the government tried to run it. Give the company some credit; it accepted a visible job that will place them under the spotlight. Very few companies are willing to take their chances with a project as tough as this one.
There are things that don’t go well together. It seems as if the EHR doesn’t go well with healthcare providers. When someone is forced to do things they don’t want to do, there will hardly ever be positive results. When changed is not made by own desire the change is not well received and the goals it sought will not be met.