This is rather lengthy, but I could not figure out anyway to divide it into two parts. You are welcome to pass it on if you wish.
All qualifying insurances must cover essential benefits.
One of the “essential benefits” is described here. “Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.” Who is to make up the “Task Force” and will preventative “services” become requirements?
What is a task force? What will it have power to do? The bill is not clear on how broad its power will be. Will “recommended” vaccines become mandatory vaccines?
(Vaccines are another issue in themselves, especially if the government is given power to make them mandatory. More is involved in this issue than simply the giving of vaccines intended to prevent common illnesses. I have done some research on this and will attempt to add information about it in some detail to my blog when I have it all put together.)
Who will appoint workers and advisory committees?
“There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be a panel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.”
Who is to make up this “advisory committee”? And who appoints them?
“(A) 9 members who are not Federal employees or officers and who are appointed by the President.
“(B) 9 members who are not Federal employees or officers and who are appointed by the Comptroller General of the United States in a manner similar to the manner in which the Comptroller General appoints members to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission under section 1805(c) of the Social Security Act.
“(C) Such even number of members (not to exceed 8) who are Federal employees and officers, as the President may appoint.”
Please do not blame President Obama for these things. He and other authorities are only exercising power given to them in a law passed in 1989. Some of these things are the results of provision made in the Social Security Act (first passed in 1935 and later revised and updated).
However, if our health care system is to be overseen by a committee of 26 people chosen by 2 top government officials, this leaves me with some apprehension as to the quality of care that will be provided. Would it not be better to allow the people to choose them from respected individuals within the medical field?
Home Pilot Programs (provided for in the Social Security Act but potentially put into practice if this health bill is passed)
“The Secretary shall establish a medical home pilot program (in this section referred to as the ‘pilot program’) for the purpose of evaluating the feasibility and advisability of reimbursing qualified patient-centered medical homes for furnishing medical home services (as defined under subsection (b)(1)) to high need beneficiaries (as defined in subsection (d)(1)(C)) and to targeted high need beneficiaries (as defined in subsection (c)(1)(C)).”
‘‘(jjj)(1) The term ‘marriage and family therapist services’ means services performed by a marriage and family therapist (as defined in paragraph (2)) for the diagnosis and treatment of mental illnesses, which the marriage and family therapist is legally authorized to perform under State law (or the State regulatory mechanism provided by State law) of the State in which such services are performed, as would otherwise be covered if furnished by a physician or as incident to a physician’s professional service….
'‘(A) the delivery of health services through interdisciplinary and team-based models, which may include patient-centered medical home models, medication therapy management models, and models integrating physical, mental, or oral health services; and
‘‘(B) coordination of the delivery of health care within and across settings, including health care institutions, community-based settings, and the patient’s home; and “(2) to implement such training programs developed under paragraph (1) or otherwise.
Physicians who order durable medical equipment or home health services required to be Medicare enrolled physicians or eligible professionals.
Grants to States for quality home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children.
‘‘(1) PATIENT-CENTERED MEDICAL HOME 9 SERVICES.--
The term ‘patient-centered medical home services’ means services that--
‘‘(A) provide beneficiaries with direct and ongoing access to a primary care or principal care by a physician or nurse practitioner who accepts responsibility for providing first contact, continuous and comprehensive care to such beneficiary;
‘‘(B) coordinate the care provided to a beneficiary by a team of individuals at the practice level across office, institutional and home settings led by a primary care or principal carephysician or nurse practitioner, as needed and appropriate;
‘‘(C) provide for all the patient’s health care needs or take responsibility for appropriately arranging care with other qualified providers for all stages of life; (Interesting; what if the patient is not satisfied with that physician and wants a different physician for a different stage of his/her life?)
‘‘(aa) The term ‘nurse home visitation services’ means home visits by trained nurses to families with a first-time pregnant woman, or a child (under 2 years of age), who is eligible for medical assistance under this title, but only, to the extent determined by the Secretary based upon evidence, that such services are effective in one or more of the following: ‘‘(1) Improving maternal or child health and pregnancy outcomes or increasing birth intervals between pregnancies. ‘‘(2) Reducing the incidence of child abuse, neglect, and injury, improving family stability (including reduction in the incidence of intimate partner violence), or reducing maternal and child involvementin the criminal justice system. ‘‘(3) Increasing economic self-sufficiency, employment advancement, school-readiness, and educational achievement, or reducing dependence on
public assistance.’’
"(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall apply to services furnished on or after January 1, 2010.
HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.
‘‘(a) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this section is to improve the well-being, health, and development of children by enabling the establishment and expansion of high quality programs providing voluntary home visitation for families with young children and families expecting children. (Does this mean it is voluntary for the family, that is they can choose this service or not choose it? Or does this mean health care workers can “volunteer” to provide this service to “eligible” families?)
… especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families or a high incidence of child maltreatment. (Like Christian families who spank their children?)
This Program is intended to
provide parents with--
‘‘(I) knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains (including knowledge of second language acquisition, in the case of English language learners); ‘‘(II) knowledge of realistic expectations of age-appropriate child behaviors; ‘‘(III) knowledge of health and wellness issues for children and parents; ‘‘(IV) modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices; ‘‘(V) skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development; ‘‘(VI) skills to recognize and seek help for issues related to health, developmental delays, and social, emotional, and behavioral skills; and ‘‘(VII) activities designed to help parents become full partners in the education of their children….
To me, this rings multitudinous alarm bells. Nancy Pelosi and other members of certain departments in the government are strict advocates of Family Planning, believing that such “services” will reduce health care costs. These are men and women who definitely do not make godly role models for our children.
We have already seen terrible consequences from the Spock mentality and from other programs which elevate children above their parents. There was an attempt made to outlaw spanking in California. Some people are afraid to mention it even here. I’ve talked with people in stores that are afraid of the consequences if they speak too loudly in support of those who would use the rod to correct their children.
We knew a family in Florida and one in California who faced trouble with the authorities or health professionals because they were suspected of child abuse. Both were Christian families who spanked their children.
We have personally met people who were diagnosed with “mental” illness when nothing was really wrong with them. Here are just two examples.
One lady was even placed on medications because she had “crying jags” after her father died, her mother died, and her dog died. Is it an odd thing to cry after losing your father, mother, and your dog? Does that mean she needed medications for her increased "mental illness?"
We knew another woman who was diagnosed with Alzheimers and put in a nursing home because she was “unable to care for herself.” They loaded her with medication so she could barely walk. Her sodium was so low she ended up in the hospital. Her “social worker” threatened her that she must not allow anybody to come help her clean her mobile home before she moved into the nursing home. Also, they told her that if she refused to go to a nursing home, they would admit her (to the mental institution).
We went and helped her anyway. While we were there, she took care of canceling her utilities, changing her phone service to the room in the nursing home, taking care of her bills, making arrangements with her children, etc. She had Alzheimers? Also, while we were there her “case worker arrived.” The worker was very angry, but we didn’t care. This was our friend, and she needed help.
They experimented on her with one drug after another for some time until she finally went into her doctor one day and told him, “Stop using me as a guinea pig. I’m not stupid. You say you have to test the medicines to see which ones work. How come you have to try a new one each week?” Suddenly they decided that the diagnosis of Alzheimers was "a mistake.”
Finally her children took legal action and were able to get their “mentally diseased” mother out of the nursing home. She was taken off all medications except one. She then went to care for a handicapped relative. And she was “mentally ill?”
Given this history, what could we expect from government appointed, government approved health care workers who give our families “marriage counseling,” “mental health services,” and child care “behavioral and developmental guidance”? Is this the Biblical role model?
The book of Proverbs gives plain instruction for the training of children. It tells what a child’s heart is like, how a child should act, what discipline should be carried out if the child misbehaves.
As for their education, the Bible says that a child “is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.” (Galatians 4:2) It does not say, Until the time appointed by the government.
Titus gives plain instruction that the pastors and teachers of the church, and the aged Christian men and the aged Christian women are to teach the young men and the young women how to be behave and how to live.
In some cases in the Bible, children were raised or taught by governmental authorities - as in the case of Moses, Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. As far as I have seen, this only took place in cases where the parents had no other choice. I have never seen this as a role model advocated by the Holy Scriptures. Children may have had tutors to teach them formal and non-formal education, but these were tutors appointed by (or chosen by) the fathers.
Free education may sound like a great benefit, and these free “services” mentioned above may sound helpful and exciting. But as we accept more and more from the government, will we not also give more and more to the government? As we take from the king, will we not also give to him?
When the children of Israel wanted a king, God warned them that “He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.” (I Samuel 8:11-17) When we long for a “king” that we might be as other nations, will not our “king” do the same as Israel’s king did to them? Hasn’t he already done the same?
Thomas Jefferson warned, “A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.”
The Bible says that man should “labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.” (Ephesians 4:28) God wants us to help our neighbors and our poor and give and help them learn how to take care of their own needs. It is not the government’s responsibility to provide for everyone. It is the people’s responsibility to work with our own hands to provide our needs. If we expect the government to give, we must not be surprised when the government takes.