A pattern is developing. The Stimulus Bill established the Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) panel. This panel was to determine what treatments and medications would be used to treat various illnesses. It would also determine who was eligible to receive these. Cost effectiveness is to be determined by dividing the cost of the treatment by the number of years the treatment would benefit the patient. Seniors will not fare well under these recommendations.
The House bill proposes a Benefits Advisory Board. This board will be comprised of 27 appointees. It will determine what coverage constitutes “acceptable” health care coverage. All insurance plans are required to meet this standard. We do not know if this refer to only minimum coverage or if it also restricts maximum coverage. The bill also does not address abortion. Previous court decisions have ruled that if abortion is not specifically excluded, it will be included.
An Independent Medicare Advisory Council (IMAC) is proposed. IMAC, a 5 member appointed board, has the authority to curtail Medicare spending and recommend broader Medicare reform. The Administration has already stated that cuts in Medicare will help fund health care reform. Seniors are again targeted.
The concept of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY) is being discussed. The patient is assigned a numerical rating of 1.0 – 0.0. If treatment is not deemed, using this number, to be “cost effective”, treatmen t will be denied. This will adversely effect those with chronic illnesses, disabilities, and again seniors.
I don’t think the plug will be pulled on Granny. I think she will simply be denied treatment.
Is this what health care is really about – “cost effectiveness?
No comments:
Post a Comment