Is the new policy to deny American newborns full, quick and automatic accessibility to Medicare going to cause more harm than good?

Change in Medicaid causes concern for infants
Several health groups are concerned that babies born to illegal immigrants could be denied essential medical care such as immunizations and physicals because of recent changes to Medicaid.

The babies automatically are U.S. citizens because they were born in U.S. hospitals. Under past policy, the groups said, the government required states to provide the babies with a full year of eligibility for Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor.

Now, mothers of the newborns will have to apply for Medicaid on behalf of their newborns, which many will not want to risk, say groups such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians and the March of Dimes.
link


Do you feel it is appropriate for the accessibility of health care to a US citizen to no longer be "automatic" upon birth but instead must be proven and applied for? Also if you support the "Culture of Life" how does this new policy adhere to it?

In the article a spokesperson for for Medicare and Medicaid Services refuted the above fears by claiming...
"If people know of an instance where a state has denied eligibility because someone couldn't produce evidence of citizenship in particular among the most vulnerable, we would be interested in knowing about that," she said. Which anyone who is familiar with providing health care to children in the US knows it is not a matter of eligibility but accessibility, often parents don't bother to register their children for the health care and coverage they are eligible for.

Also do you feel this new policy will make health care accessibility more difficult for low income newborns in the US?

I think we're talking about illegals here. I don't think they should automatically get non-emergency healthcare. Illegals need to be arrested, and deported. We can't afford this any longer. The protected population growth by 2040 is so astronomical as to completely bankrupt the US. It has to be slow down dramatically. I saw a Congressman explaining this on TV the other night. It is scary to say the least. Emergency medical care should be given only, nothing more.

This is partially about illegals. As bucket pointed out, the babies were born here and are automatically citizens.

Let me guess who the Congressman was - Tom Tancredo?

It would also be nice if you linked us, if possible, to the Congressman's - whoever he was - statement. That way we could read it ourselves instead of going by your interpretation.

Not only are they not illegals, they are newborns, infants. Perhaps you know little about care for infants but babies are in need of early check ups and doctored exams in order to assure they are progressing and developing well, and they also need to be immunized in the first few months of their lives.


I don't see how awaiting a birth certificate to arrive by mail, which can takes months when considering health care and the medical needs of infants helps anyone. This is not only an issue of basic health coverage for our most needy in society, but I believe this is also an issue of public health too because of the fact that children require so many immunizations in the first year of their life.

No one has bothered to address the questions I asked of this debate, I am still curious as to how this policy supports Bush's promotion of a "culture of life"

I think Bush borrowed the phrase "culture of life" from the Catholic idea supporting life from conception to grave - the seamless garment of life.

As the Bush administration has put the puzzle together, it appears that those pieces after birth have been lost - not only on health care, but on issues such as capital punishment.

The Bush administration has, at best, a quasi a "culture of life" position.

I wish I could tell you the congressman's name, I forget. Anyway, I have three children so I don't need any lessons from anyone here. I don't care if they are considered Americans, they are illegal in my book. We can't keep supporting this excuse of if you're born here you're legal, even if your parents aren't. But I don't think anyone here cares about the long term effects.

Well then if monetary considerations is what guides you most when regarding rights of our citizenry, then which is more cost effective?
To have an infant see a doctor during normal business hours to assure proper care, hygiene and health is progressing well, what we call preventative care.
or
For an infant to be admitted to the local hospital emergency room for measles, jaundice, inability to thrive because of poor feeding, infected diaper rash etc?

Do you feel it is appropriate for the accessibility of health care to a US citizen to no longer be "automatic" upon birth but instead must be proven and applied for? Also if you support the "Culture of Life" how does this new policy adhere to it?

This, to me, is the most exceedingly hard question in the terms of the illegal immigration flood in this country- That being a curable problem - just start giving felony sentences and verdicts to those that hire illegals. So I really don't blame illegals for thier behaviors, nor thier circumstances. And the MOST innocent in this equation is the infants themselves. So, though, I think the illegal immigration is a real problem, I do not think the illegal immigrant themselves or the infants should be punished for this crime. So no, this is silly and stupid, and quite frankly, a bit evil. You would think the religious righties would be all up in arms the same way they were about Schiavo- but they are brown babies I guess, and not worth to much to the folks that made this law/ruling or whatever we are calling it.

I think it is a very nasty thing to as well in regards to the constitution, and our heritage as a melting pot of humanity- The influx of illegals is quite a history for us, with the various european migrations to the US- and, we, as a society- either need to "cowboy up" and stop INSISTING on too cheap labor for everything, pay just a bit more, and stop supporting the employers that utilize illegals. And start busting, hard, those individuals that hire them. Make CEOs of corporations that rely on illegal labor for thier company culpable of a felony crime.

Illegals only come here in droves because we demand them, and every US citizen, including myself, is culpable in this problem, and we need to face the reality that WE as Americans, are responsible for this problem, and, as is our usual, stop blaming and punishing those that are just trying to support thier families, not really wanting or trying to harm anyone.

Seems mighty "unchristian" to deny an infant, even a brown one, health care- dont ya think?

I don't know- if I was an attending physician, I think I would take the charge in the shorts, and help the baby regardless, and worry about money later. 40k is enough for me to live on a year, maybe 60k a year for a dr to pay back his/her loans- Perhaps some Drs forget thier oaths, and the reason for the need for thier position in the first place? Anyway- I can be a cold hearted SOB towards those culpable of a crime- but infants are culpable of no crime, and, as a father, there is no way on Gawds green earth that I can justify not giving care for one, and will be happy that my taxes go to something worthwhile, like a little baby in need, than to say, oh, Cheney and Haliburton, Iraq etc

Funny, I will probably the the agnostic that is against this kind of behavior, and all the hardcore christians will be the ones that are okay with it.

Also do you feel this new policy will make health care accessibility more difficult for low income newborns in the US?

to be fair- health care accesability for the poor seems, from what I have read- if someone has some different info, I will concede quickly that I am wrong - but from what I have read, it does matter what region of the nation you live in- if you live in Anchorage Alaska- you have no problem as a poor person getting care, as opposed to, say, one of those middle income types that don't qualify for medicaid but are too poor to afford health care insurance.

But- overall, yes, I absolutely think it will be more difficult, of course.

I have three children as well, and I work in emergency health care. Yet there are always lessons to be learned, by all of us. Your having three children doesn't automatically make you an authority on parenting or neonatal healthcare. I believe that Bucket is right on the money. It is far more cost-efficient to provide well-baby care than emergency care. Infants need medical care, and these infants are American citizens. Even if they were not, they would deserve care.

You talk about no one caring about the long term effects... yet you seem to care very little for the long term effects of denying health care to newborns in this country. An interesting dichotomy, no? Frankly I worry more about the long term effects of making an ethical choice that condemns groups of people wholesale to second-class citizenship.

If we are to believe our own founding documents, our rights are inalienable. They are not conferred upon us by those in authority, but are a natural part of our existence. If this is the case then citizenship of any particular country cannot mitigate those rights - or else we must not actually believe that any rights are inalienable at all.

A scientific perspective.
Babies are born everyday with birth defects. Mostly, this is due to premature births which are increasing in this country. A baby needs the full gestation period to get equipped with the armour necessary to be a healthy adult. If you deny healthcare to pregnant women (illegal or not) and their newborn child (citizen if born here), then you are going to have Americans growing up with mental and/or physical disabilities that could have been prevented by neonatal screening and care. What costs a few hundred dollars at birth, costs many thousands (or millions) for an adult that grows with severe disabilities. The government (your tax dollars) pays for that.

Recently I saw a presentation by the "March of Dimes" charity (www.marchofdimes.com). Two babies with similar names were born around the same time in California. One was born in a hospital participating in a pilot program that screened newborns for something like 27 (could be wrong on the number) defects. It involved taking a blood sample and running it through the lab. Estimated cost was under $100. It took minutes. The baby was recognized to have an allergy to protein. The hospital prevented the mother from feeding breast-milk and advised on diet. The child is now 5 and healthy. The other child did not get that screening. The protein allergy was not detected. The mother fed him breast-milk. He was a very quiet child. Didn't cry or move much. After a few months, the parents realized that he was seriously sick. Too late. The brain damage is irreparable. The child (also 5) lies still, yet breathing, on a pillow. He will need expensive and constant care until the day he dies. As a result of both sets of parents appealing to the California Congress, this screening is now mandatory in CA.

If you cannot feel the humanity in giving healthcare to babies, then consider the economics.

Having three children has apparently not taught you much about basic compassion.

Firstly, 'your book' is not the law of the land. So the fact that YOU consider these legal children to be illegal is just unfortunate. The constitution of the United States is pretty explicit on this matter.

There are many nations in the world that have 'Jus Soli' laws, including Canada, Mexico, Germany, France and so on, and most of them (Canada excepted) have less room than the US does. However, this is not a debate about these laws, there is another thread for that.


THIS is a debate about giving medical care to infants. Frankly, any nation on planet earth that decides not to give important medical care to infants does not deserve to be called a nation. Basic immunisations cost about 25$, and could save millions of lives around the world. But you would deny them to these infants because YOU have a better grasp of the 'long term effects'?

Here is a long term effect for you, children who receive basic natal care including immunisations, examinations, basic infection and birth trauma watch and care, and so on reduces the infant's chance of DYING before they hit 18 by over 20%.

As you have three children, and don't need lessons from anyone here, I'm sure you already knew that.

Doctors are usually highly in debt from school costs. I don't think 60k a year will do it. We aren't speaking of emergency care in which the physician won't heal a sick child, we are speaking of preventative medicine, and if one physician offers his services for free what would happen? A deluge. Go down to Mexico and hand out money to the beggars and you will receive a dynamic demonstration of how this works. A doctor who acted this way wouldn't even have a practice. I trust that you give all that you own, if there is anything left, beyond 40k each year to the poor? If not, how do you justify "not caring for all of those babies"?

That being said, I do think we should give infants their first year immunizations and care. I don't like this new policy. We spend tens of millions to fund immunization programs world wide, so we can certainly do this for children in our own nation. They are the ones who should come first.

We are talking about illegals here and it does have to stop. One of the primary reasons many illegals stream across the border is for the free health care that they receive here. This places a HUGE strain onto our system which then raises rates, causing lower income persons the inability to afford health coverage.

I like Irelands approach to immigrants over US policy. The baby becomes a citizen, but the parents do not. They must apply for citizenship or face deportation. I also like Germany's approach to where you must learn the language within 5 years in order to retain citizenship.




Please indicate where the law stipulates denial of healthcare to infants. Its attempting to get these people into the system, properly.

Also, it is illegal for any medical institution to deny any persons, illegal or not, medical attention based upon weather they can pay or not. Granted, certain treatments can be denied that cause extreme cost to the facility.

I don't see how this is a proper way to "get these people into the system". Aren't there ways other than using their infant's healthcare as a medium? How about their own healthcare needs rather than their infant's?



THis is only true of emergency care, not preventative care which is what this topic is about. It's one thing to deny an adult person a paid routine exam each year, and another to deny infants in their first year of life immunizations and checkups.

Infants born here are legal citizens. They need to be placed into the system to receive medicaid and since they are incapable of doing this themselve, then there parents need to have them registered. I don't see a downfall for this. Regarding the parents, are you suggesting we continue to subsidize illegal immigrants healthcare needs and not get American citizens into the system?






EDIT FOR CORRECTION:

From the link:



Well, I certainly do. The downfall is that these infants might not receive medical care of the sort that is considered obligatory for most of us non-immigrant, "legal" parents. It's obligatory because it's extremely important. I'll say again, I don't think this is the proper venue to "catch" illegals. By using their newborn's medical care as "bait".

I think your mis-interpreting the intent of the program. Its not to identify illegals but to stop the abuse of the system. Hospitals are closing left and right because of this astronomical additional cost they must absorb.

I think you missed my point. The law does not stipulate the denial of healthcare to infants, at all. However The Founder's Intent (who I was responding to) does, claiming he does not care what the laws says, they are all illegal in his book and should be denied the treatment. Since he 'has three children and doesn't need any lessons from anyone here' I thought it worthwhile to point out (as you have as well) that in fact he might benefit from lessons on the basics of American law, not to mention basic human morality.

In fact I agree with you Tim, mostly. Frankly I think it is NOT such a huge number of immigrants and not such a huge problem as some make it out to be. I will tell you something interesting. I have in the past 20 years lived for some time in 5 different countries, and each one without fail has conservatives who rant in the media about how THEIR country has horrible immigration problems worse than anyone else, that no other nation can understand. After such consistently insular doomsaying, I have grown somewhat jaded to claims that there really are 'more immigrants than the nation can handle'.

Perhaps you can explain this to me. Before, newborns were automatically enrolled in Medicaid for the first year of life. Now, they must be enrolled by their parents to obtain Medicaid for the first year of life. How does this counteract abuse of the system, as the newborn is supposed to be covered either way?

I would be interested in this link about "hospitals closing left and right"- all I see is a boom in the health care field, and a nursing shortage etc. Have built one complete new hospital here locally, and expanded the other 2 by 100%, and opened yet another one in the town next to us -Wassila/Palmer- that is huge too.

Only reason for a hospital to close is wrongdoing, poor management, or some other system allowing idiots and morons to run the hospital.

Sorry Mrs P- I took the original post to say that they were denying health care, even the gap between emergency and routine care- there is a bit of a gap there- for instance- you are aware of the controversy of kicking women out of the hospital early? I was thinking along those lines- if I read too much into that- my apologies.

BTW- you may be right about student loans too- however- that being said- by working in a "distressed" area- public health being one- there is an enormous forgiveness program (Thank you Bill Clinton ) that not only forgives your loans- it also puts over 1K a month in your pocket! To be fair- this has been going on since Carter's time- public health has had many programs for years helping health care proffesionals pay thier loans if they choose to go into public health. I benefited from it myself for my continued ed credits.

I appreciate the clarification.

I don't want to paint the picture that we are the only problem with illegal immigration because I know for a fact that we are not alone. France has been battling this problem for many years now and in many cases, they are in worse shape than we are here.

My contention is that the influx of illegal immigration has but a major strain on our health care system. It's taking dollars away that could be used to get our lower class citizens into the health care system.



I will look for the exact study that was national. But here was a study done from 1995 to 2000 in California by University of California.

http://ag.ca.gov/charities/publications/no...hosp/report.pdf

In addition:

http://dcc2.bumc.bu.edu/hs/sager/pdfs/0212...0Feb%202002.pdf

This is one BIG reason why our healthcare system is going bankrupt. Needless to say MANY of these children were brought in from Mexico and are NOT citizens and should get deported. Those born here to illegals should go back to Mexico with them. We can no longer afford to support millions of illegal aliens and their kids.

Of course with the Dems controlling congress we are toast. The fence will stop and the illegals will pour in since Dems want (and get) the big latino vote. Meanwhile our healthcare system goes in the tank as morons like Teddy Kennedy compare the illegal aliens to the “civil rights movement’!!!

We are doomed.