Among other charges contained in their vicious, unwarranted attacks on the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Republicans alleged that the law permitted the government to “come between you and your doctor”.

Of course all the credible fact checking groups have cited this statement for the prevarication that it is. Putative GOP Presidential nominee Mitt “The Mittster” Romney exclaimed after the Supreme Court upheld the law

…and perhaps most troubling of all, Obamacare puts the federal government between you and your doctor. provides this refutation of Romney:

The health care law does set new minimum benefits packages, but that’s more a matter of coming between patients and their insurance companies, rather than patients and their doctors.

Many Republicans have claimed the law’s Independent Payment Advisory Board will lead to a rationing of patient care. But as we have written repeatedly, the purpose of the 15-member panel of doctors and medical professionals, economists and health care management experts, and representatives for consumers is to find ways to slow the growth in Medicare spending.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act explicitly states that IPAB “shall not include any recommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums … increase Medicare beneficiary cost sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and co-payments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria.” (See page 490.) The board’s recommendations, furthermore, will go before Congress, where they can be replaced with alternative cuts or rejected outright by a three-fifths majority.

And again, the health care law doesn’t come close to establishing a government-run system like those of Britain or Canada. While Medicaid will be expanded to more people, most Americans will continue to get their insurance through a private carrier. To the dismay of many liberals, a proposal to include a government-run “public option” to private health insurance was dropped during the legislative process.

Oh, but when a woman seeks a completely legal procedure like an abortion, Republican lawmakers suddenly put the government right in the examining room with her. Several states mandate that a woman undergo a sonogram prior to undergoing an abortion procedure, regardless of whether her doctor deems that exam necessary.

Furthermore some of these same states require the doctor to give false or misleading information to the woman such as this piece of nonsense:

The South Dakota legislature passed a law in 2005 that requires doctors to dispense written information that tells women that “the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being,” and describe “all known medical risks of the procedure and statistically significant risk factors,” which includes “increased risk of suicide ideation and suicide.”

There is no proven link between abortion and suicide. Studies do show that women receiving an abortion are more prone to suicide than other women, but the same life factors that led to the abortion decision in the first place such as poverty, domestic abuse, or even rape are the stressers tha may lead one down the trail to suicide, not the abortion itself.

Now that increasingly oppressive state…Florida…is fighting to put its special brand on doctor-patient interference. It has passed a law expressly FORBIDDING doctors to ask about his patient’s gun ownership as a potential risk factor for the patient’s health. The doctor can lose his license for merely asking and incur a fine as well.

Now no doctor of mine has ever asked me that question and frankly I doubt most doctors would ever consider asking about guns. But there is legitimacy to so inquire if a doctor is performing a thorough assessment of any aspects of her patient’s life that may increase the risk of harm.

Let me see if I have this straight now. The health care law passed under President Obama has no provisions directing any interchange of information or treatment for individual doctors or patients. Yet that law “comes between a patient and his doctor”?

But state laws that force certain unnecessary procedures and require a doctor to lie to his patient are okay? Likewise, preventing a doctor from getting full information from his patient that the doctor deems necessary (and may be lied about anyhow…I quit smoking last year, Doc…cough cough cough) is also okay, even at the cost of the medical license?

When I retire to Florida I’m going to be sure to arrange that Gov. Rick Scott accompany me to my first medical appointment to ensure that the nebby doctor toes the line. While Scott’s there I’ll ask the doctor to perform a transvaginal sonogram on him.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Please give me your thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: