What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The "I Can't Believe There's No Abortion Thread" Part Deux: Electric Boogaloo

Status
Not open for further replies.
leswp1 said:
This can depend on what is scanned and also where the scan is happening. Best example= we had an independent radiology center that did x-rays, mammos, etc. They had a contract with the local PHO (Physician Hospital Organization) so by proxy with all the insurances, to do Mammos at a set rate (somewhere around 250)

Mass General took over the site and didn't let people know this happened. They kept calling women to come for their annual screen. They were out of network. Mass General's agreement with insurances was to bill 800$ for the same services. The explanation for such a disparity was they were a teaching and research based hospital and this was part of the way they funded themselves.

Women were getting wacked with bills for going out of network. Some of the insurances paid but then docked the hospital the extra money from their reimbursement. I used to tell the uninsured pts to call around to get the best rate. This of course was a pipe dream. ALthough it is a law they reveal prices they never give a straight answer.
Click to expand...

Yes. Shop around is very good advice. I wanted to know if I had cancer and was at going to die so I went with the hospital and didn't care about costs. Only who had an opening the next day :-P
 
dxmnkd316 said:
Agree and fair point. But that wasn't my original point. My point was that if im a doctor and someone requests one knowing it's $200, then I'd be hard pressed to say no.
Click to expand...

I had a visceral reaction to this comment. Medicine is not Burger King. The direct to consumer ads have given people the impression that they should be able to request tests (treatments, meds) like they were ordering coffee esp if they are willing to pay out of pocket. I would have no problem saying no. Most Providers should have no problem saying no. If they don't then there is a problem with their ethics.

A Provider's job is to consider if there is a medical reason to recommend a test (tor treatment, or course of action). They also need to think of what the plan is if you do a test- You never do something without considering what you will do with the results. This is one of the first things you learn as you start ordering tests. You can be in a world of pain if you end up with incidental findings that make you do further testing even if there are no symptoms. You have to defend why you ordered the test to begin with and you get to deal with how much of a work up is necessary= the trade off between too much with incurred cost or too little and get your a55 sued.

Ordering unwarranted tests to is a waste of resources. We have limited medical resources- machines, staff, space- with limited accessibility in most areas. Just because people can afford it is not a reason to be doing tests on a whim because people want them.

If the person is looking to see if there is an abnormality with the pregnancy the capture rate would be very low having an U/S early. In most cases those tell you how many embryos are implanted and not a whole lot more except where it is in the uterus.
 
leswp1 said:
I had a visceral reaction to this comment. Medicine is not Burger King. The direct to consumer ads have given people the impression that they should be able to request tests (treatments, meds) like they were ordering coffee esp if they are willing to pay out of pocket. I would have no problem saying no. Most Providers should have no problem saying no. If they don't then there is a problem with their ethics.

A Provider's job is to consider if there is a medical reason to recommend a test (tor treatment, or course of action). They also need to think of what the plan is if you do a test- You never do something without considering what you will do with the results. This is one of the first things you learn as you start ordering tests. You can be in a world of pain if you end up with incidental findings that make you do further testing even if there are no symptoms. You have to defend why you ordered the test to begin with and you get to deal with how much of a work up is necessary= the trade off between too much with incurred cost or too little and get your a55 sued.

Ordering unwarranted tests to is a waste of resources. We have limited medical resources- machines, staff, space- with limited accessibility in most areas. Just because people can afford it is not a reason to be doing tests on a whim because people want them.

If the person is looking to see if there is an abnormality with the pregnancy the capture rate would be very low having an U/S early. Those tell you how many embryos are implanted and not a whole lot more except where it is in the uterus.
Click to expand...

Well said. Exactly right
 
leswp1 said:
I had a visceral reaction to this comment. Medicine is not Burger King. The direct to consumer ads have given people the impression that they should be able to request tests (treatments, meds) like they were ordering coffee esp if they are willing to pay out of pocket. I would have no problem saying no. Most Providers should have no problem saying no. If they don't then there is a problem with their ethics.

A Provider's job is to consider if there is a medical reason to recommend a test (tor treatment, or course of action). They also need to think of what the plan is if you do a test- You never do something without considering what you will do with the results. This is one of the first things you learn as you start ordering tests. You can be in a world of pain if you end up with incidental findings that make you do further testing even if there are no symptoms. You have to defend why you ordered the test to begin with and you get to deal with how much of a work up is necessary= the trade off between too much with incurred cost or too little and get your a55 sued.

Ordering unwarranted tests to is a waste of resources. We have limited medical resources- machines, staff, space- with limited accessibility in most areas. Just because people can afford it is not a reason to be doing tests on a whim because people want them.

If the person is looking to see if there is an abnormality with the pregnancy the capture rate would be very low having an U/S early. In most cases those tell you how many embryos are implanted and not a whole lot more except where it is in the uterus.
Click to expand...

Except when the state starts to threaten to murder you because of religious zealotry. That's a pretty good effing reason.

Edit: WHich, again, was my entire point, the context of which seems to have been lost in the several posts since then. I'm not talking about randos wanting a pregnancy test or weekly pictures of their precious chicken nugget.
 
Last edited:
Kepler said:
But these are the stories that will stop the madness.

We need to make sure every white suburban Karen knows it's her and her daughter, too.

That's how you get sh-t done in America. Frame it as dangerous or beneficial to middle brow flyover white brood sows.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree. I have nothing but heartbreak for this woman and I want all of these stories to be blasted all over.

my sarcasm is at all the male lawmakers who swear this wasn’t the intent
 
Deutsche Gopher Fan said:
Oh I agree. I have nothing but heartbreak for this woman and I want all of these stories to be blasted all over.

my sarcasm is at all the male lawmakers who swear this wasn’t the intent
Click to expand...


Yep. Face-eating Leopard remorse.

"I voted for him, and he's the one who's doing this," she said of Mr. Trump. "I thought he was going to do good things. He's not hurting the people he needs to be hurting."
Click to expand...
 
Kepler said:
But these are the stories that will stop the madness.

We need to make sure every white suburban Karen knows it's her and her daughter, too.

That's how you get sh-t done in America. Frame it as dangerous or beneficial to middle brow flyover white brood sows.
Click to expand...

The problem is that it it still won't register until it gets closer to home. But it is a start...

For years The Right got away with this type of rhetoric because women were largely silent on the issue. Who wants to recount such awful tragedies and traumas? Now The Right has forced the issue in the open and people are not liking what they see.
 
Handyman said:
The problem is that it it still won't register until it gets closer to home. But it is a start...

For years The Right got away with this type of rhetoric because women were largely silent on the issue. Who wants to recount such awful tragedies and traumas? Now The Right has forced the issue in the open and people are not liking what they see.
Click to expand...

A small part of it will be circulation of stories in the media. The biggest part will be the word of mouth between women, talking about their own stories and their loved ones'. To a large extent, men will not even be aware of what is changing in attitudes.

The Right has no idea what they have unleashed. They lost black and gays with their callous and diseased policies. Sure, they kept some black and gay Christians, but not many. The same thing will inexorably happen with women over the years. We must keep pushing and fighting and using every possible tool to hand to secure women's fundamental rights, and we must also brand this onto the Right so they can never escape it. They are the party that is attacking women's very humanity. They are the ideology which regards women by the hideous, childish, snarling Christian mother/whore caricature. The Right should never be allowed to rinse away that stain.
 
Last edited:
Kepler said:
Yep. Face-eating Leopard remorse

"I voted for him, and he's the one who's doing this," she said of Mr. Trump. "I thought he was going to do good things. He's not hurting the people he needs to be hurting."
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I'm fully on board with her plight but can't agree with the sentiment voting for a POTUS for the purpose of needing to hurt anyone in the broader sense.
 
Last edited:
Deutsche Gopher Fan said:
Condoms can’t be sold to prevent pregnancy. But thry can be used to prevent STDs

republicans are so fucking evil.

just sanction rape- a woman not getting inserted with semen is actively preventing a pregnancy and we can’t allow that

https://twitter.com/rothforidaho/status/1574501943606939648?s=46&t=UY5jrq2N3TjqCqLqo_b6bA
Click to expand...

Makes perfect sense. We can't have women avoiding being pregnant and barefoot at all times. It's the most effective way to fix our incel problem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top