Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Medical card and private health insurance

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    penguin88 wrote: »
    So I'll take from this response that you are in favour of prohibiting medical card holders from taking out private insurance. I, and many others, would not agree with this.

    What's your answer to the question asked?


  • Options
    #63
    Kurtosis
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 2,881 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kurtosis


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    Oh yes I'm Sorry if we can't solve the problem entirely we should never speak of it.. Apologies

    Nonsense post. As I said in my post, the whole system needs to be overhauled to fix the equity of access issue, hence the proposed policy of UHI.


  • Options
    #64
    Kurtosis
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 2,881 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kurtosis


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    What's your answer to the question asked?

    That's a question for another thread, the topic here is healthcare.


  • Options
    #65
    Hotfail.com
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,928 ✭✭✭Hotfail.com


    This guy could easily have a low income and value his health highly, therefore he may be getting private health insurance + Medical Card and does without Sky and other luxury goods.

    Would you prefer he spent his money on alcohol/gambling instead of health insurance?


  • Options
    #66
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    penguin88 wrote: »
    That's a question for another thread, the topic here is healthcare.

    The very principle that you are using to argue your side, is identical to the one in that question. The are virtually identical question, I would love to see what your answer is. If you don't answer I have to presume that you would give the person who can afford to pay rent the house.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    Hotfail.com wrote: »
    This guy could easily have a low income and value his health highly, therefore he may be getting private health insurance + Medical Card and does without Sky and other luxury goods.

    Would you prefer he spent his money on alcohol/gambling instead of health insurance?

    Oh yes I would much prefer that....

    I'll ask you the same question - should a person who saves, and forgoes luxuries be awarded a council house even though they are able to pay rent?

    The people who are above the income limit are given no help and are forced to scrimp and save as much as those on a medical card


  • Options
    #68
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    Fred Swanson wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Where does benefit money come into this?

    And a bit ironic... Free market = capitalism, benefit money = socialism bit of a mixed message there


  • Options
    #69
    Kurtosis
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 2,881 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kurtosis


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    The very principle that you are using to argue your side, is identical to the one in that question. The are virtually identical question, I would love to see what your answer is. If you don't answer I have to presume that you would give the person who can afford to pay rent the house.

    You might think it's an identical question but it's not, and demonstrates your lack of understanding of the healthcare system. A council house and privately rented accommodation both fulfil essentially the same role and are no different from one another.

    The public and private health systems are very different in terms of ease/equity of access and the difference between them can mean extra pain, debilitation and potentially death.


  • Options
    #70
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    A more apt analogy is offering a person a council house with shoddy conditions. They then choose to spend harsh winter like moments in a hotel with adequate conditions. Paying from their own pocket.


  • Options
    #71
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    penguin88 wrote: »
    You might think it's an identical question but it's not, and demonstrates your lack of understanding of the healthcare system. A council house and privately rented accommodation both fulfil essentially the same role and are no different from one another.

    The public and private health systems are very different in terms of ease/equity of access and the difference between them can mean extra pain, debilitation and potentially death.

    Just so you know for the future... You know when you are sitting in a&e for 5 hours waiting to see a doctor. They no you are not really sick. Notice how when the ambulance pulls up and the person is wheeled in unconscious and bleeding out the are treated immediately.

    The question is the same. The issues are similar, identical in fact. I would love for you to point out some real life incidences where people have died because they were public patients.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    Turtwig wrote: »
    A more apt analogy is offering a person a council house with shoddy conditions. They then choose to spend harsh winter like moments in a hotel with adequate conditions. Paying from their own pocket.

    Have you seen some public hospitals in Ireland? Take a spin up to Vincent's on the weekend. The conditions in Irish hospitals are for the most part more than adequate. Obviously, in some incidences standards drop, but luckily the government monitors this conditions.

    Now if only there was more funds available to upgrade the system to a higher standard. Maybe if the government weren't paying for a persons GP visits that they were able to afford without the medical card!


  • Options
    #73
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Since when do you have to be on death bed to be truly sick?

    The faster a serious illness is diagnosed the better. I hate using cancer, as it is such a broad term, but it's a concept everyone can relate to. Simply put the faster the diagnosis the better chance of quality of life. And, not all serious illness, have life threatening symptoms that an emergency department must deal with within minutes or hours.


  • Options
    #74
    Kurtosis
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 2,881 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kurtosis


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    Just so you know for the future... You know when you are sitting in a&e for 5 hours waiting to see a doctor. They no you are not really sick. Notice how when the ambulance pulls up and the person is wheeled in unconscious and bleeding out the are treated immediately.

    The question is the same. The issues are similar, identical in fact. I would love for you to point out some real life incidences where people have died because they were public patients.

    So you accept that you had a weak/false analogy with the housing thing.

    Firstly, I am perfectly aware of the system of triage in A&E. You do realise that private health insurance has no effect on speed of access to A&E?

    So unnecessary long term pain and debilitation is ok, as long as no one dies? Such suffering can contribute to mental health issues which could potentially lead to death. Of course there have been cases of people dying on waiting lists, I never suggested people could die after a car crash because they only had a medical card.


  • Options
    #75
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    Turtwig wrote: »
    A more apt analogy is offering a person a council house with shoddy conditions. They then choose to spend harsh winter like moments in a hotel with adequate conditions. Paying from their own pocket.

    And just so you can see how stupid this analogy would be let's play it out.

    Person A - I have scrimped and saved all year in order to afford rent. I have not drank or smoked in order to put a roof offer by head.

    Government - hello person A we would like to offer you a council house with shoddy conditions, what you say want it?

    In this scenario the person still shouldn't bad offered the house as they can afford rent. Now let's look at what I think you were saying.

    Homeless person currently living in a door way in dublin inner city - Jesus I wish I had somewhere I could sleep at night

    Government - hello, would you like a home? The conditions are a bit shoddy though!

    Homeless man - no f'ing problem!


  • Options
    #76
    Kurtosis
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 2,881 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kurtosis


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    Now if only there was more funds available to upgrade the system to a higher standard. Maybe if the government weren't paying for a persons GP visits that they were able to afford without the medical card!

    You realise monthly GP visits would cost more than some health insurance policies?

    You seem fixated on GP care as a benefit of medical cards and are largely ignoring the secondary care, pharmacy and other health services it provides.


  • Options
    #77
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    penguin88 wrote: »
    You realise monthly GP visits would cost more than some health insurance policies?

    You seem fixated on GP care as a benefit of medical cards and are largely ignoring the secondary care, pharmacy and other health services it provides.

    We'll let's go back to the initial point I was making.. The guy was saying he uses his med card for free gp treatment and then his for a quicker hospital experience. This is what I felt was wrong and this is why I keep referring back to GP care, as it was the initial point I was making


  • Options
    #78
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    penguin88 wrote: »
    You realise monthly GP visits would cost more than some health insurance policies?

    Oh I know it would thats why you get medical insurance!! It's kinda the whole point of medical insurance actually.


  • Options
    #79
    Kurtosis
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 2,881 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kurtosis


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    Oh I know it would thats why you get medical insurance!! It's kinda the whole point of medical insurance actually.

    No that's not the point, GP visits aren't fully covered by any policy as far as I know, hospital care is the major reason for health insurance.


  • Options
    #80
    Hotfail.com
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,928 ✭✭✭Hotfail.com


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    We'll let's go back to the initial point I was making.. The guy was saying he uses his med card for free gp treatment and then his for a quicker hospital experience. This is what I felt was wrong and this is why I keep referring back to GP care, as it was the initial point I was making

    He said all this on the internet. (I presume) You don't know the man, I doubt he was telling you the whole story.

    He could be diabetic, a cancer sufferer, have a bad heart or a myriad of other illnesses or ailments that make it impossible for him to afford to pay for both GP visits and medication but make it necessary for him to have private health insurance so he can be seen by a specialist as soon as possible to prevent his health being damaged even further due to larger waiting lists on the public system.


  • Options
    #81
    Kurtosis
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 2,881 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kurtosis


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    And just so you can see how stupid this analogy would be let's play it out.

    Person A - I have scrimped and saved all year in order to afford rent. I have not drank or smoked in order to put a roof offer by head.

    Government - hello person A we would like to offer you a council house with shoddy conditions, what you say want it?

    In this scenario the person still shouldn't bad offered the house as they can afford rent. Now let's look at what I think you were saying.

    Homeless person currently living in a door way in dublin inner city - Jesus I wish I had somewhere I could sleep at night

    Government - hello, would you like a home? The conditions are a bit shoddy though!

    Homeless man - no f'ing problem!

    Wow...and on that ridiculous conflation of the housing and homeless crises, I am out of here for tonight!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    penguin88 wrote: »
    No that's not the point, GP visits aren't fully covered by any policy as far as I know, hospital care is the major reason for health insurance.

    Yes you get covered up to a point.

    Look, the guy earlier today was basically doing this.. Knows he has medical card and thus gets free GP care. Therefore can go as many times as he likes for free. All the while running up the bill for the taxpayer.

    At the same time he is able to reduce his cover with his insurer as he knows that he will only ever need insurance if he is in the hospital.

    The system should not be set up in such a way as to allow people to play the field in this sense. Getting free GP and also benefitting from being able to reduce the amount they pay in insurance.

    In doing this the person who has a med card and private health insurance is doing better than the poor person who is just above the cut off and has to pay there way through the medical system


  • Options
    #83
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,159 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    I was talking to a fellow boards member earlier today and they were quite open about the fact they had a medical card but also pays for health insurance.

    I thought it completely defeated the purpose of the medical, clearly the guy had enough money to afford health care, yet he still felt perfectly comfortable in saying he had the medical card.

    Is this a common thing?

    There are stats on what percentage of the pop have a med card and health ins, but I don't have them to hand.

    I suspect there are thousands of people like my parents who had health insurance for many years, and who then qualifyed for the med card due to age.

    They did not cancel the insurance.

    They use the medical card to pay for GP and pharmacy, and the health insurance allows them faster access to hospital care.

    GREAT COUNTRY!.


  • Options
    #84
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    penguin88 wrote: »
    Wow...and on that ridiculous conflation of the housing and homeless crises, I am out of here for tonight!

    Good man.. Clearly you couldn't argue your way out of a paper bag mate.. You know that is precisely the point you just made played out.


  • Options
    #85
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    And just so you can see how stupid this analogy would be let's play it out.

    Person A - I have scrimped and saved all year in order to afford rent. I have not drank or smoked in order to put a roof offer by head.

    Government - hello person A we would like to offer you a council house with shoddy conditions, what you say want it?

    In this scenario the person still shouldn't bad offered the house as they can afford rent. Now let's look at what I think you were saying.

    Homeless person currently living in a door way in dublin inner city - Jesus I wish I had somewhere I could sleep at night

    Government - hello, would you like a home? The conditions are a bit shoddy though!

    Homeless man - no f'ing problem!
    Person A - I have scrimped and saved all year in order to afford rent. I have
    not drank or smoked in order to put a roof offer by head.

    Government -
    hello person A we would like to offer you a council house with shoddy
    conditions, what you say want it?

    In this scenario the person still
    shouldn't bad offered the house as they can afford rent.

    So if they had spent the money on booze and fags they should be offered the house? Is that what you are saying?
    put a roof offer by head.
    Do you have a cold?


  • Options
    #86
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    Hotfail.com wrote: »
    He said all this on the internet. (I presume) You don't know the man, I doubt he was telling you the whole story.

    He could be diabetic, a cancer sufferer, have a bad heart or a myriad of other illnesses or ailments that make it impossible for him to afford to pay for both GP visits and medication but make it necessary for him to have private health insurance so he can be seen by a specialist as soon as possible to prevent his health being damaged even further due to larger waiting lists on the public system.

    At risk of going over your head completely I'll use the old lanconic reply - if! He could be a spaceman from Mars for all I know.

    And just as a heads up the correct use of the word myriad in that sentence should read - have a bad heart or a myriad other illnesses.


  • Options
    #87
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    obplayer wrote: »
    So if they had spent the money on booze and fags they should be offered the house? Is that what you are saying?


    Do you have a cold?

    No what I am saying is if a person has suffices means that means that they do not require assistance from the government. They should not be given it.


  • Options
    #88
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    No what I am saying is if a person has suffices means that means that they do not require assistance from the government. They should not be given it.

    So government assistance should only be given if people are living at subsistence level? Anything above that is fend for yourself?


  • Options
    #89
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    obplayer wrote: »
    So government assistance should only be given if people are living at subsistence level? Anything above that is fend for yourself?

    That's how it works at the moment


  • Options
    #90
    Hotfail.com
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,928 ✭✭✭Hotfail.com


    sleepyheadh wrote: »
    And just as a heads up the correct use of the word myriad in that sentence should read - have a bad heart or a myriad other illnesses.

    Time for me to leave, once we get to correcting grammar we can say goodbye to any reasonable level of debate. And just as a heads up, they're both acceptable.

    Bye.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    sleepyheadh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 582 ✭✭✭sleepyheadh


    Hotfail.com wrote: »
    Time for me to leave, once we get to correcting grammar we can say goodbye to any reasonable level of debate. And just as a heads up, they're both acceptable.

    Bye.

    Bye, and there are not. There is the correct way and the wrong way. Myriad is a number, would you say " I have seven of dogs"?


Advertisement