9 Million Children Lack Insurance, Study Says

[OhioChick]

Health Benefits Eroding, Group Says

POSTED: 6:11 am PDT March 14, 2007

Over the last decade, the percentage of low-income workers who can get health insurance for their children has declined, according to a study by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. That has left about 9 million children without health coverage.

The report says that about 47 percent of parents in families earning less than $40,000 a year -- twice the federal poverty limit for a family of four -- are offered health insurance through their employers.

That's a 9 drop during the past decade.

About 78 percent of parents in families earning more than $80,000 a year have an option for coverage, about the same as 10 years ago.

The group said the figures underscores concern that low-income parents are experiencing a dramatic erosion in employee benefits.

http://www.nbc11.com/health/11250100/detail.html

[tandot]

1. And yet, no "pro-lifers" seem to be outraged by that. They are busy saving blastocysts

and supporting a needless war

[bdamomma]

2. this is shameful.

[lovuian]

3. Every American child should have insurance

children should be loved and protected what kinda society is america

[Benhurst]

5. No, not insurance. Every man, woman and child in this country

should be covered by single-payer national health.

The health "insurance" companies are a big part of the problem and should be put out of business.

[jhasp]

7. A few questions about single payer-

While I support the idea of universal health insurance, I am hesitant concerning single payer. I have the following questions:

1. What effect will it have on elective surgeries (my wife is well on her way to losing 120 lbs and will likely need/want some cosmetic surgery in the future and I would like to get RK surgery for my eyes)?
2. Will it stop me from paying out of pocket if I choose not to go through the government for my medical needs? How will this be enforced (will I and the doctor go to jail for it)?
3. Will doctors and hospitals only be allowed to accept government payments and no other outside payments?
4. Can pharma companies and hospitals choose not to offer available treatments at the price paid by the government and if they so choose will they be prosecuted?

I have some serious issues with what I perceive as loss of freedoms that are inherent in a single-payer model.

[xchrom]

9. universal health care doesn't mean you can't purchase other health care.

nationalized healthcare simply means that most health care -- the health care that most people need most of teh time will be covered -- it doesn't exclude extra insurance, out of pocket or elective stuff.

why would it?

[jhasp]

11. My questions have to do with single payer vs. universal health care.

Universal just means that everyone has access to health care. Single payer means that the government is the sole source of payment for health care. Like I said I would like to see the former, but have serious questions about the latter. If other forms of insurance are available under single payer-then it really isn't single payer and hospitals and doctors can simply deny care to "single payer" patients.

[xchrom]

12. actually -- in either case other insurance options

would be available.

no one is going to design a system that doesn't allow for some other options.

it's the 21st century not the 19th century.

[kath]

10. Say it, bro! NOT "insurance" - what every American needs is a single-payer health

care system. Just like virtually every "first world" nation.

The blood-sucking, parasitic insurance companies suck HUGE amounts of money out of the system. Their role in health care should be eliminated (we will still need ins. companies for life, homeowners' and other types of insurance. But get them OUT of health care, pronto.)

[Benhurst]

4. And we wonder why the vets are getting such poor treatment.

Any society which can neglect its children can hardly be expected to take care of adults, no matter who they are.

It's pathetic. The World's Only Superpower, indeed.

[jhasp]

6. I think an important point in the story...

is that 6 million of these children needn't be uninsured, as there are existing programs for them. Both of my kids are on Medicaid (I'm a low income grad student) and it has worked great. I think low income parents need to be better educated about what is available.

[noonwitch]

8. And many states have low-cost programs for those who are not elibible for medicaid

A lot of people with low-paying jobs don't qualify for medicaid. In Michigan, we have a program that parents can enroll their kids in for about $5 a month.

[kath]

13. But many states are having HUGE cutbacks in the CHIP program,

and many children will lose their eligibility.

[jhasp]

14. Isn't CHIP just an insurance pool?

I know in Arkansas it is. It is just set up by the state, but insurance premiums are not subsidized. We tried to get high deductible (very low premium) insurance for my wife, but since she has a liver condition we had to go through Arkansas's CHIP program. We pay $192 per month for coverage and have a deductible of $5000-so it certainly isn't subsidized.