• Home page of novelist William S. Frankl, M.D.
  • About author William S. Frankl, M.D.
  • Books by novelist William S. Frankl, M.D.
  • Reviews of the writing of author William S. Frankl, M.D.
  • Blog of author William (Bill) S. Frankl, M.D.
  • Contact author William S. Frankl, M.D.
Title: Blog by Novelist William S. Frankl, MD

ObamaCare and Its Crippling Assault on Doctors and Patients: Read It and Weep Especially If You Voted For Him

HHS Secretary Sebelius, a bureaucrat with no medical experience, can tell your doctor how to treat patients starting in 2015

Despite President Obama’s claim that “you’re not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor,” a little known provision of ObamaCare gives the health secretary broad authority to dictate how doctors practice medicine and treat their patients.

Starting in 2015, Obamacare will grant the Secretary of Health and Human Services, an unelected bureaucrat with no medical experience, power to decide what treatments are available to patients and if the doctor can perform procedures.

Section 1311(h)(1)(b) of Obamacare reads:  “Beginning on January 1, 2015, a qualified health plan may contract with … a health care provider only if such provider implements such mechanisms to improve health care quality as the Secretary may by regulation require.”

In other words, insurance companies will be banned from doing business with doctors who do not comply with the regulations established by the health secretary – and there’s almost no limit on what these regulations may entail.

“Under President Obama’s health care law, should the HHS Secretary determine that performing mammograms on women younger than 50 violates a standard of care, the provider must comply, regardless of his or her concerns,” Rep. Phil Gingrey, M.D. (R-Ga.)said on the subject. “Failure to do so would allow the Secretary to shut down a medical practice.”

“The powers given to the Secretary are so broad, he or she could literally dictate how all physicians nationwide practice medicine.”

The lawmaker also added that the provision violates “the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship, as physicians are trained to treat patients individually and not with a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach.”

However, Dr. Donald Berwick, an administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services under Obama, deplored that the physician’s focus is “on the acute needs of individual patients” and not on “care for important subgroups” in the name of “social justice,” as reported by Betsy McCaughey ( O’s Radical Pick for Medicare: NY Post, 6/16/10).

In his Triple Aim plan, Berwick laments that US health care is “designed to focus on the acute needs of individual patients.” He argues for a different focus, social justice.

Instead of doctors making decisions autonomously in the interest of their own patients, he wants a nationwide plan allocating resources “to anticipate and shape patterns of care for important subgroups.” These subgroups — which can be defined by age, disease affliction or socio-economic status — should be the “unit of concern,” not the individual patient.

Will the elderly be a favored subgroup? Not under the Obama health law. An April 22 report by Medicare and Medicaid chief actuary Richard Foster shows that the law nearly doubles Medicaid rolls at a cost of $410 billion over the next decade.

To pay for this, the law slashes future Medicare funding by $525 billion over the same period, when 30 percent more people will enter Medicare as baby boomers age. In short, boomers will get less care than today’s seniors.

Less care is Berwick’s vision. In a speech marking the 60th birthday of the British National Health Service, he praised the NHS for deliberately creating scarcity: “You [the NHS] plan the supply; you aim a bit low; historically, you prefer slightly too little of a technology or service to much too much and then you search for care bottlenecks and try to relieve them.”

Berwick’s statement serves as a microcosm of Section 1311(h)(1)(b) and for ObamaCare as a whole: the pursuit of centralized planning and collectivism at the expense of the individual.

Rep. Gingrey, one of the few lawmakers who knew about the provision, introduced the Safeguarding Care of Patients Everywhere Act in both 2012 and 2013 to repeal Section 1311(h)(1)(b), but both bills never left the Subcommittee on Health.

Outside of Gingrey’s press release on his bills and a recent article in the New York Post, the provision has generated little media attention.

But by 2015, Americans will be demanding answers for the inevitable loss-of-life due to byzantine regulations and the destruction of the doctor-patient relationship.

For the entire story, go to: Tea Party.Org and http://www.infowars.com/obamacare-health-secretary-to-dictate-how-doctors-practice-medicine/

4 Responses to “ObamaCare and Its Crippling Assault on Doctors and Patients: Read It and Weep Especially If You Voted For Him”

  1. jordan grape 5 apparel Says:

    Do you mind if I quote a few of your articles as long as I provide credit and sources back to your weblog? My website is in the exact same area of interest as yours and my users would truly benefit from a lot of the information you provide here. Please let me know if this alright with you. Thanks a lot!
    jordan grape 5 apparel
    [url=http://www.bangbangromeo.com/index.asp?shop=jordan-grape-5-apparel&id=8686]jordan grape 5 apparel[/url]

  2. admin Says:

    Sure, you can quote me.

  3. Teguh Says:

    Is not just Republicans that call the Health Care Law, Obama-care. While Bill Clinton was in office Hillary tried to have a naazontliied Health Care system, it was nicknamed Hillary-care. this Obama-care nickname is just the same continuation of the same idea.When Social Security was created it had a nickname. Anytime a politician purposes a law they run the risk of it being oh wait the laws are always named after those that pose it.

  4. Tommy Says:

    that obamacare would save us money. So, in other words, if the Republicans elniimate obamacare, we would therefore be spending more money according to Obama. So, if Obamacare is elniimated, more spending cuts would have to be found to balance the supposed increase in expenditures. Sounds like the Republicans found a win-win.

Leave a Reply

William S. Frankl, All Rights Reserved
Design by Yikes!