Is this really what obama intended from the start?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/16/southwestern-pa-hospital-to-stop-baby-deliveries/?test=latestnews

All because of obamacare.

Ghandi wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/16/southwestern-pa-hospital-to-stop-baby-deliveries/?test=latestnews

All because of obamacare.

Up until about a hundred years ago probably 98 % of babies were born at home in their mother's beds. I was.

A hospital can generate 40 or 50 thousand dollars from a childbirth. Is that too much?
A CEO of a hospital makes 900,000 thousand a year right here in Pensacola. Is that too much?

Yella wrote:

Ghandi wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/16/southwestern-pa-hospital-to-stop-baby-deliveries/?test=latestnews

All because of obamacare.

Up until about a hundred years ago probably 98 % of babies were born at home in their mother's beds. I was.

A hospital can generate 40 or 50 thousand dollars from a childbirth. Is that too much?
A CEO of a hospital makes 900,000 thousand a year right here in Pensacola. Is that too much?

I saw an episode of the Waltons where John Walton had an operation to have his appendix removed and it costed them $14.00. Cash.
No insurance. Just cash.

This article is misleading. 200 babies a year is not a lot...the hospital where I worked in the early 70's had 10,000 births in a year. And there are plenty of reasons for doctors to readjust their practices. Sometimes, working directly for a hospital, doctors don't have flexibility with regard to the treatment of their patients...for instance, the hospital might mandate the number of patients to be seen in a day or subtly try to influence the doctor to recommend expensive testing.

I had my second child at home with a midwife in 1984. I saw a doctor throughout my pregnancy and he was on standby if any emergency arose. I took my baby to a pediatrician the next day for a postpartum check. I much preferred the home delivery to my previous hospital delivery. Of course, high risk patients should deliver at the hospital.

This article is misleading, to say the least.

Floridatexan wrote:


This article is misleading, to say the least.

It's to be expected. The source is Fox News.

Watcher wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:


This article is misleading, to say the least.

It's to be expected. The source is Fox News.

Watcher,did you mean "Faux Noise?"

Ghandi wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/16/southwestern-pa-hospital-to-stop-baby-deliveries/?test=latestnews

All because of obamacare.

obgyn docs are expensive. that profession is one that has a high rate of lawsuits.

this doesnt surprise me. by the end of this year we will have a little bit of an idea of how bad its going to be/get.

Floridatexan wrote:
This article is misleading. 200 babies a year is not a lot...the hospital where I worked in the early 70's had 10,000 births in a year. And there are plenty of reasons for doctors to readjust their practices. Sometimes, working directly for a hospital, doctors don't have flexibility with regard to the treatment of their patients...for instance, the hospital might mandate the number of patients to be seen in a day or subtly try to influence the doctor to recommend expensive testing.

I had my second child at home with a midwife in 1984. I saw a doctor throughout my pregnancy and he was on standby if any emergency arose. I took my baby to a pediatrician the next day for a postpartum check. I much preferred the home delivery to my previous hospital delivery. Of course, high risk patients should deliver at the hospital.

This article is misleading, to say the least.

The only doctors in our area that work for a hospital are the Hospitalists. The rest of the physicians are in private practice and are not under orders from a hospital.