On Jul 1, 11:35 am, Mark & Steven Bornfeld
<bornfeldm...@dentaltwins.com> wrote:
> Bill wrote:
> > On Jun 30, 6:43 am, The Webby <tmjiatroepide...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> In article
> >> <815f5f27-faef-4f1c-b506-149f927e3...@w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> >> Bill <dental...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Jun 29, 6:25 pm, The Webby <tmjiatroepide...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>> If you watched it this evening, what did you think about it?
> >>>> Webby
>
> > In three minutes(!), of course it was very shallow. It doesn't really
> > address the main causes of dental problems in the first place.
>
> > I have been addressing these problems for over thirty years, and some
> > sensationalistic rating-grubbing news show give it THREE MINUTES??
>
> > And they couldn't even get the main issue defined!
>
> > The idea that "insurance" is the key to solving dental health problems
> > is complete hogwash.
>
> > In this country, people decide to spend more money on their HAIR than
> > they do on their teeth! Do we ever hear that there is a problem with a
> > lack of HAIR insurance?
>
> > The media here didn't even address the issue of priorities. Why do I
> > see my welfare patients wearing clothes that I couldn't afford myself?
> > ($180 shoes? Who are we kidding?)Why am I giving them something for
> > free when obviously they have the money to buy fancy, unnecessary
> > stuff?
>
> > Well, my personal answer to that particular question is, that if I
> > didn't provide them with the free care, then they would suffer dental
> > disease. But that doesn't address the real problems of untreated
> > dental disease on a national scale.
>
> > The main problem is that people don't bother to take care of
> > themselves OR their children. That's it in a nutshell. The phony straw
> > man of "dental insurance" is about as relevant as "hair insurance."
>
> > People need to set their own priorities. When you see a lot of dental
> > disease, you'll find a skewed set of personal priorities.
>
> > - dentaldoc
>
> Do I have to stand up as the only lefty in this group? I don't see
> many patients on public assistance, but I see plenty that I truly
> believe cannot pay for anything like comprehensive dental care. They
> don't walk in here wearing Manolos, either.
> Yeah, many of them have made mistakes in life. Some are lazy, some
> just unlucky. I figure I'm no one to judge. I've also seen children
> with severe dental and other problems, and public assistance has failed
> them.
> I haven't seen the news clip, so I can't comment. In New York state,
> welfare rolls are way down. Dentistry is expensive. I try not to hold
> myself out as some moral paragon because I floss my teeth. And I don't
> do full mouth reconstruction in a filthy mouth. But if you see oral
> health care as part of health care and not in the same category as a
> manicure, I don't think you can rationalize the situation as merely
> badly set priorities (though that is certainly out there too).
> I know enough about your history that I'm sure you didn't mean to leave
> that impression.
>
> Steve
No, I certainly didn't mean to leave that impression. What I was
addressing was the idea that "insurance" is the answer to everything.
Yes, oral healthcare is certainly a part of overall health care.
However, we have all seen patients who have NO teeth left (they're
batting zero for thirty-two) and they still seem to survive. So
although most people in modern society seem to value their teeth, many
of them don't bother to put much effort into it.
To expect stellar dental health, for no effort whatsoever, is simply
not realistic.
I do whatever I can to help people who can prove they are down and out
(yes, in California there are people who cheat, so I really want to
see their state-assistance ID cards to know they're legitimate).
The problem is that state assistance pays only one-third of fees.
Since my overhead alone costs me about two-thirds of fees, in the
final analysis, I'm not only working for free for those patients, but
I also PAY out of my own pocket to provide them with decent dental
care.
If I didn't volunteer to do that, what would those patients do? Where
could they go? In my town there are 63 dentists, the last time I
counted. Out of those 63, 61 do NOT bother to treat patients who have
Medicaid. Dentists volunteering for Medicaid would lose a lot of
money, so I can't really blame them. But that leaves the patients
without the choices that the Medicaid law of the 1960's was intended
to give them.
For over thirty years I have taken a sizeable hit to my income. But
it's either that, or turn these patients away and let them suffer. I
can't do that. Some of them are innocent kids. Most have been turned
away by the all those other dental offices down the street.
So no, you don't have to be a "lefty" to care about these people. And
you don't have to be a "lefty" to actually do something about it.
What gets me steamed is the fact that so many of my fellow California
dentists who are politically active like to TALK about getting someone
ELSE to do more for poor people, but they personally refuse to see
those needy patients in their own offices.
In my opinion, if they talk the talk, they should also walk the walk.
In California there's not very much consistency in that regard.
"Insurance" is not the answer. The much-vaunted income-tested national
children's health insurance (Healthy Families) has been as miserable a
failure as the Medicaid program (and yes, I see children on both
programs too).
What is needed is a sincere committment by government to provide an
honest assistance program for those people who need it. And let's be
honest and call it government assistance. That is not pretend
"insurance" that really isn't insurance.
These short, shallow TV news clips should be more honest, and call for
national dental assistance for the needy -- fully funded -- instead of
talking about "insurance" as though these government programs had
anything to do with real insurance.
People who join any such publicly funded dental assistance programs
should be required to contribute some of their own earnings to the
program on a sliding scale dependent on their financial resources. All
the sociological studies that I've ever been told about, agree that
people value what they receive FAR more when they have to make some
degree of personal sacrifice to achieve it.
They take care of their $180 Nikes because they paid for them. They
don't take care of their teeth because dental health care is free.
That needs to change.
- dentaldoc
Bill
Mark & Ste…
