Tag Archives: healthcare

How this right-wing Christian Tory girl ended up supporting Obama

… Or [alternative title]:

“I am sorry I was an ass-hat for the last 6 months”.

But it takes me a while to get to that part in this post. Patience if you will, please.

So, back in good old Blighty, I was actually noticeably right-wing. I was a Young Conservative. I dated a former Young Conservative. I was devastated when he broke my tax-reducing, spending-cutting heart. I cried when “New Labour” got in. I rejoiced when they were out (although not at the coalition replacement). I… OK, OK, you get the picture. So, it seemed clear to me that when I moved to the US, although I liked Obama as a person, I would support the Tory-party allies: The Republicans.  Right? Right?

No. I don’t so much hate them, as actively fear Romney becoming President. I cry at the thought of it. That’s one helluva turnaround in less than three years. So, I began to ask myself: why? How the heck did this happen? How did it happen living in Alabama (although, living in Alabama was probably causal, but that’s not the point of this post). While vaguely pondering it, I did notice other people making the same switch. Fellow displaced Brits looking confused and perplexed and going “hang on, when did I become a leftie?”. Indeed even the Tory party in the UK is struggling to love the Republicans: Cameron is trying to repair relations with his ‘sister’ party, but keeps making clear statements against Romney-Ryan.

How did this happen? I was genuinely curious. After much thinking and mulling and chatting and yelling and crying, I believe it came down to this: in the UK a lot of the ‘social’ policies are pretty done – yeah we tweak them, yeah there are groups asking for more, yes there is inequality It’s no wonderland). But it not on the same scale as the US. The decision, when voting, comes largely down to economics. Even ‘social’ policies: education, welfare etc are largely discussed in purely economic terms. I tend to be right wing economically (a fiscal conservative?), and so to vote right was an easy decision.

In the US many, many mainstream (by which I mean large) groups are fighting for basic civil rights, which I believe should be extended to them: I am socially liberal. So, with my broad sense economic views not changing, I had to choose: Right vs Left: Economics vs. Society. I chose civil rights. Here is why:

I looked at the economy, and the economic policies offered by the two candidates. I do buy the argument that Obama maybe could have done better economically. I don’t know this, I am sort of 55% on that side, 45% on the side that he couldn’t. I don’t know if Romney would do better, because he won’t lay out a damn plan, nor stick to a stated policy. (I did go and read his 8-page plan on his website. About 3 pages was criticizing Obama, about 3 were saying right wing in general is wonderful. ~2 concerned his actual plan, which was vague and non-specific).

Romney changes all the time, many people say Obama could have done better. So, while I may not be confident handing the economy over to Romney, I am not confident handing it over to Obama either. Kind of a dead heat. My history is to think of more fiscally conservative policies as better in times of strife, so I might actually just tip in favor of the Republican party. But. And it is a big but:

If Obama could have done better (and we don’t know that he could have), I don’t think it is significantly better. That is: the world is in a huge economic recession. The Western world is collapsing under financial distress. I doubt anyone could have done more than Obama, such that enough people’s lives were hugely significantly changed. We don’t know if traditionally left- or right- wing policies really work better. Historians and top economists argue about it. But it does seem pretty clear to me that no one in the current world situation could have made a giant leap of difference to the lives of most every day Americans (sure… ‘tell that to someone unemployed’ you say… but I am talking here on a grand scale). Sadly we do vote for ourselves, and our friends, and our situation and looking around, on an economic level I don’t see anyone changing the lives and happiness of those Americans I see by ‘fixing the economy’ on such a scale that it out-weighs the difference social change could make.

This point was first brought home to me when I was hiking with a girl (let’s call her Hot-Stuff A) living in Colorado. She was given great job offers at my Alabama institution and I said to her “Come on, you have to be tempted to take one up, right?”. She looked at me and said: “I can’t. I simply can’t. I am married to a woman, and she would have no rights. No protection.” I was floored, because I suddenly realized it was true. Hot-Stuff A is indeed married to Hot-Stuff B. If they moved to Alabama, both could legally be fired for being gay. Unlikely, but LIKELY s that Hot-stuff B could be denied healthcare, because Healthcare policies are allowed to only be extended to spouses ‘as recognized by the state of X’. Alabama does not recognize gay marriage. So Hot-Stuff B could, and would, be denied it. Furthermore if either got sick, their life long partner could be denied hospital visitation rights: because they are not recognized as family. Their wills could not be recognized, or legally contested by family, because in the eyes of Alabama these girls are not married, and so not family.

That’s bad. That causes actually misery and pain. Britain may wrangle about whether gay people are ‘married’ or in a ‘civil partnership’ but they do not wrangle over basic civil rights. I was horrified, horrified, that two law-abiding people were prisoners in their own state, because they happen to love someone of the same sex.

It was, really shocking to me. And I think it was the turning point. I opened my eyes to the media portraying real, and horrendous stories of people in these situations and saw the misery it caused.

Then I met a girl, a single-Mom at my new job. She works hard. She is what the rightest-of right would call a maker, not a taker. Her 13 year old girl has a genetic condition. The 13 year old (not that it should matter) is a very smart, very functioning girl – I think I last saw her reading an adult book. A very smart, very functioning, very happy and productive 13 year old, who happens to have expensive physical needs. That’s crummy enough, but the Mum was offered another job, and couldn’t take it, because the insurance offered with the job did not cover pre-existing conditions.

So… she could not advance her career, she could not make more money (be more of a ‘maker’), because she could not guarantee her daughter adequate healthcare (she would earn too much for Medicaid in that State). As if that wasn’t bad enough, the Mum told me that she had sat down and worked out that the daughter would exceed her lifetime maximum by the time she was 17. What is this lifetime maximum of which you speak? I hear you Brits say. Oh… well, that is the maximum U.T.’s health insurance will pay out, over a lifetime, for any one person. I.e. at 17 this girl will have no medical coverage. No guarantee of such. I can’t even imagine what it is like to be facing that, at her mother.

Another case: when signing up for health benefits I met a lady from CA who had moved because her cancer treatment exceeded the cost her insurance company would pay. U.T. did accept pre-existing conditions, so she moved here to get it covered. Let me spell it out: the woman had breast cancer. She was afraid of dying. She had to move across the country, away from her friends and family, support and medical doctors to be able to afford treatment.

I looked around and really saw that some social change could make a whole lot of difference to people’s lives. I may not think ObamaCare is the best solution. But it is, at least, a solution. ‘Repeal and Replace’ with some unclear (and frankly untrustworthy) hazy guidelines is not a solution. ObamaCare will at least improve the lives of these individuals. Immeasurably. More than I think an upswing in the economy – or at least, more than I think an upswing in the economy attributable to just one person / one party – could do.

I don’t have time to write about all the cases I have met / discovered. People unable to get safe abortions (do I ‘agree’ with abortion? No. Would I ever deny anyone their right to follow their own ethical code and chose? No.). Kids committing suicide because many politicians in the US want to send out the message ‘being gay is wrong’ (according to who? YOUR God? That is not MY God? What if I don’t believe in God?). Ryan who signed a bill trying to make IVF and IUDs illegal. Endless examples of people’s lives getting worse that Obama would make better.

And lest you think I support Obama because I am a do-gooder only looking out for others, let me assure you, this is not the case. Because then, then, it got personal.

First I went to get birth control for my impending marriage. My insurance company didn’t cover the IUS / IUD (‘tiz abortion, doncha know. Sigh.). I couldn’t afford it. Instead, I got a prescription for valium and some hormones that sent me insane. I gave up on those (it was either that or give up on my marriage… which nearly happened as I went so loopy) and failed to find an affordable solution. By January I was still saving up for the cost of an IUD. By February I was pregnant. Nuff said.

I moved to Texas in June. 4 months pregnant. Not sure why, but I suffered pre-term labor. Sadly, Texas doesn’t cover individuals healthcare when they first move. I had only a ‘help hotline’ to call. I spent many night in tears, scared I was losing my baby, until my coverage kicked in. It worked out well, but for the first time I was forced to face the consequence of putting healthcare in the hands of money-makers with minimal regulations: the loss of people’s children.

Then I was denied maternity leave. FMLA doesn’t kick in as I have not been at U.T. long enough, and anyway, I am the only earner. I can’t go unpaid for 3 months. Luckily, I have a very flexible job, which I can do from home, and very kind and understanding mentors and bosses. We have figured it out. But there was no guarantee of that. The suggestion of healthcare companies I called trying to find short term insurance coverage for pregnancy (which is, of course, a pre-existing condition)? “Don’t change jobs”. Ah, so stay at a lower status, lower paid job and lose the opportunity to do well (academic jobs are scarce) because I am a woman? I see.

Oh, and I find out that C-sections are considered by some insurance companies to be a pre-existing condition. So, should I have one, I may have to make the decision: change jobs and not have children (because their birth would not be covered, and I am not sure I’ll ever have a spare $30,000 lying around), or stay where I am and have the possibility of more children. So, essentially: my career will be held back, because I am a woman. Because – I don’t see men having to make this choice… I suppose they may have to make it on their wife’s behalf. But, overall, I still see this as a woman’s rights issue.

I also have written about this before. I am sick of being told how to live out my religion. Yes, I am Christian. Yes, in my eyes I am a practicing Christian. But no, in my eyes, this does not mean gay marriage should be illegal (if Christians are harping on about the term ‘marriage’ know it was around before the Bible. So just get another term. Let gay people be married, and straight Christians be ‘Bible-married’ or whatever, just don’t base rights on that). I am used to being in a country where I am able to choose how I live my religion (no, I won’t have an abortion, yes, I will attend a gay friend’s wedding) and not told that my interpretation is wrong. I have never lost so much religious freedom as a Christian as when I came to the US.

So, I guess I looked at the options. And, no, I don’t think Obama is perfect. No, I don’t think he has done the perfect job. Nor necessarily the very best. But he has done something, and he will reach in and improve the lives of many – far more than Romney will. Romney will not make changes that affect so many people’s lives this profoundly – is my belief.

So why do I write all this? Well, thinking it through made me realize two things, that made me happier.

(1) I don’t have to hate all Republican supporters.

This is my “sorry I was an ass-hat for 6 months” moment.

I always realized that there were many Democrats I did not agree with, and did not respect. But, I found it hard to see the flip side with Republican-supporters. That there are some I realy can respect and love. There are still many Republican supporters I do not agree with, and pray hard not to judge (no… I really do). But there are also many who would like to see the problems above ‘fixed’, they just don’t have the ‘at any cost’ stance that I do. Or, they don’t think Obama can fix them. Or they think Romney can. Or they just prioritize differently.

I  fully admit there are many worthy and good causes I just don’t feel passionately enough to be swayed by: saving the environment is one of them. It is not a good thing, but it is true. I try to recycle, I try to minimize waste, I am happy to do my part. But I am not going to seriously put myself out, and  don’t really care about it (sorry 😦 ). It is what it is. People can have different priorities and can be just as compassionate. Who is to say which priorities are ‘right’ or ‘more worthy’. Not me guv’nor.

So, thinking through calmly and logically helped me remove my animosity to some people I dearly love. And I am sorry if I seemed mean or judgmental of you before – truly. That is indeed not how I live out my faith.

(2) It helped me navigate the insane media circus that is the US at election time.

Seriously Brits, think of the mud-slinging we do to our celebs. The US is actually nicer to its celebs than we are, but seems to treat its politicians as we treat Jordan. The US media at election time is an ugly, ugly place. And I used to read all the left media and get so outraged and angry at the right. Furious. Upset to tears. Almost beyond reconciling. The right does it too… and then I would get mad at how misrepresented the left was.

Then, I realised that 1/2 of what the media was up in a furor about, I didn’t care about. Do I care that Tagg Romney said he wanted to punch Obama? No. Looking above, that has nothing to do with why I support Obama.

Do I care that Mitt Romney said the humorous comment that he was brought “binders full of women”? No. He mispoke, but it was a debate and I don’t think the hysterical interpretation was what was in his heart. But I do care that when asked the question of what he would do to help women’s equality, he basically said “I’ll create more jobs in general and women can then have access to them” because that does not even touch on what bothers me so much about women’s rights (or lack of) as laid out above.

So, that is how I became an Obama supporter. But that is also how thinking through why that happened helped me be a little happier.

Oh, and to all those who want to say ‘If America is so tough for you: GO HOME’ I do understand your viewpoint. And I don’t mean to whale on America. There are a lot of great things here, and this country has been good to me. And, much as I appreciate a lot about this country, I would like to go home, very much. Indeed, I got married under the supposition that that would likely happen. But my husband examined it some more, and if I did go, I could have to choose between him and my country, and I couldn’t legally take my child. So, while I may have annoyed you, please have some sympathy too. I am not sure I wouldn’t live my life a little differently if I had known this is how it would end up.

On a more positive note, here is the top Google image for the search ‘cutest kitten ever”:


Image credits

http://egbertowillies.com/2012/10/10/jon-stewart-deconstructs-mitt-romneys-promisesliesjournalists-no-longer-serve-their-purpose-video/

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/05/11/stephen-colbert-slams-anti-gay-christians/
http://cutestkittenever.tumblr.com/ <— check this website out.

Advertisements

Goodbye second trimester….

Or, as this post could be called “In which Lekki gets on her soap box again”.

According to this handy little calculator (which is also very helpful at helping me pretend not to be a completely useless-mother-to be and thus be able to actually answer the question “how far along are you?”) my third trimester begins anywhere from August 4th – August 9th. I.e. soon. It has been a while since I last blogged about my pregnancy – but you can take this as a good thing: basically I have been having too much of a rip roaringly good time traveling to NYC, entertaining the bestie on her sojourn to Houston, and working hard. OK, maybe the last one is not so good… I have also not had too much to blog about: straight forward as this pregnancy has gone. I did have lots of growing bump pics, but then some evil-knevil stole my phone and took them away from me. I hope s/he gets some serious guilt when he sees a bunch of bump and ultrasound pics, now lost forever. But… that’s by the by… let’s see how we are doing:

So, I am *checks calculator* 26 weeks and 4 days… 3 months to go! The baby is viable (woo-hoo), so come on out FW (but not like, just yet, or anything). The bump is pretty good, I have gone from this:

End of the first trimester

to this:

20 weeks

To this:

End of second trimester – 27 weeks

with weight gain at a healthy 13 lbs (and rising!).

My comfort level is pretty good. Have had one or two issues: while walking in New York I got this ‘orrible shooting pain down my back through my butt to my knee that made it impossible to walk – in fact made it only possible to literally collapse, thank goodness for NYC cabs everywhere. Mmmmmm…. sciatica. An exercise-based management technique has helped no end. Oh, and I had a night of false labour last week, which is waaaaaaay earlier than expected. Which was terrifying as I DID NOT HAVE MEDICAL INSURANCE TO CHECK EVERYTHING WAS OK, which Republicans think is just fine, as insurance companies should be allowed to exclude ‘pre-existing conditions’. Cough. Basically I woke up in the middle of the night with lower back cramps that radiated to my lower belly. The pain was impressive, and no amount of rocking / ball sitting / walking / curling up and sobbing relieved it. A quick internet search (because, yes, when you have no medical care Google is your only friend) revealed that it was likely heightened by dehydration so I drank 60 oz of water, lay on my left side, and eventually it eased allowing me to sleep for brief 10 minute snatches in between loo trips, marred only by my reassessment of the decision to attempt a natural birth. As you can imagine, I was a rockstar at work the next day.

I have, however, found an OB / GYN. Which was not as easy as it sounds. You think it would be, as you are basically saying “hey, in the US, people massively overpay per person for worse health outcomes, because they are afraid of government interference… so I would like to have you paid vast amounts to not give me the most effective care. Please”. Piece of cake, right?  Nope, because I have had a ‘gap in care’ and so am ‘high risk’ and no one wants to take me. After yelling ‘so you are going to deal with my LACK of care, by denying me more care?’ and  ‘Just to get this straight: you think that I may have some uncontrolled health conditions that could make the birth complex, difficult and expensive. So instead of treating them early and turning a complex, difficult and expensive birth (which the state has to pay for legally, as it is ’emergency care’) into a simpler, easier, less expensive birth… you are going to let them run amok and so become a more complex, more difficult and more expensive birth?’. After receiving several affirmatives, the Women’s Healthcare Specialists of Houston took me on. Hoorah. But in the process of which, I had to do all sorts of promising and faxing of records and proving that I and little Firework, are, to the best of my knowledge, exceptionally healthy. Because you know, we eat right, sleep well, do regular exercise yada yada yada. The ob / gyns all opined that the only reason I had had such an easy pregnancy so far was because I was in, and had maintained, excellent athletic shape. Yeah… that exercise and athletic shape thing. So, in other news, I have got my ever expanding butt off the sofa for the first time in 9 weeks (where has the time gone??) and completed 2 yoga classes, one strength class and 2 ‘runs’.

When I say run, I mean going from 8.5 min miles to 10 min miles. And from 15K to 2.5K.

Post run sweatiness

Included for Walter’s confused expression; he is thinking “I didn’t know whales ran?!?”. Also ignore my terrible hair – there was pre-dye gook in it, and so it looks straw like and straw coloured.

And by ‘strength’ I mean lifting 10lb dumbells and then collapsing on the floor to oogle at John Stewart on my iPad.

John Stewart, lookin’ smokin’ and saying smart things… as he does.

But, it is a start. And Wes is working on the diet, sneaking vegetables into my meals and snacks without me protesting:

“Would you like a chip, Lekki?”

“Mmmm… yes please…. wait, this chip is surprisingly green and ungreasy and kale like”.

He made kale chips.

Wes’ kale chips – actually really delicious

Apart from the potential health hazard of the inherent shock at ‘the-McDonald’s-employees-miss-me-when-I-don’t-go-daily-Wesley’ making kale chips I am sure it is overall a good thing.

So… we have also been receiving awesome, awesome baby clothes and gifts. I absolutely LOVE everything everyone has bought for us.

Oh, and we have been doing the nursery (I was reminded of this as Holly managed to send babygros that matched the nursery perfectly. Cool.). Too early ye say? Well, probs not, as FW is due early Nov, I have a grant due mid-Oct, and am traveling for the last 3 weeks of Sept (work)… and possibly have another grant due mid Sept. So, working backwards, this means the nursery needs to be done by late August: 3 weeks’ time.  Thus we have a lovely grey nursery courtesy of my excellent paint-choosing skills, and Wesley’s excellent paint-applying skills

Dark, but soft, grey walls and our awesome changing table which was given to us!

and a sketch of a mural which I am going to attempt to paint. Yup, the girl who failed basic art at school is going to freestyle it on a wall.Results to come… (good or bad).

The nursery theme is clearly grey & white, with yellow and blue accents (to come) so we have these pics I made too:

Not sure if I want to redo these to make them tidier or not

Can’t wait to meet the little ‘un!

Trying to understand some of America’s reaction to the Affordable Healthcare Act

Alright. Time for a brief departure from gardening, and pregnancy, and occasionally work. This is more a post to answer many questions I have had from people across the pond about the now approved Affordable HealthCare Act. Why America needed reform, why some Americans hate it and so on. It is my perspective on that for my fellow countrymen, and also an attempt for me to try to make sense of what seems like the utter craziness around me.

The current system

So to understand the reform, you need to understand the current situation of American healthcare. It is certainly very different to what I, as a naive Brit, has imagined. I had envisioned a healthcare system where if you had a ‘reasonable’ job (and I did  not define reasonable) you could go out and get private insurance for healthcare fairly acceptably within your budget. People who could afford it could choose their insurance, and then those who were insured, once they had paid their premium, got access to top notch and almost unlimited healthcare (I was actually kind of excited to get this ‘better’ healthcare than I had been receiving) . Those who were not insured, had some lower standard healthcare sort if similar to the (usually unfounded) horror stories we hear of the NHS: long wait lines, long distances to travel, limited drug availability – possibly all only available through ER.  I was sort of vague on that. Having lived in the US, it is clear to me that the main things I had misunderstood were this:

-Few people can afford private health insurance out of pocket. Prices for health services in America are ungodly high compared to say, Canada and the UK (have fun googling the cost of a C-section in the respective countries). Therefore, to cover basic services, employers provide health insurance. Employers can get cheaper insurance premiums per person, by agreeing to have all their employers on one scheme – it is in part how companies can provide insurance when individuals often cannot. Economies of scale.

-Therefore, employees often do not get a choice of providers: in both my jobs here, I have been stuck with one option and one company.

-The healthcare provided by the companies, in both my cases has not covered what I would choose in my choice of insurance company. UAB did not cover contraception outside of birth control, nor Wes’ testosterone. UT has very steep co-pays (birth is $1,000-3,500). I understand that I am lucky though, because at 3,500 I reach my yearly max and the baby is covered under that max as long as we are both in the hospital. Some companies charge separate maxes for the mother and baby, meaning the cost of 60% of US births would exceed $7,000. I am generally unhappy with the level of care offered. Some companies do not cover pre-existing conditions (kid with cystic fibrosis? Nope. Previous cancer history? You’re on your own if it strikes again). Some companies have a maximum they will pay out for a given individual. If your cancer treatment exceeds this (as was the case with a lady I met from CA): tough. But you have no decision over whether to choose a company with these exclusions / conditions or not.

-Then, for many, there is no company they work for, and so no insurance. And their only recourse for treatment is (1) pay the inflated US prices, or go to ER. So cancer treatment is out (too expensive / not available in ER). Ditto much preventative care. Care for your child who needs to go to NICU.

-So, I was shocked by the number of categories individuals in the US without healthcare. Examples:

1)The oft cited (by outsiders) / classic case of ‘tramps and immigrants’. But also in some cases:

2)Pregnant women who for whatever reason have to change jobs (it is a pre-exisiting condition)

3)Cancer patients who have ‘run out’ of coverage

4)Children with serious health issues whose parents change jobs (coz, you know, America is in a recession ‘n’ all)

5)Adults with previous health issues that change jobs

6)The self employed, including a man I spoke to today, who chose to be self employed so he could earn money while caring for his mother who had had a stroke and had cancer. So, let’s just say: carers.

and so on. Google it and make your own judgement on the accuracy of figures, but look how many actually qualify for health insurance (some say 10%), how many actually qualify for Medicaid (do not listen if people say it is open to all children and pregnant women – I was turned down!), and how many die each year from lack of insurance: I would go with ~45,000 but again, I let you make your own sense of the figures.

Bottom line: many people are dying within the current system. Both ‘undesirables’ (illegal immigrants / people not wanting to work), and ‘desirables’: me the pregnant university professor, Will the carer, Jane the child born with a hole in the heart whose father lost his job and got another quickly.

The solution

So, a solution has been proposed. I would like to say by Obama, but actually, I think Kennedy first (?) … On the basis that at least categories 2-6 are not reasonable, reforms have been proposed. Including: no pre-existing condition exclusions, and an extension of government covered health insurance. If a company cannot offer you a premium that is a reasonable percentage of your salary (it changes, depending on your situation) the government will pick up the difference. However, there is a problem: some clauses, particularly the first two, if left ‘as is’ will drive up premium prices – which is just generally and all around considered very undesirable. So, there are two twin solutions:

(1) The individual mandate. By forcing everyone to HAVE to buy health insurance (either through their company, or their pocket), if they can afford it, more healthy people proportionally to those needing services will now buy coverage, so there will be more money ‘in the pot’ and premiums shouldn’t experience a massive hike. If you don’t buy it, you pay a penalty. This penalty contributes to the health care system, either by keeping the premiums low, or by covering the ER-emergency care you may recourse to, which as you cannot afford to pay for, goes unpaid for, and so the cost is spread to other people / services, and the insurance companies pay for these (in the main) so it contributes to rising premiums. So: the individual mandate makes sure that premiums are increased as little as possible.

(2) In dealing with the issue that many people are letting healthcare conditions get out of control and into an emergency state: and thus become much more expensive to treat than they are to prevent, and thus as above, are driving up premiums: preventative care has become free. And Medicare has been extended.

So: the solution to many Americans with a lack of coverage is enforced insurance. So that everyone contributes and those lucky enough to remain fairly healthy lose their $$, those unlucky enough to be touched by devastating illness effectively gain $$. Of course, in allowing pregnant women / babies with birth defects / carers / self employed to access these benefits, which requires extending Medicare, you can’t really ‘weed out’ those who chose to take free insurance because they cannot be bothered to have a job. Or women who want to have consequence-free pre marital sex (many Americans get very upset over this. They don’t want to pay for ‘people’ to have sex so regularly get upset at free contraception. But there is no outcry for Viagra / Cialis being covered, so one must assume it is only women they don’t want to have sex without consequences). Or a host of other people you just don’t fancy paying for (personally, I might pick those who engage in dangerous sports, and chose to follow a lifestyle that leads  to obesity… but they generally seem OK in the eyes of the public).

The reaction

Some Americans have gone ballistic. Fair enough: it is not everyone’s ideology that the best health care is a right. My husband’s attitude is this: if you can’t afford healthcare, you don’t get it. When I say ‘what about an adult with cancer? Would you have a preventable death occur because coverage has run out?’. He says ‘Yes. People die Lekki. It is a fact of life. I am not interested in paying to fight that for others’. Well… OK then. I guess that it at least logical. I don’t agree, but I get it. If you want to all the categories of individuals above dying, so that you don’t have to pay for the healthcare of those you don’t want to then yes, oppose the new act. Kinda shocking, but logical.

There are others who think that these deaths, or uncontrolled health conditions, are acceptable if the only alternative is no government interference in the private enterprise of healthcare. Left unfettered, private insurance went the route of the above: the government decided to step in a put a stop on it, to save lives. They either believe that this solution is unconstitutional, or accept SCOTUS’ decision that it is not but believe it is so undesirable, that they would rather people died than see it enacted. OK – again, sad but logical. Stand up and say ‘I believe cancer suffers should die to prevent the travesty that is government interference’. I will accept you as logical but politely disagree that that is a good ideology.

There are some who believe that if saving all categories of individuals above means helping ‘lazy’ people, or people without a job, then that is an unacceptable trade-off. People and children should die so that others do not get health care when they do not have a job. Again, a little shocking to me. But stand up and say ‘in order that people who do not work, and are not married to a worker, do not get coverage paid for by others, I believe the categories above should die’. Cold, but logical.

There are two categories of reactions who deeply confuse me:

-People who get picky about what ‘type’ of person they do and do not want covered. Lindsay said to me (when I couldn’t get contraception): I don’t want to pay for you to have sex. Gina said when I commented that my pregnancy was (albeit briefly) not covered: you chose to have a baby, I don’t want to pay for that decision. OKey doke. But given that in any insurance / universal system we all pay for the bad decisions of others, if you don’t want this, and only want to pay for truly bad luck, why do you want to pay for the consequences of:

-Obesity among those who chose to consume more than the recommended daily caloric intake, and conduct less than the recommended daily activity guidelines

-People who chose to get a suntan

-People who chose to ride a motorcycle, or engage in high risk sports

-People who do not get the recommended hours of sleep per night.

-People who chose to have a high stress job.

To really name but a few. I am baffled by people thinking we don’t ALL (well, nearly all, there are a few health nuts who may not fall into any such category) chose to make decisions every day that are detrimental to our health, and others pay for this.

2) People who get VERY upset when you tell them that they are choosing to let *insert emotive picture* let’s go with: a university professor needing treatment for a brain tumor, whose insurance has ‘run out’, die. VERY upset. ‘How can you say this?? I absolutely do not want any of the categories above (well, often just categories 2-6) to die. Why are you being so rude?? Why are you being so hurtful? Oh I am so upset you think I would let a child die!!’. But it seems to me: they do. For the sake of their constitution, their desire not to pay for certain sections of society, their desire to keep government intervention out or some such they are saying ‘hey, I don’t want to subscribe to a system that provides in these circumstances, and I will let people die as a result. The casualties are worth the greater ideology’.

Then, I *get* it. That is logical thinking. But, as my friend Lizzie explained it to me, I fear some people are doing only emotional thinking. Otherwise they would stand up and say ‘I want to pay for some health choices, but not others and I think I am accurately qualified to decide which ones’ or, ‘I think people must die to preserve my ideology’. Right?