sWell

(random riffs on topics medical)

rahul k. parikh

rahul k. parikh
Location
Walnut Creek, California,
Bio
Physician & Writer of Salon's Vital Signs

Editor’s Pick
SEPTEMBER 29, 2009 10:23AM

Regina Holliday & The Art of Health Reform

Rate: 30 Flag

73 Cents Mural - Nurse turned away from the patient

If you want to get insights into the problems of our health care system, you should certainly listen to policy makers like Peter Orzag, browse economist Uwe Rhinehardt's blog, or read Atul Gawande's recent article in the New Yorker.

But you should also look at a mural by Washington DC resident Regina Holliday. Holliday is a 37-year old mother of two and an art teacher. Last summer, her husband, Fred, died from kidney cancer at the age of 39. The Hollidays' experience is a case study in the ugliest, most festering problems of American health care. To share that horror story and to advocate for change, she began painting a portrait of a health care system that is fragmented and insensitive. It is a system where caregivers like Regina have to unfairly shoulder many bureaucratic burdens and one that needs to treat people better than the way it did her husband.

The Death of Fred Holliday:

Regina stated her story by telling me about what happened to her husband.  Fred Holliday developed the early symptoms of his disease-fatigue, weight loss and occasional blood in his urine-before he had health insurance. In late 2008, his insurance kicked in after he got a job at American University teaching film studies. Last January, he developed low back pain. He went to see his doctor multiple times. Each time, she prescribed pain medication, but his pain worsened. Regina wondered: if Fred just had muscle pain, then why the night sweats? Why the blood tinged urine? Why didn't his clothes fit him anymore? Still, Fred's doctor didn't reconsider her diagnosis and treatment.

His pain worsened. In March, Regina demanded more. Fred's doctor ordered an MRI of his back. Three days later, they got a call telling them that he had "shadowing over his kidneys." What that meant wasn't entirely clear, but the next thing Fred and Regina knew, they were in the office of a Maryland oncologist, who admitted them to Holy Cross Hospital in Silver Spring for further tests.

On Friday, March 27 around 11 am, Regina was at work when Fred called. He was crying. "I think the doctor just told me I have cancer," he managed to tell her.

What exactly did the doctor say? Fred remembered being told that he had a growth on his kidneys. Regina rushed into see the doctor, but he had left town for the weekend. They had to wait until the next day before another doctor (not an oncologist) tried to clarify his diagnosis: it looked like he had stage IV metastatic renal cell carcinoma. That jumble of words didn't make any sense. Regina went onto the Internet. Wikipedia turned out to be more helpful than Fred's doctors.

When their oncologist returned, he was curt and often distracted by his cell phone. He didn't like Regina's detailed questions, telling Fred that, "If Miss type-A personality wants me to answer her questions, she can come to my office hours."

In retrospect, Regina believes that if Fred's doctor had been clear about his prognosis from the beginning, he may have made the decision to stop fighting sooner. Instead, he informed him of how he could fight: surgeries, radiation, and chemotherapy. So he decided he needed more advanced care than what Holy Cross could provide.

Patient transfers between hospitals are normally the responsibility of doctors who work there. Holy Cross doctors, however, told her they had not been able to find another center willing to accept him. So Regina contacted her own internist, who sat on the board of directors at Suburban Hospital in Bethesda. After hearing Fred's story, he pulled strings and arranged a transfer.

The Hollidays arrived at Suburban four weeks after Fred's diagnosis. The first thing they learned was that he needed surgery to repair a broken hip-which happened after an orderly at Holy Cross bumped him into a wall while he was moving Fred on a gurney. Fred had been complaining of severe hip pain for two weeks, but nobody at Holy Cross had followed up on it. All it would have taken was the x-ray he got when he came to Suburban.

After surgery, his new oncologist ordered a chemotherapy drug called Sutent. While his health insurer approved the drug, Fred's doctor told Regina that  the pharmacy refused to order it. At $40,000 for a 28 day supply, it was too expensive. "Sometimes this happens," Fred's doctor told her. So Regina had the drug mailed home, picked it up, tucked it safely into a fanny pack, and dispensed a dose to her husband each day.

Fred's cancer advanced. He still couldn't walk. He had become incontinent. The doctors decided to transfer him to a rehabilitation center with the goal of getting him to walk again. Once he was there, Regina's duties as his caregiver intensified. She learned where the center's storage closets were so she could collect fresh sheets and change them herself. She emptied his trash, and changed and disposed of his bedpans.

While he was in the hospital, Fred required blood transfusions every 10-14 days. Regina knew when he needed them because he would begin to get very tired, eat, move, and talk less. One afternoon, this is just what happened. At Surburban Hospital, it was easy to ask the nurse to get a blood test to know just how low his counts were. In the rehab center, they only did blood tests once every morning, no exceptions. So Fred suffered until morning came and his test confirmed what he and Regina knew the day before.

Fred would have to be re-hospitalized. The nearest one was, literally, across the parking lot from where he was. But rules and regulations prevented an employee from wheeling him over on a gurney. So Regina picked up the phone and arranged for an ambulance to take him across that parking lot. To accomplish this, she had to beg the rehab staff there to provide her with the proper medical records so the hospital would take Fred.

Fred continued to deteriorate. It quickly became a question of how much longer to fight. On May 19th, he was moved to hospice care to get his pain under control and on June 11th, he went home. On June 17th, less than three months after he was diagnosed with cancer, Fred Holliday died at home. Ironically, this was the same day that the United States Senate began debating health care reform.

Turn onto Connecticut Ave, Not Pennsylvania Ave

These days you'll find Regina Holliday on NW Connecticut Ave, painting her mural on the side of a gas station across from a CVS Pharmacy and near Politics and Prose bookstore. It's called 73 Cents, named after the price patients have to pay to obtain copies of their medical records--$0.73 per page.

My colleague, Dr. Ted Eytan, recently took some photos of 73 Cents and posted them on Flickr. At the center of photo is Fred Holliday lying sick-a note in his hand that's telling Regina to "go after them" when he was at Holy Cross, after doctors wanted to send him home.

In front of Fred is Regina. She has two faces: the bright one of the caring, loving wife juxtaposed against the ashen one of the exhausted, frantic caregiver. She is secretly grabbing medical records from the nurse standing at his bedside. That nurse is looking at a blank computer screen, symbolic of a closed information loop of each hospital, which prevents doctors from sharing information freely. In contrast, a computer behind Fred in another room is being used by a nurse not to provide care, but rather to surf a social networking site, like Facebook.

In the far right corner of the mural sits a family friend, the one visitor who came to see Fred. The extra space between figures in the painting is something Holliday did on purpose-distance is a medical motif, be it strict visiting hours for family or the masks, gloves and gowns providers to prevent infections. Central to that theme is Fred's doctor, his first oncologist, who keeps physical distance as he stands near the foot, and not the head of the bed, and that cell phone glued to his ear. His cold countenance-which nurses who work with him tell Regina she got just right-captures is emotional distance as well.

Symbols abound in the picture-one that stands out is the little girl dressed in the Stars and Stripes holding the caduceus staff. Holliday told me that she represents the status quo and the fear of change-exemplified in the real work by angry town hall meetings and anti-reform rallies that demand we protect Medicare, yet rail against a government takeover of medicine.

73 Cents is compelling advocacy, the exact opposite of what we've seen from our leaders over on Pennsylvania Ave. Regina Holliday isn't sure whether her story and her mural will move the rudders in our National Debate over health care. She told me a few people have screamed at her over her art. She's also had many fans, including Howard Dean, who reportedly came over and admired it. Regina's work has also persuaded a few angry but more civil folks opposed to reform to look, think and chat with her. An eye-opening but civil dialogue about health care-now there's an accomplishment Regina Holliday should get credit for.

 

 

 

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
Great and moving article. Somehow, many who are opposed to reform or are dupes of the Republican Party of No or the lobbyists, seem to be able to dismiss the human cost of our sick system. They could read this tragic story and still find a way to rationalize their perverted thinking. My brain can't wrap around how that is possible.
I just broadcast a tweet on Twitter with a link to this post, and also asking others to re-tweet it. I hope it brings you more traffic.

Thanks! ...a beautiful post.
As always, what we have done is become enamored with the horse trading and the horse race and forgot why we need the reform.
A heartbreaking story, to be sure, but what problems with the American healthcare system does it expose? It would appear that Fred received cutting-edge treatment and advanced medicines that were covered by his insurance. Fred's death is tragic, but what reforms could be enacted to prevent his death?

I don't mean to sound heartless, but just how does this story mean anything in the debate over health insurance reform?
Wonderful article. What gets me is the cost of human lives and dignity that anyone opposing healthcare reform seems so happy to give up. Paul, up above me, says that the dupes would find a way to rationalize this. He's right. They will. In a post on another blog, one of them tells me he will pray for me, even though he is the one advocating violence.

My brain can't find a way to figure it all out either. Why are they so stupid and so cruel? I get the greed of the company heads, even though it's wrong, but why are these others doing something so clearly evil? Here is the real grief. What does it accomplish for them? I have no idea.
I have to agree with Geraldine here. What this artist has done is prove the following statement: "American health care is not ideal." But no health care system is ideal. The question is whether such problems wouldn't exist if we had a single-payer system.

The United States has significantly higher survival rates for most kinds of cancer as compared to other countries. Thus, we can't conclude that a government-financed system would have saved her husband. The likelihood is that her husband would have died sooner. Tragically, stage IV cancer is usually a death sentence.

As far as the poor treatment, a plan with government financing would rely on the same health care providers. Some will be caring and helpful, and some will not be. That's life, unfortunately.

My last comment is her complaint about one of the rules. It may have seemed foolish to her that they couldn't have taken her husband in a gurney across the street. The likelihood is that that rule was in place because someone got hurt doing that in the past. It's easy to believe that a confused patient may have jumped out of a gurney in the middle of a busy road, for example.
Geraldine--Fred didn't seek treatment until he had insurance. Tragedy #1. He couldn't afford to do that because if it was something bad and diagnosed before health insurance set in, it would be considered a pre-existing condition and not covered. Tragedy #2. And then his insurance company prevented him from getting treatment that he needed (difficulty with changing doctors, etc.) and it was only through the diligence of his wife that he could get that treatment. She took care of him because no one else was doing that, including the nurses whose job it was to do that. Because of problems within the health insurance industry, there was fighting over how to move him from hospital to hospital, resulting in the most expensive and ridiculous way. Because it's an industry, ready to make money, he was not counseled to consider forgoing treatment. Gotta make our money, don't ya know? And let's not forget the title, whereby in the electronic age, the patient is being required to pay 73 cents a page for his own medical record.

Those were just a few. Does that make it clearer for you?
Legislation such as HR3200 in the House, would not have saved Fred's life, and may actually contribute to the death of many in the future. "Reform" would have done nothing to save Fred...he was a victim of poor doctoring based on what the article states.

A very heartwarming story, to be sure. Every family has been touched by the loss of loved ones. We all have spent those months while a dad, mom, brother, sister, relative or friend, suffered on a bed while the tumor destroyed their bodies. However, to politicize
this horrible loss of a woman's husband, cast blame on "republicans" is more than a bit over the top.

If there is any blame here, it's not the "system". The "system" worked. Nowhere in the essay did I see that those evil insurance
companies cancelled the policy because of a "pre-existing condition", a comment that I was sure would be the focus of the story. In fact, the insurance paid the $40,000 cost of a months supply of a necessary drug but that was kinda lost on some people who read the article.
The problem was not with the "system"...the issue here is poor diagnoses by Freds doctor. Why she did not have tests done is exactly the future for all of us when doctors are TOLD what is the proper protocol for testing based on a cost/benefit analysis. The doctor buried the real issue of cancer by masking the root cause with "pain medication". As Regina herself stated, "Wikipedia turned out to be more helpful than Fred's doctors."
And what do you all think the future will be with the democrats pushing for the "Mayo Clinic" model of doctors on "salary". Really, spend half of ones life getting educated, interning and specializing, to be TOLD what salary they should be getting by politicians?

No, I'm sorry. The loss of a loved one is a pain that we all know too well. This story, however, is about poor doctoring, not the "system". Are there problems with a three trillion dollar healthcare system...of course. Should we try to fix these issues?..who would disagree? However, the ,millions of people of spoke out this summer and continue to speak out against the democrat farce of healthcare reform which is really legislation designed to improve the health of the democrat party. Simple things like having a photo ID to show that you are elegible to receive the support of taxpayers for healthcare was voted down by the democrats. An amendment to allow a minimum of 72 hours review of the final legislation after reconciliation was turned down by the democrats!! So much for "transparency". People are tired of the rubber stamped, unread legislation that Pelosi, Reid and Obama have put on the country. And that's why the democrat party, with absolute control over the House, the Senate and the Presidency, is floundering. New Jersey, Virgina, Connecticut, and other election races this November will be an eye opener for liberals who continue to be in denial since they could never comprehend that their approach to government will not be tolerated by all but a very small minority.
Thanks for the moving piece. It's a great illustration of one of the results of the current system...but it's also useful to look at what brought us here. Why are we mired in a system based on greed with the resultant insensitivity? A good part of this involves following the money - to the Drug Trust.

In US and world medicine there was a huge 180 degree turn in the early 19th century, when Rockefeller paid for a study from a man named Flexner -- a report with a pre-determined conclusion that the only group of the many medical schools then struggling for funding which should be funded (with his foundation money) would be the drug-oriented ones. This brought the German allopathic medical model to the fore, a relatively new and mostly untried system, but one that promised a lot of potential wealth and had the sex appeal of being 'science-based.' Rockefeller was in the process of forging an alliance with the (German, again) pharmaceutical giant IG Farben with an eye to cornering a huge market in making and selling drugs. Natural medicine, which stressed nutrition, herbalism, and homeopathy, was giving the drug-based approach a stiff run for their money, lost out in this rigged funding game, and most of them closed shop. Rockefeller Medicine Men, Murder by Injection, and the Medical Mafia are three books which will provide you with the now-forgotten history. See also the Wiki entry for IG Farben.

Lest you toss this aside, and say that well, of course things went this way, modern pharmaceuticals are inherently superior to the other forms of therapy, you need to go past the PR to the actual scientific studies. Consider these two perspectives. Drugs act only to suppress symptoms, and the effects ('side-effects') of prescription medications are one of the leading causes of death in this country. Do some reading. Questioning Chemotherapy, Medication Madness, and Confessions of a Medical Heretic will give you a sound scientific basis for critiquing this style of 'healing.'

Second, many of the serious modern diseases of civilization can be successfully addressed in part or in whole with changes in diet: heart disease, diabetes, MS, and more. Homeopathy is a well-respected and effective modality, embraced and widely practiced in Europe. Herbs have provided the source for many of the truly effective pharmaceutical drugs.

Food for thought.
I'm late to this, sorry. But beautiful story.
fact 1: America is listed as # 37 in quality of healthcare world wide.
fact 2: Polls continue to indicate the vast majority of Doctors and Nurses support single payer.
fact 3: Health care for profit makes money from denying coverage and reducing costs, not by providing top quality heath care.
fact 4: In thialand you can go to a doctor and get a complete work up done (including blood) for $250.00 and walk out of the clinic with the report in your hand. (the examination takes about 4 hours of actually being examined, not waiting around)

Sadly however those with coverage are buying in to the fear mongering and thus supporting our current system. Along with health care lobbyist paying out millions in both political support and lobbying. Which basically means you are saying "I got mine and tough luck for you buddy."

However the real tragedy is that we could do both - have a top notch world class health care system that covers ALL of our citizens and we could make it better than any other system that exists. Because this is what the true America does. You have two hands. One is reaching up to the person above you so you may climb higher. The other is reaching down to the person below you to do the same. That is how it works.
Like others have said, what in any version of health care reform would have changed the above outcome?

Somehow reform is going to make Doctor's more thoughtful?

To people saying that his lack of insurance prevented treatment, Fred delayed going to the Doctor AFTER getting insurance.

Yes, in rare cases pharmacies will not stock exceedingly expensive medicine because they lack the facilities to protect it. Nothing in any reform bill would address that.

Hospital rules can sometimes appear arbitrary and overly strict, that's not going to change by adding another layer of rules.

Good people get sick and good people die, and it's not wrong that their family act as caregivers. Nor are Doctor's your friends.

If Doctors seem cold and distant, it's because they are. Especially oncologists. The fact is a number of your patients are going to die, and there's nothing the Doctor can do to prevent it. Workers in oncology wards keep a certain emotional distance, because otherwise most could not function.

But again, what does this sad story say about the current health care reforms? That somehow a bill is going to keep people from getting ill, or that people aren't going to be upset when a loved one dies?
And as you see, already people have come to twist themselves into intellectual knots on how it cannot be a problem with our healthcare system, that this situation happened here. It's "just life" or "happes anyway." Uh, no, it pretty much does not in a country with a healthcare system not mired in making money.

sigh. I guess it's easy to dismiss it when it's not happening to you.

Sadly though, at the rate things are going downhill and continue to slide, it will, but then, it will be too late, people.
I must agree that this tragic story could have occurred almost anywhere ... the inattentive primary care physician, the callous & arrogant oncologist, the bureaucratic rules, the poorly-managed local hospital, the awkward transfers between hospital & rehabilitation center, the trouble and expense of sending records ... no amount of insurance reform will miraculously end these problems. I suspect that these problems and others like them are found even in the most comprehensive systems, such as Holland or France. No legislation is going to somehow correct human error, ugly personalities or the faults of complex systems.

I'm very much in favor of health insurance reform in this country, but I don't harbor any illusions that it will prevent the kind of errors and failures detailed in this article.
To Geraldine, Ray, and Joe:
You missed the most important sentence in the article:

"Fred Holliday developed the early symptoms of his disease-fatigue, weight loss and occasional blood in his urine-before he had health insurance."

If Fred had had access to any sort of insurance, for example, a Public Option before he got employment-administered insurance, he could perhaps have been seen before the cancer advanced to Stage IV. That is the point of health care reform.

There are only a few protocols to treat this sort of cancer. All of them are expensive and horrible to go through. Once it has advanced to that stage, I'm not sure what could be done.

I know because my dad died from the same cancer. Took the same drugs. But since he was retired military, he got seen when he first urinated blood. He also had his kidney removed and went into clinical trials of various drugs to keep the cancer from growing. It did for a year or two; then it came back and he died within a year.

And Joe: "millions" of people did NOT speak out in favor of keeping the status quo. A few thousand loudmouths at townhall meetings did not sway the rest of us: we still support, by wide margins, health care reform. (Oh, and if you think "illegals" can't get photo ID, you're kidding yourself. And if you think they can't get communicable diseases that can kill YOU, you're really kidding yourself. )
I think it's very heartening to be hearing these stories -- sad stories and achingly frustrating stories, but we're FINALLY able to hear them and realize this could happen to any one of us. Thank you Regina for that beautiful mural. Thank you for not rolling over and playing dead. And thank you Doc, for writing about Regina & her husband, Fred. May he rest in peace.
But Critical path, if lack of insurance was causing a large number of people to delay checking out possible cancer symptoms, we would expect that cancer would be caught at a later stage in the U.S. than in other countries. Furthermore, we would expect a higher death rate for cancer in this country than in other countries. In fact, we see the opposite. See http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20080716/cancer-survival-rates-vary-by-country
Joe,
Yes, the insurance company paid for the drugs. That was great. What wasn't great was the fact that the PHARMACY at the HOSPITAL wouldn't order it because of the expense. When you have a sick spouse don't you just want to mess around on line and order drugs for them all day because the pharmacy won't help you? That's cRAzY.
Yes Ray, and all cancer in uninsured patients is accurately tracked and documented. The fact of the matter is that if the patient couldn't afford to be seen by an MD s/he may have died of 'natural causes' because the family couldn't afford the autopsy.
It seems to me the real issue here was one of quality of health care. This women was running rampant trying to help her husband. She discovered something I've known for a really long time. Doctors can't really do much of anything. The treatments are very expensive and the patient dies anyway. They can help prolong a cancer patient's life but inevitably, they know they cannot cure or save their life. I don't understand why some pills cost $40,000 a month. That's really bizarre. That explains why insurance companies balk at costs. I'm glad this person had insurance but ultimately it didn't help except to keep you out of bankruptcy.
Elizabeth,

It was a shame on the hospital pharmacy protocol that they were not allowed to order the Sutent. Fortunately, the drug was able to be purchased elsewhere, I'm guessing a mail order pharmacy like Caremark. Again, the gist of this essay, and some of the comments , is to attack the "heatlhcare system" of the country. I think that is really too much of a stretch. As I said, the care Fred received all along the line of treatment, from his initial internist mis-diagnosis, to problems with the hospital, and on and on..have nothing to do with healthcare reform or insurance reform but were problems local to this patient. I have had just the opposite in my family where a doctor did what might be termed an "unnecessary chest x-ray on my wife when she was taken to an ER for passing out...and discovered a "shadow" on her lung that turned out to be stage 1 cancer. Half her lung was removed and 3 1/2 years later she is doing great. All of her treatment was paid for by Insurance.

I might add, that while she was going through chemo, some of the woman also getting chemo were not as lucky. They were on medicare and the medicare protocol allows for 13 "cancer markers", important tests to see if the cancer is evident in the blood stream. These woman had gone beyond the 13 tests allowed and were taking from their food money to pay for the tests that meant life or death for them. Yea.. medicare over-all is very good for many people...but personally I would rather keep my private insurance.

I also mentioned that there were millions voices in opposition to the democrat healthcare debacle and a comment was made that it was only "thousands". As I understand it, this government, this media, utilizes "polls" that maybe count 1,000 people and extrapolate out to the general population. I wonder what gallup or Rasmusen would have concluded with a poll of the tens of thousands that marched, at their own expense in Washington, of the thousands that crowded into hundreds of Town Hall meetings across the country. One democrat in total denial actually suggested that Dic Army organized this demonstration. Give me a break. The republican party couldn't organize a Sunday church BBQ!
Elizabeth, let's consider your hypothesis.

For your claim to be true, a significant number of people would have to going through stage IV cancer and dying from it without ever going to an ER. I've been close to people who have died of cancer and you probably have as well. Wouldn't it be virutally impossible not to seek relief from an ER at some point?
1. Excellent story (and thank you for it).

2. Remarkable number of commenters don't get the point of the story. Universal medical record - comprehensive information for better decisions - anyone? Yes, it's part of the reform package, among many other things related to this medical case. Information is power for both patients and caregivers and access to a patient's complete healthcare record is essential for quality, non-redundant care.
To anyone that responded to my first post with something to the effect of: “You missed a CRUCIAL piece of information” or “You don’t understand”, sorry, no. I read and understood the entire piece.

The story indicates that Fred went to see the doctor multiple times after he got a job teaching at American. It does not say either way whether he had insurance before he took the American teaching job. For you to infer that he did not have access to a primary care physician shows that YOU’RE the one that’s short information.

Furthermore, in either case, the patient has to be the one to go to the doctor and tell the medical professional what’s going on. A checkup costs, on Park Avenue in New York City, at retail – retail! - prices (i.e. the patient pays full freight when he visits the doctor) - $250. I know this for a fact because I just had a checkup (inc bloodwork and urinalysis) with a doctor there that does not accept insurance reimbursement at all. Not just doesn’t accept Medicaid – he does not accept any insurance. So it’s not like anyone without insurance is somehow unable to have a checkup. If you feel that your symptoms of “fatigue, weight loss, and occasional blood in [your] urine” are serious, you can get a checkup with or without insurance.

As to the bureaucratic hurdles etc. Regina had to go through – that’s the process under every system, in every country in the world. And guess what else? They worked! Fred got every bit of the treatment he and Regina requested and the insurance companies paid for it. What monsters.

To contend that Fred’s death could’ve been prevented had he been living in, say, Canada at the time is just stupid beyond words.

Oh, and BTW – the reason the hospital refused to wheel him across the street is because if something had happened to Fred while he’s under the hospital staff’s care outside the controlled environment of the hospital, the hospital could’ve been liable and forced to pay an outrageous settlement by some of those wonderful Democrats otherwise known as trial lawyers. Come to think of it, that’s the only actual problem this piece highlighted – that people like John Edwards have forced medical care to become so hyper-regulated and (literally) clinical that a nurse can no longer help a patient across a parking lot.

Ladies and Gentlemen, there are plenty of arguments to be made for a single-payer healthcare system, but this piece does not support any of them.
My children and I sat and watched my wife die while the health care providers rigged everything they could to increase the bill to our insurance company and us . The Congress is debating insurance while the motive of most of our health care providers is for profit . Prior to our 40th President and his V.P. there were many not for profit health care facilities and many were allowed to be taken over by for profit corporations after he became President . Also during that same time the number of lobbyist went from a few hundred to near 50K and the health care insurance corporations expanded greatly and became very powerful . At this time if a Congress person votes against a public option there will be a high paying lobbying job waiting when the Congress person leaves Congress . Not so if they vote for a public option . Being on shaky ground the Blue-Dogs are sure to consider their future when voting . Unless the existing not for profit facilities are expanded we will be looking at an exercise in futility .
It isn't, I believe, that they don't get it. It's that they don't want to get it. They don't want it to be anything that could mess with their understanding or their own conclusions. So, no matter how many tragedies our terrible healthcare situation perpetuates, if it doesn't happen to them, they'll write "Gosh. Terrible story. Despite the fact that it's utterly and completely about the health care situation in our country, I can't see how it relates to health care." And that will be that. Sometimes, even when presented with something as awful as this, they will tie themselves into knots to make it not so.

LOTS of people don't seek care for illness because they don't have insurance. And it kills a bunch of them. But I doubt very seriously there's been a poll amongst the dead to figure out how many. I mean, they are dead. It's hard to fill out a form then.

Damn people. Just damn.

When it's cheaper and people live longer and are in better health in other countries and clearly it's not working here ... people have died and have been bankrupted by the health care industry. A LOT OF THEM. THAT doesn't convince these people. Nothing would be enough. Nothing.

But if Rush or some other nitwit comes on and says the word 'socialism' and "USA!USA!" well, they love them slogans, don't you know.

Honestly, it should be a crime to sit around complacently smacking your gums while somebody else is suffering in this way or when someone in your own life could suffer the same fate. But these are the same people that buy the giant cars with the "I support the troops" on the back window. They don't get irony evidently.
To those in the comments claiming that this is simple "bad doctoring" that wouldn't change with different policy, consider how much of this bad doctoring is due to the legal and financial hopes doctors have to jump through to do anything. Consider how much of a nurse's time is consumed with paper work, instead of patient care. And consider how doctors are conditioned to avoid certain diagnoses that will lead to complications in their own lives due to bad insurance policy.
Thanks, Doc.

I still can't get over how so may people can read the same words, see the same things, and come away with opinions so inapposite. It floors me.

Blessings and hope to Ms. Holliday. Not that they'll offer much comfort. She's an artist and a warrior. I suspect we'll hear more from her.
Thank you for sharing Regina's mural with this cogent post. Art is powerful. After all, people got sent to the Gulag for it.
For all you bitching about, it could happen to you.

It has happened to me, it's happening to me right now. We'll know in 6 weeks whether my wife has to go on the Renal Transplant waiting list. It's something I live with everyday. It's not abstract.

That said, nothing in reform is going to change the outcome of this story.

Oncological staff isn't going to suddenly get a better bed side manner because of a Federal law.

I can list the same type of medical "horror" stories from Germany and France.

Some people here are acting as if reform will somehow magically prevent all tragedy, and it won't.

Notice, in this case, even after getting insurance, the patient did not press to see the doctor. If you don't see the doctor when you have insurance, and you are passing blood, then having insurance earlier is not the issue.
Geraldine:
The line I quoted is:
"Fred Holliday developed the early symptoms of his disease-fatigue, weight loss and occasional blood in his urine-before he had health insurance. "

Read it again - carefully. "...before he had health insurance..."

And your argument that everyone should keep some sum of money just lying around for "checkups" or other routine care is specious. Plenty of people in America live much closer to the bone than apparently you are lucky enough to: rent, clothes, and food can easily leave a family without a cushion of hundreds of dollars to get things looked after. And even if they do - what then? Spend yet more money they don't have? Or get diagnosed with what is now called a "pre existing condition"? Happens every day in America, and to people with jobs.

Without being poor, disabled, or over 65, there IS no government help on any level to provide access to the "best system in the world."

Ma'am, getting everyone in America access to health care is one of the points of this article.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Just--no words. Such cruelty and barbarism in a healthcare system. This woman's mural is amazing.
An important piece of public art, worth more than all the TV ads on the topic rolled together.

Any objective outsider must conclude that if such a situation is routinely tolerated in America, we must be a country ruled by almost unimaginable levels of fear. Of what?
Such a multi-faceted tragedy. A system that is so mired in it's own red tape and doctors who prescribe the latest and greatest in 'wonder drugs' and walk away. A grim picture to be sure. If you haven't, read the hippocratic oath and then re-read this article.
Daniel Hurst: We'll know in 6 weeks whether my wife has to go on the Renal Transplant waiting list. It's something I live with everyday. It's not abstract.

Critical Path: Without being poor, disabled, or over 65, there IS no government help on any level to provide access to the "best system in the world."

Not so true, CP. Daniel Hurst's wife will be completely covered by medicare, as is everyone, for dialysis and kidney transplants in end stage renal disease. Sad about his wife but it seems to be another case of, "I got mine, f*** everyone else. If you're going to be very, very sick in this country, kidney disease is the way to go.* (The semi-generous** socialized medicine coverage of ESRD doesn't apply to kidney cancer, apparently.)

* No whining about my lack of compassion please, I have a nephew who's had 2 transplants and several friends who've had one or more. It's not a walk in the park but it beats hell out of kidney cancer.

** I say "semi-generous" because while we'll cover the transplant nicely you'll soon be on your own for the drugs you'll need to keep the new organ.
Poignant and communicative. I received another e-mail this morning from a friend who suggests we do something or other to oppose being forced into a public option. This time (and from now on), I didn't let it pass. I wrote back, made demands, asked for proof, corrected errors, and hit "rely all." This article reminds me why I have to do that.
What a pathetic health care system.