Thursday, July 28, 2011

What does the health care bill mean for dependent children

What does the health care bill mean for dependent children?
I just turned 23 last year and I am no longer covered under my parent's insurance. I started paying for my own health insurance since I only work part time while attending school. I see that the new health care bill will allow dependent children to be covered under their parent's insurance until age 26. Can I go back to being covered by my parent's insurance as long as they claim me as a dependent?
Other - Politics & Government - 1 Answers

Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Yes, you can be covered by your parent's policy but I don't know when that takes effect. I would contact the insurance agency.





   Read more discussions :

Sunday, July 24, 2011

I'm 25 yrs old. I'm looking for my father. I'm having health problems & have a child, it meant be inherited

I'm 25 yrs old. I'm looking for my father. I'm having health problems & have a child, it meant be inherited?
My father left when he found out I was concieved. I know he was married with 3 children ( believed to be 2 boys and 1 girl). His name is Lawerance R Hill. He has an uncle named Clifford Anderson. He should be between 45 and 55yrs old. I believe he used to paint house for his uncle who owned a company believed to be called Anderson Painting. I was told he lived in Inverness, New Port Richey, Dade City and maybe Brooksville, fl. I have been looking for years and years and still no luck and now with health problems I need to find him even more.
Family - 2 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
check out classmates and go to the people search
2 :
facebook




  Read more discussions :



Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Can someone please tell me of a medical facility that would deny health care to children in America

Can someone please tell me of a medical facility that would deny health care to children in America?
I am serious. Is there a hospital or a doctor's office in America that would deny treatment to a needy child that was uninsured?
Politics - 7 Answers
 


Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
There arent officially any, but you take a busload of sick minority children to the finest blueblooded hospital, out of all honesty, and suddenly there will be a "facilitation" problem.
2 :
Yes. My nephew had a hernia, he was eight years old. The Doctor and the hospitals said to wait until it strangulates, and then it would be treated as an emergency. Once a hernia strangulates, you can die.
3 :
An emergency room will treat the uninsured, but you will go home with a big bill, after you are out of an urgent care situation there is no hospital in the US that will treat anybody of any age, from 1 to 101 without getting paid.
4 :
Yes: any privately owned Hospital can and any Doctor can. The ones who do not get money from the Government to run the Places they work and is privately own,will and do everyday.
5 :
I doubt this, other than some differences of opinion over what is necessary, possibly. But no one will convince me that won't occur with universal health-care or that it doesn't occur now with Medicaid and Medicare. I've actually found the re-payment terms better with private hospitals than so-called public ones, incidentally. Additionally, the needy uninsured can apply for Medicaid at admissions.
6 :
if they only have a cold... yes... MOST CERTAINLY... if they aren't in critical need there are many... take your kid to a local doctors office and say you don't have any money or insurance and the kid is ill, not deathly ill... see what happens...
7 :
No private hospital must accept charity cases, there are many stories where ambulances pass one hospital to go to another. No doctor needs to either, he may at his discretion, but he is not mandated to treat everyone. And they bill, all medical facilities and doctors will bill the patient, in some cases more than they do the ones who are insured, because insurance companies work out their own deals with hospitals. There is a reason half of all bankruptcies in the US are caused by medical bills, and its not because Aunt Margaret is a hypochondriac. I had a friend who was between jobs and insurance coverage, he wouldn't go to an emergency room with what was probably just heartburn. He died. He was 53. You can't diagnose yourself.





   Read more discussions :

Saturday, July 16, 2011

is it possible to lower child support if I have an older child living with me from my first marriage

is it possible to lower child support if I have an older child living with me from my first marriage?
Can i get my child support lowered if I have custody of my older child and he lives with me from my first marriage. he has special needs and I am paying private health insurance for both children.
Law & Ethics - 4 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
They go by your income. Aren't you receiving support for the older child? Seriously if you can't afford the one you have why do you go on to have another? Totally unfair to the younger child.
2 :
In Connecticut you cant............You have same responsibility to other child.
3 :
You are going to have to go back to court to request a review of your family situation.
4 :
Yes. call dss(child support) in the county for which the case has been herd. You have a case worker. Plus You can go to the clerk of court and file you own modifications. I did this because I have to pay on 16 year old Plus I have custody of a new one year old. . Be honest . When you go to court, have pay stub, proof of how much monthly yo pay on ins. They will calculate it for you . Dss will tell you there here for the client. But its their duty to also work with father for modification. Hope this helps





   Read more discussions :

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

If your children don't have health care because of you refusing vaccines, the government will take them

If your children don't have health care because of you refusing vaccines, the government will take them?
If your children don't have government health care because of you refusing vaccines, the government will take them? Mandatory Vaccines another advantage of the health care bill?
Politics - 13 Answers
 


Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Government is always right, not
2 :
The government already has stipulations that require kids to get vaccines at a certain age, but I don't think that's part of the healthcare bill. I don't think they take them away either, I think it's a fine.
3 :
Not providing your children with basic medical attention like vaccines is abuse and just cause for removal of the children.
4 :
Vaccines are not full of socialist mercury or tracking devices. They are made by doctors for the benefit of humanity. They should NOT be mandatory but they are a good idea. And if the government ever tried to take my kids, they'd be leaving with a chest full of bullets.
5 :
yes the government will take everyone's baby away. the trouble is that they don't have the infrastructure to house them all. as things stand right now, all of the babies will be put in halfway houses with recovering drug addicts, until they can be adopted.
6 :
That cannot be true. It's not smart to refuse those vaccines unless there is serious cause for concern. For one thing, they are required for college or they were. It didn't work if you got them after a certain age. I've had the vaccines. It's been fine. I think there is a lot of ignorance surrounding this and these parents with concerns should get both sides of the story. I'm a believer in getting the ones that you need. I didn't get the flu shot this year but I have before. I made the decision based on statistics for my life. I felt ok taking the risk.
7 :
The governments in most states will take your kids if you don't teach the approved curriculum, even if you home school. We're living under fascism but most don't recognize how little control they really have because the fascism has come in stages and we've had time to adjust.
8 :
In many states you cannot enrol children in schools unless they have had mandatory vaccinations.
9 :
If that is in there, and I don't know whether it is, it won't hold up in court. What makes you think that you cannot turn down vaccines if your children are on government health care? Even in the states where vaccines are required to attend public schools, this cannot be enforced. It is called being a conscientious objector and perfectly defendable in the US. You take your child to a physician for a wellness check and explain your objections and the physician can note them. This is America, people. Matthew, all that is currently required is that your home-schooled children take the state tests (as far as enforcing curriculum, how can they really do that? lol). People--you can defend against this bill without making stuff up. I promise.
10 :
this is what everyone in this country wants though..the government to take care of us in every way..never have to pay or do anything for ourselves again. america is just like a giant daycare and instead of being taught personal responsibility and morals we are taught to sue and blame someone else and look where its got us. something had to be done about health care but its not fair that i had to pay $1000 deductible,$190 a month and only get 80% coverage thats a bunch of crap. what they should have done was expanded the states healthcare guidelines to include more people and backup coverage for wen people lose their jobs.
11 :
Don't refuse vaccines, nutcase. Your kid brings Measles into the school and it effects my kid. Your right to stupidity doesn't extend to injuring me and mine.
12 :
scary isn't it? big government taking over our lives..... and yes vaccinations should be the choice of the parent, I know of more than one child who died from vaccination reactions. It should not be imposed on "every child". Some vaccinations are outdated and impractical. furthermore, the standard vaccinations are lumped together and provide more risk to the child. A parent should have the option to pick and choose. I have personally opted to vaccinate my child but I wish i could have had some of the shots as 3 single shots instead of 1 triple...it causes more risk and illness for the infant.
13 :
They try something like that and my family will be leaving the country. There are people on both sides of the fence, but I think a lot of them that are pro-vaccine really haven't been told all the dangers to make an informed decision either way. For those that are for them, just research the ingredients and the side effects of those ingredients. There are those of us who have been vaccinated and have gotten side effects. I almost died after an MMR as a child, of course I already had the measles. It causes asthma. I also now have on and off numbness in the tips of my fingers due to the hepatitis vaccine. My sister almost died after an MMR. Sorry, death is not worth the risk for my children. I am also against abortion and there is aborted fetal tissue in some of the vaccines. And you really have to stop and ask yourself about AIDS, it came from a rhesus monkey, and there is rhesus monkey tissue in some of the vaccines (this last statement is only my opinion, not documented). Check out www.thinktwice.com and read for yourself. It gives things on both sides of the fence. The child that I have that did not get vaccinated is much healthier than the ones that did. She is now 7 and had a stomach virus. No ear infections, fevers, etc that most little children get. Can't say that for my oldest who has problem after problem and she has continued for 25 years of her life. The difference is, my youngest was able to fight off things going around without interference of having to fight off diseases that were put in to her body. And schools cannot refuse your children. There are exemption forms and each state is different on where they get signed or obtained. The school will tell you its the law, but the law is actually that the school holds either a record that the immunizations are up to date or that there is an exemption form on file for each child.





  Read more discussions :


Friday, July 8, 2011

Would you allow a Mental Health Unit for Sexually Violent Predators in your town

Would you allow a Mental Health Unit for Sexually Violent Predators in your town?
So, the state of NY has plans to turn a former Mental Health unit into a "prison" type unit to house Sexually Violent predators in our town. (violent rapists and child molesters). These people are being held on the mental health law, as a danger to others or themself. At the same time, it can take days to find a bed in mental health for children in this state. Would you oppose this unit or not? How would you voice your opinion pro and con?
Civic Participation - 7 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
I would support this unit if the people running it can periodically castrate some of the inmates...in public...on Pay Per View...using a rusty chainsaw...a rusty chainsaw with a dull blade.
2 :
I guess you dont have a family. If you did have either a wife, and children you would automatically oppose this kind of thing happening even 5kms near your place of residence. If even one of these disturbed people was to escape & find a way to your place, i think that then you wouldnt have to think about if you're thinking of oppising this or not, it wouldnt be a question at all in your mind, rather a flat out HELL NO, NOT IN MY NEIGHBOURHOOD!!!!
3 :
Keep those scumbags in prison for life, or better yet, execute them so we don't have to pay to support their sorry *sses!
4 :
would i really have a choice?? i would rather not as there would be an awful lot of problems and not just with the predators. parents would be terrified an i can't say that i would blame them. there have been known escapes from these places. i would by every means i have oppose this, sorry.
5 :
Well as long as it is a MAXIMUM security ward I think it would be fine. I grew up near a mental health facility and once in a while they got out because it wasnt maximum security but with in an hour they were back in the facility. So as long as proper precautions were taken I wouldnt be opposed to it.
6 :
As long as I was assured that the security (min 4 layer max security) was sufficient to prevent escape in case of a wing becoming unstable. Example: if the west wing became compromised and was overrun, there would still be two layers of security to prevent inmates from escaping the MHU.
7 :
fun weekends, lemme tell ya




   Read more discussions :


Monday, July 4, 2011

Why does the President think making sure children have health care is wrong

Why does the President think making sure children have health care is wrong?
Even many fellow Repubs disagree with him..."This is not a government takeover of health care. This is not socialized or nationalized medicine or anything like that," Grassley said. "This is not bringing the Canadian health care system to America." I read that it would cost $60M over the next 5 years...how is that too much to spend when we spend twice that much a month on Iraq... For those of you who see everything in black and white and therefore will say socialized medicine is bad...give me a reason...not just that Jesus doesn't like it or something like that. for those of you that say it's as simple as having their parents provide it for them...sorry it isn't. Some hardworking people try thier best and still end up selling thier houses and everything they own to continue to pay the hospital. My daughter was born with a congenital heart defect. In her first year her bills have added up to over $1.5M. Luckily, we have great coverage and haven't had to pay a dime. But we met many people who had to move across country for a specialist and had hit thier cap for the insurance. This people are not bad people that spend their money on drugs and/or material posesions. I am right around the cut off for this bill, but I would have been in big trouble if the insurance company had quit covering us. All I am saying is that kids should be treated different than adult...if over 18 or 21, fine you are on your own...but a two month old baby born with half a heart should be covered. Government shouldn't run healtcare, but insurance companys should?!?! Ruth, never said hospitals turn people away...but good parents can't always afford to pay the bills... My only point is that we spend Billions of dollars on war and to bail out huge corporations, but we balk at helping our citizens when they need it because that would socialism. BTW, noone answered why socialized medicine is wrong...it just is seems to be is the only answer.
Politics - 30 Answers
 


Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Maybe the President thinks that's why children have parents. ADDED: I have neither seen nor heard of children being turned away from medical treatment. Please provide some evidence of this.
2 :
That would mean less tax dollars for him to funnel to defense contractors.
3 :
Because that means that he has less and less money to blow off for the war...
4 :
You are mistaken - this president does NOT think. His track record is proof positive.
5 :
Not if 60 cents out of every dollar goes to Overhead.
6 :
I believe socialized medicine is bad because it goes against the fundamentals of basic capitalism. However, I believe that the government should supply health care to those that cannot afford it.
7 :
Because he's just going to send them to Iraq to be killed when they turn 18. It's a poor return on the investment
8 :
Because it'll be more money NOT coming to him. I really dont like him.
9 :
What no body likes about the bill is that it really isn't for kids, it is for couples with kids that earn $80,000 or less a year. Most of these people can afford to buy health insurance. They just choose to spend their money on vacations and at Walmart. It's a backdoor trick to start socialized medicine.
10 :
You know what. I'll bet it has something to do with all the stupid pork tacked on as an amendment to the bill. That's why. Since there's no line-item veto ... he has to accept it with the stupid amendments or veto the whole bill. Thus the power of checks and balances ...
11 :
Look at Canada. They have socialized medicine. They look to come here for treatment. It takes months to get a simple MRI or CAT scan. If they die before they get it so be it. And who is going to pay for this???
12 :
Government has no business in the health care industry. The United States does not need socialized medicine. Socialized medicine is worse than what we have the USA. There is nothing wrong with children having HEALTH CARE, its just wrong that so many people want the government getting involved.
13 :
Here is an unusual idea, how about their parents provide them with health care since they managed to bring them into this world. I don't feel it's my job to send my money to raise other peoples kids and provide them with the care their parents should provide for them.
14 :
The poor little rich people can't afford to pitch in.
15 :
He's a selfish SOB. If it's not for him or his millionaire buddies, he's not for it. Want to guess where the infant mortality is highest, the US or all other industrialized countries?
16 :
The government has no responsibility to provide healthcare for anyone. Check the Constitution...I swear it's not in there ;oP Not to say that this war is constitutional, clearly it is not. I love how all these programs start out for children (welfare, medicaid, etc) and then turn into programs for everyone...Yay I just love having money taken from my paycheck and given to people who don't pull their weight! Cris, Is the fact that it would be unconstitutional not a good reason? Others have provided many other good reasons. Maybe you should take another look.
17 :
Tell you what...let's cut out the middle man. You give me money so I can take my kid to the doctor. What's that you say.....You won't give me, a complete stranger, who is fully capable of providing for my own family, any of your hard earned money out of your pocket? Why is that? That's what you're proposing....I'm just cutting out the middle man.
18 :
It's called personal responsibility I pay for my daughters Why should I have to pay for the lazy libs kids Think First
19 :
Grassley is wrong. it is opening the door to socialized medicine and that is wrong, wrong, wrong. Tell me we won't be paying for the illegals kids too?
20 :
It's wrong because Haliburton isn't in the business of health insurance. If they were, the children would be insured as soon as 'mom and dad' can prove conception. Cha ching, again Mr. Cheyney.....
21 :
Duh...do you think that a single mother making $80,000 a year should get a pass, cancel her private insurance and sign up for the new Dem health plan and then get it free, is good for the rest of us? Read the small print. The Pres is vetoing it because it includes people making over $80,000 a year, not the poor folk that it was designed for.
22 :
Because he wants to encourage these children to be responsible and ensure they are born into nice wealthy families so they do not have to be a burden on the state.
23 :
It chips at the foundation of our government, it expands the nanny state, it gives parents the excuse to by a big screen TV or a razor phone, instead of investing in their own children. It involves wealth distribution, takes from the rich and gives to the poor who are unwilling,or very willing to allow big brother to provide for them.
24 :
It's a brisk step toward socialism, and monopolization of the heath care industry by government. It gives free heath care to children of parents who can already afford it, and of course they will all take the bait instead of paying for it themselves. Others will begin to complain that they don't get free health care, etc etc etc. I'm not particularly against universal health care, its just that making it "free" (i.e. taxpayer provided) has too many problems. For example, there will be a inevitable jump in heath care usage once everyone can just go to the doctor for free, which will lead to overcrowding. There is also the inevitable government red tape, and the regulation of costs will that will lower the quality.
25 :
Bush is hoping those dang little pickaninnies will die before they can reproduce........
26 :
Well we can always do it the way the Democrats want, abort them all, no children no need for health care.
27 :
Reading all the idiotic comments above mine...I don't know if I should be laughing or shaking my head in disgust. You poor poor americans, so brainwashed with government propaganda that the mere mention of anything 'socialist' will cause massive revolt, when the majority of you can't even think of a good reason as to why social health care is wrong. In your puny little brains, affordable health care= democrats= communism= USSR= death to the good old 'free' US of A. sigh.when will anyone wake up and face the fact that people from countries with socialized health care aren't dying by the dozens, aren't waiting 'months for a cat scan' as someone above me stated (hmm i wonder where he overheard that lie), and sure as hell aren't complaining.
28 :
It gives the government more control over the people, that's why. It takes away peoples independence and work ethic and makes us depend on the government for our living.
29 :
Where is it written that it's the Governments job to take care of my children. You won't find it in the constitution because it's not there. If you don't think socialized medicine is wrong just ask the Canadians or Britons about it or better yet take a look at some of the stories of how they wait for months to get life saving treatments. or don't even get them at all. I've heard stories of people dieing while waiting months for treatments. Why should we even think of letting Government control health care, I mean they proved themselves unworthy on other such tasks haven't they. Stephen
30 :
Can ask for billions of dollars to fight his immoral war but could care less for the health care of this country and its children.





  Read more discussions :



Friday, July 1, 2011

What level of college education would you need to get a career in children mental health

What level of college education would you need to get a career in children mental health?

Health Care - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
There are at least 3 different fields that you can go into. You can become a licensed social worker, specializing in child therapy. For that you would need to complete a 2 year masters level degree. You can be a psychologist. You would need at least a master's degree, but you'd do better with a Ph.D. You can be a psychiatrist. You would need a medical degree, and then go on to specialize in psychiatry, and then child psychiatry.
2 :
The minimum would be a masters for therapist and many clinical positions (play therapist, MFCC, etc) (you do not say exactly what field you are considering). Anything more like a psychologist is a doctorate (you can not call your self a psychologist with out the doctoral training).





  Read more discussions :