Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- A kid with a fractured leg highlights the problems Dr. Jaquelin Gotlieb's pediatric practice is having with Georgia's Medicaid system.
"I needed to send the child to a pediatric orthopedic surgeon," said Gotlieb. "I couldn't find a specialist who took Medicaid. It took so long that the leg healed on its own."
This sounds like political propaganda, just like the Toyota scare. If enough people are afraid they won't have medical coverage, then Obamacare will have a better chance.
With Toyota, one of the best selling cars, if it looks like they are all unsafe (I have owned Toyota for 20 years), people will start buying Ford and Chevy and prop up the market.
Sounds like that doctor couldn't think outside the box. I'm sure it would have been OPTIMAL to have a pediatric orthopedic surgeon in this case, but really... were there no other options? Could the child have not seen a regular orthopedic surgeon instead of seeing NO surgeon? Granted, that's not really the topic of discussion, but I think it puts a desperate twist on a situation that didn't have to be as desperate as it is portrayed.
Sounds like that doctor couldn't think outside the box. I'm sure it would have been OPTIMAL to have a pediatric orthopedic surgeon in this case, but really... were there no other options? Could the child have not seen a regular orthopedic surgeon instead of seeing NO surgeon? Granted, that's not really the topic of discussion, but I think it puts a desperate twist on a situation that didn't have to be as desperate as it is portrayed.
You SHOULD read the article. It states that Georgia medicaid pays LESS for pediatric patients. That's the reason why most doctors in that area will only see adults.
Furthermore, adult orthopedic surgeons won't treat children for liability reasons. Even for doctors who are willing, most healthcare systems forbid them from doing so.
You SHOULD read the article. It states that Georgia medicaid pays LESS for pediatric patients. That's the reason why most doctors in that area will only see adults.
Furthermore, adult orthopedic surgeons won't treat children for liability reasons. Even for doctors who are willing, most healthcare systems forbid them from doing so.
Does that differ by region/state? The orthopedic surgeon my son saw a couple of years ago treated patients of all ages.
Does that differ by region/state? The orthopedic surgeon my son saw a couple of years ago treated patients of all ages.
Medicaid is a federal program run by states. States determine who is eligible, what's covered, and how much is paid. There can be a huge difference between states.
According to the article, Georgia pays doctors less for pediatric patients than adult patients.
As for health system policies, that would vary by city/region.
Where I live, there's a huge monopoly of the UPMC health system, and it forbids non-pediatric doctors from treating children under a certain age.
It's disgusting really. The health system only allows patients to be treated at Children's Hospital. (Trust me, it's not ideal. I have hated the treatment there.)
In the past, we could take children to any hospital. It's gotten to the point where we have very limited treatment choices for children in my city.
Psst. I DID read the article. I agree with the point of the article -that the way that Medicare and Medicaid reimburses (or rather fails to reimburse) physicians is unacceptable and is causing major problems for both the physicians AND the patients. However.. I still say that there was likely a Plan B that was ignored if the child's leg was allowed to heal on it's own. Would it have been optimal for a specialist to treat the child's leg? Of course. Could a regular old family physician have set the broken leg if they needed to, instead of doing NOTHING? Yes, they could have.
Psst. I DID read the article. I agree with the point of the article -that the way that Medicare and Medicaid reimburses (or rather fails to reimburse) physicians is unacceptable and is causing major problems for both the physicians AND the patients. However.. I still say that there was likely a Plan B that was ignored if the child's leg was allowed to heal on it's own. Would it have been optimal for a specialist to treat the child's leg? Of course. Could a regular old family physician have set the broken leg if they needed to, instead of doing NOTHING? Yes, they could have.
I had that thought, too. Our family physician has treated all sorts of issues that previously would have sent me to a specialist. I think he gets excited whenever there's a possibility that he might be able to pull out his suture tray, and my family has certainly given him more than one opportunity to do so. Last time my son broke a bone, it was set by an ED physician, and he was referred to an orthopod for follow-up.
Family practioners are able to treat pediatric patients, but some orthopedic injuries are too complex to be treated by a family practitioner.
If the injury was too complicated (broken on the growth plate, etc.), most family pracitioners wouldn't touch a patient of any age.
I imagine some injuries are better to let heal on its own and wait for a properly trained specialist to rebreak it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
