Special needs / LJWorld.com

Letters to the Editor

September 19, 2008

To the editor:

As an average working mom, I have to wonder why there's such a fuss about Ms. Palin - especially regarding her comment about being a special-needs friend and advocate. While I commend her for some improvements to special-education funding within the relatively flush Alaskan budget, the much bigger issue is the ability to afford excellent care outside the classroom.

If the kids are lucky, they will be helped for 13 school years. What about early diagnosis and treatment, especially for all those special needs that aren't initially obvious? What about summers? What about the rest of their lives after they finish with their schooling?

Sarah and her husband make $200,000-plus annually. They can afford health insurance for their entire family, including a member with a pre-existing condition such as Down syndrome. They can afford to drive to and pay for specialists, and get testing and therapy that insurance might not want to pay for. They can afford to have extra sets of eyes and hands working on that child when they are not present. They can afford to buy the healthiest foods. They can afford to start a fund that will care for that child into adulthood and beyond.

How many parents of special-needs kids would like to do all of this and more for their children? How many can afford it? Health care reform is your real issue, and Sarah Palin won't help you. Health care puts all those innocent children first.

Rebecca Henry,

Lawrence

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

19 September 2008
at 5:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

That's why more parents need to get HR 676 and National Health Insurance. This will provide health care for all regardless of income.It's not what the political parties want it's what the people want!Rep. John Conyershttp://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/legislation/hr-676-conyers/united-states-national-health-insurance-actSupport HR 676Enough talk already… together let's just get it done!The Citizens Alliance for National Health InsuranceHR676.org,Inc. http://www.hr676.org/Physicians for National Health Insurance HR676http://www.pnhp.org/publications/the_national_health_insurance_bill_hr_676.phphttp://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/legislation/hr-676-conyers/united-states-national-health-insurance-actHow it would help! * HR 676 establishes an American-styled national health insurance program. The bill would create a publicly financed, privately delivered health care program that uses the already existing Medicare program by expanding and improving it to all U.S. residents, and all residents living in U.S. territories. The goal of the legislation is to ensure that all Americans, guaranteed by law, will have access to the highest quality and cost effective health care services regardless of ones employment, income, or health care status. * Physicians For A National Health Program reports that under a Medicare For All plan, we could save over $286 billion dollars a year in total health care costs. * We would move away from our present system where annual family premiums have increased upwards to $9,068 this year. * Under HR 676, a family of three making $40,000 per year would spend approximately $1600 per year for health care coverage.* the primary obstacle is the medical insurance industrywho will not cover all citizens no matter what. No profit in providing care to all. Our medical health system is like a can of beans on the retail shelf. If you can afford it you can have it.
19 September 2008
at 6:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

Support HR 676http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/legislation/hr-676-conyers/united-states-national-health-insurance-act*Single-payer national health insurance is a system in which a public agency organizes health financing.*Should anyone be forced to live without medical care? No! *Should anyone and their families be forced to live without healthcare due to a lay off? No!* So many countries providing healthcare to their citizens have taken jobs away from the USA by the millions. Pakistan and India are receiving white collar USA jobs as we speak*Why support the healthcare system that discriminates in so many ways?*Shouldn't all receive the same medical coverage no matter what? Absolutely! Instead of coverage based on what type of policy one can afford… this stinks.*Should employers be forced to pay for medical coverage? No!*Should blue and white collar workers who became victims of outsourcing be forced to live without medical coverage? No!http://blog.aflcio.org/2008/03/30/as-jobs-disappear-so-does-health-insurance/*Should soldiers come home to no healthcare for them and their families? No!*Should reservists who lost jobs with medical care be forced to live without medical care? No!*Should those with jobs yet cannot afford healthcare be forced to live without medical care? No!http://blog.aflcio.org/2008/03/28/got-a-job-cant-afford-health-coverage/*Should doctors,hospitals,clinics and emergency rooms be forced to absorb the cost of those without medical care yet do? No! These costs are likely being passed on to those to have coverage…..is this fair? No! Should healthCare be equal to a can of spinch on a retail shelf? No way jose'!National Health Insurance makes dollars and sense.About HR 676:http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/legislation/hr-676-conyers/united-states-national-health-insurance-act
19 September 2008
at 6:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bkgarner (Brent Garner) says…

Well, I was feeling pretty good about this LTE until that last jab about health care reform. What started as a very well written depiciton of the case of most families with children with special needs twisted at the last moment into a political jab. As the father of a child with special needs I am sick and tired of public officials who make disparaging comments about “tax dollars wasted” on my child and others like her. I am thrilled that perhaps, maybe, we will have someone in high public office who will have first hand experience with the issues of special needs children. Perhaps, maybe, this matter will finally get much overdue attention. And, perhaps, maybe, certain other officials both national and local will develop a different perspective on the issue.
19 September 2008
at 6:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

Should anyone become a victim of healthcare that ultimtely leads to bankruptcy? No No NoMedical care is currently the leading cause of bankruptcy in the USA today. Many many many industrialized nations provide healthcare yet are able to maintain strong economies.National Health Insurance would likely attract new industry…meanwhile corporate america continues to ship YOUR jobs abroad. How can the USA expect to generate new wealth shipping OUR jobs abroad?Support HR 676 today ,tomorrow,next week,next month until forever!Medical Insurance special interest campaign money is blocking National Health Insurance,HR 676 and healthcare coverage for all in the USA. How is it the industry can afford campaigns,golden parachutes,obscene salaries but not health care for all?
19 September 2008
at 6:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

National Health Insurance protects families and business at the same time. No more large chunks from the paycheck for health insurance that sometimes is not worth the paper it's written on. Business will not be forced to shell out large amounts for employees. Yet all citizens will receive identical coverage. Why should healthcare be treated like some retail object on a shelf in the business district?Why National Health Insurance?¢ We'll all receive identical healthcare¢ Provides extraordinary leverage against suppliers¢ Protects families and business alike from being gouged by the healthcare industry¢ Treatment for serious illness such as cancer will not be cut off because a patient has reached the point insurance companies will pay no more:happens everyday¢ 60% of healthcare insurance today is paid with tax dollars so why not 100% that covers all who need treatment.¢ Citizens will not be forced to lose all of their assets or file bankruptcy due to serious illness as does happen somewhere everyday as we speak¢ Eliminates healthcare dollars going into special interest campaign cookie jars¢ Eliminates healthcare dollars from financing golden parachutes¢ Veterans receive care immediately for whatever symptoms war has imposed on their physical or mental health. No more waiting on the Dept. of Defense¢ National Healthcare eliminates over 300 different policies thus eliminating tons of wasteful administrative costs. That money could be included towards 100% coverage. It is estimated todays administrative costs runs at 33%:that is a lot of dough. Myth busters: http://www.pnhp.org/single_payer_reso…
19 September 2008
at 6:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

Kansas Health Care For All in Lawrencehttp://www.khcfa.org/Heartland Health Care for Allhttp://healthcareforall.kumc.edu/
19 September 2008
at 8:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

The sad thing about this is not that Sarah has a kid with Down's. It is that Trig does not become some kind of icon for reformed health care or kids with an intellectual disability. He becomes a poster child for votes..period. If Sarah was actually elected, does anyone really think that the net result of all this would be more dollars in the system to serve people with ID? I doubt it. This state is so far behind the curve on serving people on Medicaid waivers it is ridiculous. There are over 3000 folks on the waiting list in Kansas. And the resources that are available are spread so thin they become transparent in many cases. It would be nothing more than yet another Republican attempt to urinate down my back, and tell me it is raining.

19 September 2008
at 11:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Confrontation (Anonymous) says…

Rebecca, I don't think you got the memo. Palin and her followers only care about the fetus until it exits your womb. Then, you're on your own.
19 September 2008
at 4:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Lynn731 (Anonymous) says…

I have a friend in England, where they have national health care. She waits months for doctor appointments. If she needs surgery, which she did, she is put on a long waiting list. Some people die on the waiting list, never getting the life saving surgery they need. What we need to do is find a way to make certain everyone has health insurance. Government running healthcare, really screws it up. Thank you, Lynn
19 September 2008
at 4:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bearded_gnome (Anonymous) says…

absolutely correct Lynn!honestly, based on the brit/canadian model, if we had nationalized medicine, I believe I would be dead today, four times over! no, this is not an exaggeration. because of access to technology and quick access to specialists, modern medicine has saved my life four times. note, because of nationalized medicine, there is actually a *dental crisis* in england! and, ambulances stack up outside the emergency rooms for *hours!* ***please note the lte writer's dragging class warfare in again! cost of living is higher in Alaska. $200,000 does not a wealthy family make with *five kids!* I am saddened that once again the intolerant uncivil left is trying to use Sarah's family to attack her. if you vote for the junior senator from Illinois and Jawbone Joe, you will empower these rude and hateful people! just ask them, including Merrill mr. cut-and-paste vapidity, they'll tell you how much money you should make and how much is *bad!* Lawnmowerman presumes to be an expert. note, he strongly supported John Edwards in postings on this board. he supports planned rolling blackouts to *force* energy conservation. don't get caught by anything he says, and ignore this lte writer! pure political emptiness.
19 September 2008
at 5:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

BuffyloGal (Anonymous) says…

I have many friends in Australia and lived there myself for ten years. They have nationalized health care too. My doctor used to apologize if I called up in the morning and they couldn't fit me in before lunchtime. What are the odds America can learn from the mistakes of other countries' systems and provide great coverage for all of us? Having that peace of mind in knowing that you and your family are covered, and not being dependent on your employer for that honor does not have a price tag.
19 September 2008
at 6:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

teachandlearn (Anonymous) says…

Lynn731 (Anonymous) says: I have a friend in England, where they have national health care. She waits months for doctor appointments. If she needs surgery, which she did, she is put on a long waiting list. Some people die on the waiting list, never getting the life saving surgery they need. What we need to do is find a way to make certain everyone has health insurance. Government running healthcare, really screws it up. Thank you, LynnI am so glad that does not happen here!http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-11411438_ITMhttp://www.aheartylife.com/2006/09/16/woman-dies-of-heart-attack-in-er-waiting-room/http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/01/waiting.room.death/index.html?eref=rss_ushttp://www.azstarnet.com/news/188813That's just a few links!
19 September 2008
at 6:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

teachandlearn (Anonymous) says…

Here are the links to each canidate's platform on disabilities. You decide who is prepared to help the millions of children and adults with disabilities!http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/DisabilityPlanFactSheet.pdfhttp://www.johnmccain.com/Search/?keyword=diabilitieshttp://www.johnmccain.com/content/?guid=24dc9c37-e739-4aa3-8a88-ebae650a2f11
19 September 2008
at 10:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

merrill (Anonymous) says: “That's why more parents need to get HR 676 and National Health Insurance. This will provide health care for all regardless of income.”“It's not what the political parties want it's what the people want!”I realize merrill - if he's even a real person - doesn't (or can't) read the responses to his cut-and-paste posting bot. But for those who are evenly mildly swayed by his lies, it is *NOT* what the people want. The majority support for nationalized healthcare is for the concept only - when the details, such as longer waiting times for non-emergency procedures, limited choice of doctors, etc., are included, the majority support disappears. Those with private insurance are mostly satisfied with their coverage and heavily against turning over control of their healthcare spending to the government.”National Health Insurance would likely attract new industry:meanwhile corporate america continues to ship YOUR jobs abroad.”Even for merrill this is a moronic claim. Attract new industry from where, merrill? You think Canada is going to move their businesses here if we nationalize healthcare? Especially when our already ridiculous corporate taxes are increased to pay for it all?”¢ We'll all receive identical healthcare”Identical, lousy, life-threatening healthcare.”¢ Provides extraordinary leverage against suppliers”Like they do with prescription drugs now, merrill? Oh, wait…”¢ Eliminates healthcare dollars going into special interest campaign cookie jars”Uh, merrill, how much $$$ do you think Physicians for National Health Insurance spend to promote that propaganda you keep cutting and pasting here?”¢ National Healthcare eliminates over 300 different policies thus eliminating tons of wasteful administrative costs. That money could be included towards 100% coverage. It is estimated todays administrative costs runs at 33%:that is a lot of dough.”Not an outright lie, but seriously misleading. The NEJM study that came up with that 33% figure included all administrative costs, not just those related to filing insurance claims. Most of those costs would not disappear regardless of how many, insurers were being used.”¢ Treatment for serious illness such as cancer will not be cut off because a patient has reached the point insurance companies will pay no more:happens everyday”The biggest lie of all from the nationalized healthcare socialists. Anyone familiar with the VA or Social Security knows it's virtually policy to reject 90% of disability claims, despite a significant majority of those claims being approved on appeal (if the claimant is still alive) *years* later. Anyone that thinks yet another huge government bureaucracy is going to handle your healthcare claims any differently is seriously deluded.
20 September 2008
at 11:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

splashy (Anonymous) says…

I too have a friend that lives in England, in London, and she LOVES their universal health care. She says it's much better than what we have in the US, with all the paperwork and waiting to be treated we have here, not to mention us worrying about paying or getting cut off by the greedy for-profit insurance companies.She says the only problems are caused by funding cuts by conservatives when they get in power, which are undone by the liberals when they get in power. Those that talk about waiting times can lay those problems at the feet of the corporatists/conservatives in England, much like we can lay the problems with our own health care at the feet of the corporatists/conservatives here. They are short sighted. They don't realize (or care) that healthy citizens are better citizens, better workers, and just less expensive in the long run. All they can think about is making more money for the wealthy in the short term, not long term ramifications.