RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality

RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

slvemike4u -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:26:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse Prostate surgery would be needed to save a life. An abortion would be just the opposite. Oh boy.....thats going to get a reaction....yep.

servantforuse -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:28:38 PM)
They can do whatever they want with their bodies. I don't want it paid for with tax dollars, and it will be under the public option.

tazzygirl -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:29:19 PM)
Got that right. How many women are raped and unable to reach help. How many are victims of incest. How many are victims of date rape, marital rape, ect. Lets not forget that even the skeptics claim at least 5% are performed to save the mother's life.

tazzygirl -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:39:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse They can do whatever they want with their bodies. I don't want it paid for with tax dollars, and it will be under the public option. Dont even try that. Within weeks of Viagra hitting the market, a medication given to induce the drive for sex, thus helping to create life, Viagra was covered by insurance plans. Guess what... the pill to prevent the conception of that drive for sex wasnt. quote: Within weeks of hitting the U.S. market in 1998, more than half of Viagra prescriptions received health insurance coverage. If many women weren't already outraged that they had to pay for birth control out of pocket, they were infuriated at the preference given to the anti-impotence pills. Erections Get Insurance; Why Not the Pill? Women See Progress in Getting Birth Control Covered by Health Insurance By GERALDINE SEALEY June 19, 2002 BC pills had been out ever since i could remember, and insurance companies didnt want to cover them. Even now a woman has to read the fine print as they may not be offered as part of the options. When you view one end eligible for payment, yet the product non-eligible, well... lets just say... its extremely sexist.

kittinSol -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:41:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse Prostate surgery would be needed to save a life. An abortion would be just the opposite. Oh boy.....thats going to get a reaction....yep. Not from me. Not raising to such a blatantly trollish bait [:)] . Servant will have to use something a little more subtle - perhaps if he addressed the subject of the thread, as opposed to keep on parrotting anti-abortion talking points, it might be worth addressing him?

slvemike4u -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:42:11 PM)
Walked right into that one.....ouch!

zenny -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:43:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Again, if there were a proposal for a web site to display the same information about men having their prostates removed, what do you believe the chances of that passing would be? Hence my mention of precedence. quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that abortion rights have been consistently hijacked and threatened by politicians wanting to distract the electorate from larger issues because it is such a conveniently divisive subject, and by an ignorant, superstitious and bigotted public who thinks that personal medical decisions concern society as a whole. No, this is about women's rights to make the right decision for themselves, in the privacy of the consultation room, and in the company of their chosen healthcare professional. It's not about everybody's rights, because men's medical decisions never create the public polemic that abortion creates. Yes, this single issue deals with women. The precedence deals with all people. It always starts with one thing. Think about it, this has the potential to be far more reaching than a simple 'women' issue. Also, I can think of several extremely easy examples, including but not limited to, transsexuals, vasectomy, ANY medication, especially those used for effecting neurological changes, et cetera, et cetera.

tazzygirl -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:45:34 PM)
Looking at it from that perspective, your right, zenny.

kittinSol -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:45:55 PM)
You're missing my point: no other medical issue has created a polemic in the manner that abortion has. And who is medically concerned by abortion? Women. Women are the exclusive recipient of such an intervention.

rulemylife -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:46:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse Do you really think that your medical records will be kept private once the government starts paying the bills.? They will have access to everything you do. They will be the ones deciding who gets paid for what. Of course they will know. And this means what? Your insurance company knows the same now, but they can no more divulge it then the government will be able to with a public option. Understanding HIPAA Privacy Who is Covered by the Privacy Rule The Privacy Rule, as well as all the Administrative Simplification rules, apply to health plans, health care clearinghouses, and to any health care provider who transmits health information in electronic form in connection with transactions for which the Secretary of HHS has adopted standards under HIPAA (the “covered entities”). Health Plans. Individual and group plans that provide or pay the cost of medical care are covered entities. Health plans include health, dental, vision, and prescription drug insurers, health maintenance organizations (“HMOs”), Medicare, Medicaid, Medicare+Choice and Medicare supplement insurers, and long-term care insurers (excluding nursing home fixed-indemnity policies). Health plans also include employer-sponsored group health plans, government and church-sponsored health plans, and multi-employer health plans.

tazzygirl -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:47:25 PM)
kittin, someone is always the "target" to start the whole ball of wax. This time its abortion laws and confidentiality. They pass this, next who knows who will be on the hit list.

kittinSol -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:50:55 PM)
It wouldn't be politically viable to even try with other medical issues, the uproar would be too loud. With abortion it's worth a try, simply because it's such an opinion rouser. I don't disagree with Zenny entirely: I think though that this is specifically concerning to women precisely because of the political nature of the abortion debate.

tazzygirl -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:52:42 PM)
Dont think transexuals wouldnt make a great target for the next step? I personally have no problems with them. Many in the "religious right" and "moral minority" who are so in power do.

zenny -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:54:07 PM)
There are many variants of contraception. Just because it is a pill doesn't mean it should be covered under insurance. Do you ask don't ask for insurance companies to purchase condoms, why would I ask them to purchase The Pill? Also, Erectile dysfunction is a medical condition. Not being able to keep ones legs closed is as best a neurological one (ignoring obvious amputee references). Regardless, were there a disease of some sort or biological need for The Pill by some women, I'm sure she would get it covered by insurance.

tazzygirl -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:55:33 PM)
Ahem... and when a MAN is raped... HE doesnt get pregnant, does he.

kittinSol -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:56:26 PM)
Woah. It always amazes me when I read such Neanderthalian arguments against contraception as a medical necessity. Shocking [:(] .

kittinSol -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:57:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zenny Regardless, were there a disease of some sort or biological need for The Pill by some women, I'm sure she would get it covered by insurance. Actually, yeah, there is: it's called unwanted pregnancy. Contraception's a medical progress. It's prescribed by doctors for patients.

zenny -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:59:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol It wouldn't be politically viable to even try with other medical issues, the uproar would be too loud. With abortion it's worth a try, simply because it's such an opinion rouser. I don't disagree with Zenny entirely: I think though that this is specifically concerning to women precisely because of the political nature of the abortion debate. If you don't think transsexuals aren't targeted you've another thing coming. There are also a lot more abortions than sex changes.

tazzygirl -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 7:59:46 PM)
LOL... impotence is not a medical condition, its a fact of life, just like pregnancy, Only difference is one happens to men, and its considered medically necessary to correct and cover by insurance... and the other happens to women.

chiaThePet -> RE: So much for Dr-patient confidentiality (10/24/2009 8:00:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Again, if there were a proposal for a web site to display the same information about men having their prostates removed, what do you believe the chances of that passing would be? Tazz, If I am reading this article correctly, no one is being asked to forward identifying information which would include name, address, etc. The article does state that this type of information is gathered quite frequently, even offering that 46 out of 50 states and the District of Colombia already have mandatory or voluntary reporting. I'm certainly not for promoting anything which would violate our basic right to privacy. Each side in an argument will of course advance that which will promote their agenda. I believe figures are already available on prostate information. Hopefully, most gathered information is for the betterment of society as a whole. We of course need to rebuff that which means us harm. Realizing that hysteria is often used to gain the strength of an emotional tide by both sides if they feel it will ensure victory in the end. Personal information which could jeopardize the privacy of individuals should remain off limits. Of course, many will cry foul when anything they deem to be of a private nature is exposed publicly. I am currently gathering information of the average foot size of straight male Dominants from the scuff marks on the ceiling of my Early American boudoir. All except the six-toed right footprint shall be deemed anonymous. Besides simply fucking up the much loved and adored rendition of "This Little Piggy, piggy, piggy, piggy, piggy, piggy", the whole flamingo stance just freaked me out. Just for the record, I'm totally serious. Literally. chia* (the pet)

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875