FROM THE AMERICAN THINKER

ObamaCare and me
By Zane F Pollard, MD
 
I have been sitting quietly on the sidelines watching all of this national debate on healthcare. It is time for me to bring some clarity to the table by explaining many of the problems from the perspective of a doctor.
 
 First off, the government has involved very few of us physicians in the healthcare debate. While the American Medical Association has come out in favor of the plan, it is vital to remember that the AMA only represents 17% of the American physician workforce.
 
 I have taken care of Medicaid patients for 35 years while representing the only pediatric ophthalmology group left in Atlanta, Georgia that accepts Medicaid. For example, in the past 6 months I have cared for three young children on Medicaid who had corneal ulcers. This is a potentially blinding situation because if the cornea perforates from the infection, almost surely blindness will occur. In all three cases the antibiotic needed for the eradication of the infection was not on the approved Medicaid list.
 
Each time I was told to fax Medicaid for the approval forms, which I did. Within 48 hours the form came back to me which was sent in immediately via fax, and I was told that I would have my answer in 10 days. Of course by then each child would have been blind in the eye.
 
Each time the request came back denied. All three times I personally provided the antibiotic for each patient which was not on the Medicaid approved list. Get the point -- rationing of care.
 
Over the past 35 years I have cared for over 1000 children born with congenital cataracts. In older children and in adults the vision is rehabilitated with an intraocular lens. In newborns we use contact lenses  which ar! e very e xpensive. It takes Medicaid over one year to approve a contact lens post cataract surgery. By that time a successful anatomical operation is wasted as the child will be close to blind from a lack of focusing for so long a period of time.
 
Again, extreme rationing. Solution: I have a foundation here in Atlanta supported 100% by private funds which supplies all of these contact lenses for my Medicaid and illegal immigrants children for free. Again, waiting for the government would be disastrous.
 
Last week I had a lady bring her child to me. They are Americans but live in Sweden, as the father has a job with a big corporation. The child had the onset of double vision 3 months ago and has been unable to function normally because of this. They are people of means but are waiting 8 months to see the ophthalmologist in Sweden. Then if the child needed surgery they would be put on a 6 month waiting list. She called me and I saw her that day. It turned out that  the child had  accommodative esotropia (crossing of the eyes treated with glasses that  correct for farsightedness) and  responded to glasses within  4 days, so no surgery was needed. Again, rationing of care.
 
Last month I operated on a 70 year old lady with double vision present for 3 years. She responded quite nicely to her surgery and now is symptom free. I also operated on a 69 year old judge with vertical double vision. His surgery went very well and now he is happy as a lark. I have been told -- but of course there is no healthcare bill that has been passed yet -- that these 2 people because of their age would have been denied  surgery and just told to wear a patch over one eye to alleviate the symptoms of double vision. Obviously cheaper than surgery.
 
I spent two year in the US Navy during the Viet Nam war and was well treated by the military. There was tremendous  rationing of care and we were told specifically wha! t things the military personnel and their dependents could have and which things they could not have. While I was in Viet Nam, my wife Nancy got sick and got essentially no care at the Naval Hospital in Oakland, California. She went home and went to her family's private internist in Beverly Hills. While it was expensive, she received an immediate work up. Again rationing of care.
 
For those of you who are over 65, this bill in its present form might be lethal for you. People in England over 59 cannot receive stents for their coronary arteries. The government wants to mimic the British plan. For those of you younger, it will still mean restriction of the care that you and your children receive.
 
While 99% of physicians went into medicine because of the love of medicine and the challenge of helping our fellow man, economics are still important. My rent goes up 2% each year and the salaries of my employees go up 2% each year. Twenty years ago, ophthalmologists were paid $1800 for a cataract surgery and today $500. This is a 73% decrease in our fees. I do not know of many jobs in America that have seen this sort of lowering of fees.
 
But there is more to the story than just the lower fees. When I came to Atlanta, there was a well known ophthalmologist that charged $2500 for a cataract surgery as he felt the was the best. He had a terrific reputation and in fact  I had my mother's bilateral cataracts operated on by him with a wonderful result. She is now 94 and has 20/20 vision in both eyes. People would pay his  $2500 fee.
 
However, then the government came in and said that any doctor that does Medicare work cannot accept  more than the going rate ( now $500) or  he or she would be  severely fined. This put an end to his charging $2500. The government said it was illegal to accept more than the government-allowed rate. What  I am driving at is that those of you well off&n! bsp; wil l not  be able to go to the head of the line under this new healthcare plan, just because you have money, as no physician will be willing to go against the law to treat  you.
 
I am a pediatric ophthalmologist and trained for  10 years post-college to become a pediatric ophthalmologist (add  two years  of my service in the Navy and that comes  to 12 years).A neurosurgeon spends 14  years post -college, and if  he or she has to do the military that would be 16 years. I am not entitled to make what a neurosurgeon makes, but the new plan calls for all physicians to make the same amount of payment. I assure you that medical students will not go into neurosurgery and we will have a tremendous shortage of neurosurgeons.
 

Already, the top neurosurgeon at my hospital who is in good health and only 52 years old has just quit because he can't stand working with the government anymore. Forty-nine percent of children under the age of 16 in the state of Georgia are on Medicaid, so he felt he just could not stand working with the bureaucracy anymore.
 
We are being lied to about the uninsured. They are getting care. I operate at least 2 illegal immigrants each month who pay me nothing, and the children's hospital at which I operate charges them nothing also. This is true not only on Atlanta, but of every community in America.
 
The bottom line is that I urge all of you to contact your congresswomen and congressmen and senators to defeat this bill. I promise you that you will not like rationing of your own health.
 
Furthermore, how can you trust a physician that works under these conditions knowing that he is controlled by the state. I certainly could not trust any doctor that would work under these draconian conditions.
 
One last thing: with this new healthcare plan there will be a tremendous shortage of physicians. It has been estimated that approximately 5% of the current physician work force will quit under this new system. Also it is estimated that another 5% shortage will occur because of the decreased number of men and women wanting to go into medicine. At the present time the US government has mandated gender equity in admissions to medical schools  That means that for the past 15 years that somewhere between 49 and 51% of each entering class are females. This is true of private schools also, because all private schools receive federal funding.
 
The average career of a woman in medicine now is only 8-10 years and the average work week for a female in medicine is only 3-4 days. I have now trained 35 fellows in pedia! tric oph thalmology. Hands down the best was a female that I trained 4 years  ago -- she  was head and  heels above all  others I have trained. She now practices only 3 days a week.

ANN ARBOR, MI — The U. S. Supreme Court announced on Monday that it has denied a request to review a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that upheld the constitutional rights of pro-life activists to display graphic photos of aborted babies on the public streets in California.  The Supreme Court’s decision cements a victory for the Thomas More Law Center and the pro-life cause.

In July 2008, court observers were stunned when a unanimous 3-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a lower court decision and held that pro-life activists had a constitutional right to display large graphic photos of aborted babies on the public streets adjacent to the Dodson Middle School in Rancho Palos Verdes, California.  The case involved a 75-minute police detention of two members of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, Inc. (CBR), a California-based pro-life organization.  The CBR members had been driving a box-body style truck that displayed large photos of first-term aborted babies on its sides. 

School officials and the LA County Sheriff’s Department claimed that the photos were “disruptive” in violation of a California penal statute.  The Ninth Circuit ruled that deputy sheriffs violated the pro-lifers’ First Amendment right to Free Speech and their Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable police seizures when they halted the peaceful demonstration.

In the opinion, which was written by Judge Harry Pregerson, who is considered by many to be one of the most liberal judges in the Ninth Circuit, and supported by Judges William A. Fletcher and Marsha S. Berzon, the Court ruled that “the government cannot silence messages simply because they cause discomfort, fear, or even anger.”  Click here to read the entire opinion.

The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, brought the case on behalf of CBR.  The mobile billboard truck is part of CBR’s effort to expose as many people as possible to the horrors and realities of abortion.

Robert Muise, trial counsel for the Law Center who handled the case, commented on the decision, “This is a tremendous victory for the First Amendment and the pro-life movement.  The Supreme Court’s decision leaves the Ninth Circuit’s ruling undisturbed, ensuring that there is no double standard for pro-life speech and affirming the fundamental principle of the First Amendment that government officials cannot prohibit silent, peaceful, non-obstructive, political speech on the public streets simply because certain listeners or viewers find the speech offensive.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Illinois Supreme Court Allows Pharmacies' Right Of Conscience Case To Go Forward

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Illinois Supreme Court ruled today that pharmacies have legal standing to challenge an administrative rule requiring pharmacies to dispense 'Plan B (the so-called “morning after pill”)', which abortion activists call “emergency contraception,” regardless of their religious, moral, or conscientious beliefs.  The Supreme Court’s ruling in Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich reversed two lower courts that had previously ruled pharmacy owners did not have legal standing to challenge the rule.

Thomas More Law Center attorney Kim Daniels, who filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Illinois Pharmacists Association and American Pharmacists Association, stated, “Since Governor Blagojevich promulgated this rule, Illinois pharmacists have been in  legal limbo regarding whether the state can force them to violate their consciences despite long-standing legal protections against just such government coercion.  This ruling clears the way for Illinois courts to determine whether the plain language of state and federal law protects the rights of these professionals not to be forced to act against their most deeply-held beliefs.” 

Governor Blagojevich, in referring to his executive order, infamously stated, “Rather than try to get the legislature to pass something – because we attempted to and they didn’t do it – on my own, through executive order action, I forced these guys to fill prescriptions for birth control for women who come in with prescriptions from their doctors.”  The Governor went on to say that pharmacists and pharmacy owners either had to dispense the abortifacient pill or leave the profession.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center stated, “Pharmacy owners should not have to stock ‘Plan B’ against their conscience.  These types of rights to conscience cases are blossoming all over the country due in large part to efforts of the pro-abortion lobby to force medical professionals to act against their moral and religious beliefs.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org. 

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced today that a federal lawsuit it brought on behalf of Dr. Monica Miller, a pro-life activist, against the Detroit Police Department, was settled after the Detroit Police Department acknowledged in court that citizens have a right to peacefully protest on public sidewalks.  

As part of the court settlement, the ticket against Dr. Miller was dismissed with prejudice and the City of Detroit agreed to pay costs to the Thomas More Law Center in the amount of $1,593.00.

The Law Center filed the lawsuit in the Detroit Federal District Court in September 2006, after the Detroit police issued Dr. Miller a ticket, told her to go home, and threatened her with arrest while she was engaging in peaceful pro-life activities. 

At the time, Dr. Miller and others were engaged in a peaceful counter-demonstration near a pro-life pregnancy center that was being picketed by pro-abortion protestors.  Miller called for police assistance when she witnessed pro-abortion protestors assaulting a pro-life protestor.  When the police arrived, they told Dr. Miller she had to march in a circle in the same area as pro-abortion demonstrators and that her pro-life poster violated Detroit’s sign ordinance.  When Miller objected, she was ticketed for violating the sign ordinance and “failing to obey a lawful order.” 

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center commented, “Monica Miller is one of those courageous Christian women imbued with the spirit of the Gospel and unafraid to proclaim her pro-life convictions regardless of the situation.”

Brandon Bolling, the Law Center’s attorney who represented Dr. Miller before the Federal District Court, commented, “Dr. Miller is pleased that the Law Center was able to protect her First Amendment rights to protect life. Our lawsuit put the Detroit Police Department on notice that there are consequences for disregarding the First Amendment rights of those who speak out on behalf of the unborn.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

ANN ARBOR, MI — A Federal Judge in Minnesota has signed a Stipulated Permanent Injunction this month, allowing a sixth grade student of the Hutchinson Middle School, located in Hutchinson, Minnesota, to wear his pro-life t-shirts to school.

The sixth grader, referred to in the lawsuit as “K. B.” because of his age, is a Christian who wore several different pro-life t-shirts to school to proclaim his belief that abortion is the wrongful taking of an innocent life and a grave offense to the Law of God.

However, the principal and several teachers, on over a dozen occasions during April 2008, told “K. B.” not to wear the t-shirts, publicly singled him out for ridicule in front of his classmates, removed him from class, sent him to the principal’s office, forced him to turn his pro-life t-shirt inside out, and threatened him with suspension if he did not stop wearing the offending pro-life t-shirts.

As a result of the School District’s actions, the Thomas More Law Center, a national public-interest law firm, based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a federal lawsuit against the school in June of this year alleging that the sixth grader’s constitutional rights had been violated. 

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, commented, “This young Christian was not afraid to stand up for his pro-life beliefs despite ridicule and threats from school officials.   We are pleased we were able to vindicate his Constitutional rights. ”

During the period in question, “K. B.” wore three different t-shirts, produced by the American Life League, a national pro-life advocacy group.  The t-shirts contained such pro-life messages as, “Abortion… growing, growing, gone” (pictured above), “What part of abortion don’t you understand?” and “Never Known – Not Forgotten.”

The Thomas More Law Center was assisted by Minnesota attorney Paul Taylor, an affiliated attorney with the Law Center.

In addition to the permanent injunction prohibiting the school from banning the pro-life t-shirts, the School District agreed to pay the sixth grader nominal damages, as well as $12,500 to the Law Center in attorney fees.

Brandon Bolling, the Law Center attorney assigned as lead counsel stated, “This is a great victory for freedom of speech and the pro-life movement.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.