Republican utopia - Texas!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We also know they were both young and possibly did not understand how insurance could help. Maybe they thought the nearly $300 out of his paycheck was too much.

I don’t know what happened there, but there are plenty of scenarios that don’t mean he was a loser.

Should they have gotten her enrolled in a healthcare plan? Of course. But that is us looking at it from the outside, judging them after the fact, not having the full story/all the details.

I know people want to find someone to blame. It’s easy to blame the person we know so little about. But, really, in the end, it was so many little things that added up to disaster based on what we know.

Everyone is blaming the state of Texas. Texas would have paid for her medicaid.

I think it didn’t help the situation to be in TX

She was having pregnancy complications and had no health insurance. What would have been different in another state?

It always better to have all of the information regarding your health.
Women are not entitled to that in Texas.

This woman didn’t want an abortion. She didn’t need an abortion. She needed health insurance and medication and treatment.

Not one article I have read about this situation said she wanted an abortion or an abortion would have saved her life as her condition was treatable with medication and bed rest.

Now looking back as a dead woman with a dead fetus, do you think she would have said yes to an abortion if she had actually been told it was an option in her 1st trimester when she initially had some complications?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Her medications for diabetes and high blood pressure were more than she could afford as well. Though her OB-GYN warned her about the risks of skipping her blood pressure medications, Glick sometimes avoided taking her medications because they were expensive and made her feel “nauseated and sleepy.”

According to her OB-GYN, not taking the medications put Glick at high risk for a heart attack, stroke, or miscarriage.“

Awful that in the US patients ration their care because they can't afford it, sometimes (often?) with deadly consequences. This is our national shame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Woman was sick and dying
She did not have the ability, money, or time to care for herself
Her only option becomes abortion, or death.
The baby’s death was a foregone conclusion in this scenario.
The mother’s death was preventable with an abortion.
Harping on the medical care she should have had isn’t helpful to the woman, once she needs the abortion.
Did her doctors make the likely outcomes clear to her? Doubtful due to the laws in Texas.
Sure she wanted her baby. But there is a point when that pregnancy wasn’t going to result in a healthy baby. Was she made aware of the facts? Was she able to make an informed decision?
Doubtful

She had a loser husband who didn’t do a single thing to help her get the medical insurance she qualified for.

She could have been treated by a high risk ob-gyn 51 miles and had her medications paid for and been in compliance with the treatment she needed. She improved and went downhill again because she was non-compliant with her medication.

Why wasn’t her husband helping her?

I think it is a stretch to conclude he was a loser based on the very little info we have about him. As I posted above, we seem to have about 3 data points from this story and that’s IT. No real conclusions can be drawn from those.

He was a loser. No mention if him helping his wife. He didn’t help her get insurance, he would have been the only person who could have enrolled her in Tricare. He HAD to coordinate that process. She was working while sick to pay for her medication.

Why was he not involved in the saga except to leave town with her car after she died?

Why are you so obsessed with that car?

This man suffered the loss of his wife and their baby. You are just an awful judgmental human being devoid of empathy.

His wife and baby died and the article doesn’t mention once he even attempted to get his wife on Tricare to provide her medical insurance. That fact is completely ignored. Don’t you think the husband of a pregnant woman experiencing pregnancy problems that led to her death from lack of care and needed medication should have tried to help her? She couldn’t submit paperwork to add herself to DEERS to be enrolled in Tricare; that was his job to do.

If you were pregnant and had multiple health issues, and needed medical insurance, and your husband didn’t put you on his health insurance plan, what would you think of him?

The husband did not want to talk to the reporter. So you have no idea what actually went on. Shame on you.

+1 this is what I keep trying to say. We don’t know much at all about him. He didn’t talk to the reporter.

We know he was an Army Reserve Soldier. We know he was eligible for Tricare Reserve Select. We know his wife was eligible for Tricare Reserve Select as his dependent. We know foreign born spouses are eligible to be added to DEERS and thus receive Tricare health insurance. We know JAG attorneys will assist-for free- a soldier who needed to navigate the system to add his foreign born spouse to DEERS/Tricare. We know that much.

We do? You've seen the paperwork he received? You were with him when these things were shared with him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We also know they were both young and possibly did not understand how insurance could help. Maybe they thought the nearly $300 out of his paycheck was too much.

I don’t know what happened there, but there are plenty of scenarios that don’t mean he was a loser.

Should they have gotten her enrolled in a healthcare plan? Of course. But that is us looking at it from the outside, judging them after the fact, not having the full story/all the details.

I know people want to find someone to blame. It’s easy to blame the person we know so little about. But, really, in the end, it was so many little things that added up to disaster based on what we know.

Everyone is blaming the state of Texas. Texas would have paid for her medicaid.

I think it didn’t help the situation to be in TX

She was having pregnancy complications and had no health insurance. What would have been different in another state?

It always better to have all of the information regarding your health.
Women are not entitled to that in Texas.

This woman didn’t want an abortion. She didn’t need an abortion. She needed health insurance and medication and treatment.

Not one article I have read about this situation said she wanted an abortion or an abortion would have saved her life as her condition was treatable with medication and bed rest.

Now looking back as a dead woman with a dead fetus, do you think she would have said yes to an abortion if she had actually been told it was an option in her 1st trimester when she initially had some complications?

Her body, her choice. Right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We also know they were both young and possibly did not understand how insurance could help. Maybe they thought the nearly $300 out of his paycheck was too much.

I don’t know what happened there, but there are plenty of scenarios that don’t mean he was a loser.

Should they have gotten her enrolled in a healthcare plan? Of course. But that is us looking at it from the outside, judging them after the fact, not having the full story/all the details.

I know people want to find someone to blame. It’s easy to blame the person we know so little about. But, really, in the end, it was so many little things that added up to disaster based on what we know.

Everyone is blaming the state of Texas. Texas would have paid for her medicaid.

I think it didn’t help the situation to be in TX

She was having pregnancy complications and had no health insurance. What would have been different in another state?

It always better to have all of the information regarding your health.
Women are not entitled to that in Texas.

This woman didn’t want an abortion. She didn’t need an abortion. She needed health insurance and medication and treatment.

Not one article I have read about this situation said she wanted an abortion or an abortion would have saved her life as her condition was treatable with medication and bed rest.

In fact an abortion especially early on absolutely would have saved her life. What a ridiculous thing to assert. You are no doctor, that's for sure.

But yes of course she needed health insurance AND paid sick leave AND affordable medication and treatment. It's too bad Texas refused to accept the expansion of Medicaid last year. And it's too bad so many ob/gyns are leaving Texas because they don't want to work in the awful environment Texas laws have generated. Can't blame them, but it's terrible for Texas women especially in rural areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We also know they were both young and possibly did not understand how insurance could help. Maybe they thought the nearly $300 out of his paycheck was too much.

I don’t know what happened there, but there are plenty of scenarios that don’t mean he was a loser.

Should they have gotten her enrolled in a healthcare plan? Of course. But that is us looking at it from the outside, judging them after the fact, not having the full story/all the details.

I know people want to find someone to blame. It’s easy to blame the person we know so little about. But, really, in the end, it was so many little things that added up to disaster based on what we know.

Everyone is blaming the state of Texas. Texas would have paid for her medicaid.

I think it didn’t help the situation to be in TX

She was having pregnancy complications and had no health insurance. What would have been different in another state?

It always better to have all of the information regarding your health.
Women are not entitled to that in Texas.

This woman didn’t want an abortion. She didn’t need an abortion. She needed health insurance and medication and treatment.

Not one article I have read about this situation said she wanted an abortion or an abortion would have saved her life as her condition was treatable with medication and bed rest.

Now looking back as a dead woman with a dead fetus, do you think she would have said yes to an abortion if she had actually been told it was an option in her 1st trimester when she initially had some complications?

Her body, her choice. Right?

You think she would have chosen to continue a pregnancy she knew would kill her and the baby? Really? Why? Why would any woman willingly choose that knowing for certain of deadly outcome? Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We also know they were both young and possibly did not understand how insurance could help. Maybe they thought the nearly $300 out of his paycheck was too much.

I don’t know what happened there, but there are plenty of scenarios that don’t mean he was a loser.

Should they have gotten her enrolled in a healthcare plan? Of course. But that is us looking at it from the outside, judging them after the fact, not having the full story/all the details.

I know people want to find someone to blame. It’s easy to blame the person we know so little about. But, really, in the end, it was so many little things that added up to disaster based on what we know.

Everyone is blaming the state of Texas. Texas would have paid for her medicaid.

I think it didn’t help the situation to be in TX

She was having pregnancy complications and had no health insurance. What would have been different in another state?

It always better to have all of the information regarding your health.
Women are not entitled to that in Texas.

This woman didn’t want an abortion. She didn’t need an abortion. She needed health insurance and medication and treatment.

Not one article I have read about this situation said she wanted an abortion or an abortion would have saved her life as her condition was treatable with medication and bed rest.

Now looking back as a dead woman with a dead fetus, do you think she would have said yes to an abortion if she had actually been told it was an option in her 1st trimester when she initially had some complications?

Her body, her choice. Right?

She didn't have a choice though. If she had an actual choice and turned it down then of course. If you are on the brink of dying and are offered a life-saving treatment but say no, that is your choice, 100%, absolutely we agree on that. People can turn down life-saving treatment. That is their right, which is why we have DNRs. A very important thing.

She was never offered a choice, though. No doctor ever got to counsel her on all the options that women in states with abortion rights get - you know that's true, right? So ultimately it doesn't matter how much she wanted that pregnancy, and yes she did. But lots of women with wanted pregnancies ultimately choose to end them when they are faced with a grim situation and doctors explain the outcome and the options. I was one of them. I got to choose.

[Anonymous]

https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/45/Supplement_1/S232/138916/15-Management-of-Diabetes-in-Pregnancy-Standards

This woman needed to have her diabetes managed by a high risk ob-gyn.

Women are not counseled to abort their babies just because they become pregnant and are diabetic.

Diabetes, asthma, and hypertension are common conditions that can be safely managed on an outpatient basis in pregnant women.

The problem that occurred for this woman was she was not compliant taking her medications and admitted to her ob-gyn she was not taking them as prescribed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/45/Supplement_1/S232/138916/15-Management-of-Diabetes-in-Pregnancy-Standards

This woman needed to have her diabetes managed by a high risk ob-gyn.

Women are not counseled to abort their babies just because they become pregnant and are diabetic.

Diabetes, asthma, and hypertension are common conditions that can be safely managed on an outpatient basis in pregnant women.

The problem that occurred for this woman was she was not compliant taking her medications and admitted to her ob-gyn she was not taking them as prescribed.

You keep saying the same thing over and over again.

This woman was one of the poor working class who can't take off work because of no paid sick leave and didn't take her medications because she couldn't afford them so she rationed them. Scandalous that this happens in the richest country in the world.

Moreover, she had the misfortune to live in rural Texas where doctors cannot counsel patients on all the options they would discuss in states without such draconian restrictions on women's health care.

Moreover Texas last year refused to expand medicaid coverage. Because the republicans in charge not not really pro-life. They are pro-shame and pro-blame.

[Anonymous]

Sounds like she had many comorbidities prior to pregnancy.

Whose fault was that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like she had many comorbidities prior to pregnancy.

Whose fault was that?

And being pregnant made them all worse, which is what ultimately led to her death.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like she had many comorbidities prior to pregnancy.

Whose fault was that?

You sound like an elitist.

[Anonymous]

Oh yes, the highly trained and specialized abortion advocates posting on dcum just KNOW she needed an abortion.

The highly trained medical professionals interviewed in the article just KNOW that she should have been offered that option very early when the pregnancy was causing so many complications, and that the laws in Texas prevent highly trained medical professionals from offering that option. We’ll never know what she would have decided at that point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Oh yes, the highly trained and specialized abortion advocates posting on dcum just KNOW she needed an abortion.

The highly trained medical professionals interviewed in the article just KNOW that she should have been offered that option very early when the pregnancy was causing so many complications, and that the laws in Texas prevent highly trained medical professionals from offering that option. We’ll never know what she would have decided at that point.

So women who are diabetic should not become pregnant, and if they do, they should abort their baby asap? Is that what happens in the US? Diabetic women are considered so high risk their doctors tell them they need to abort their child? That’s the standard recommendation for diabetic women when they become pregnant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Woman was sick and dying
She did not have the ability, money, or time to care for herself
Her only option becomes abortion, or death.
The baby’s death was a foregone conclusion in this scenario.
The mother’s death was preventable with an abortion.
Harping on the medical care she should have had isn’t helpful to the woman, once she needs the abortion.
Did her doctors make the likely outcomes clear to her? Doubtful due to the laws in Texas.
Sure she wanted her baby. But there is a point when that pregnancy wasn’t going to result in a healthy baby. Was she made aware of the facts? Was she able to make an informed decision?
Doubtful

She had a loser husband who didn’t do a single thing to help her get the medical insurance she qualified for.

She could have been treated by a high risk ob-gyn 51 miles and had her medications paid for and been in compliance with the treatment she needed. She improved and went downhill again because she was non-compliant with her medication.

Why wasn’t her husband helping her?

I think it is a stretch to conclude he was a loser based on the very little info we have about him. As I posted above, we seem to have about 3 data points from this story and that’s IT. No real conclusions can be drawn from those.

He was a loser. No mention if him helping his wife. He didn’t help her get insurance, he would have been the only person who could have enrolled her in Tricare. He HAD to coordinate that process. She was working while sick to pay for her medication.

Why was he not involved in the saga except to leave town with her car after she died?

Why are you so obsessed with that car?

This man suffered the loss of his wife and their baby. You are just an awful judgmental human being devoid of empathy.

His wife and baby died and the article doesn’t mention once he even attempted to get his wife on Tricare to provide her medical insurance. That fact is completely ignored. Don’t you think the husband of a pregnant woman experiencing pregnancy problems that led to her death from lack of care and needed medication should have tried to help her? She couldn’t submit paperwork to add herself to DEERS to be enrolled in Tricare; that was his job to do.

If you were pregnant and had multiple health issues, and needed medical insurance, and your husband didn’t put you on his health insurance plan, what would you think of him?

The husband did not want to talk to the reporter. So you have no idea what actually went on. Shame on you.

+1 this is what I keep trying to say. We don’t know much at all about him. He didn’t talk to the reporter.

We know he was an Army Reserve Soldier. We know he was eligible for Tricare Reserve Select. We know his wife was eligible for Tricare Reserve Select as his dependent. We know foreign born spouses are eligible to be added to DEERS and thus receive Tricare health insurance. We know JAG attorneys will assist-for free- a soldier who needed to navigate the system to add his foreign born spouse to DEERS/Tricare. We know that much.

We do? You've seen the paperwork he received? You were with him when these things were shared with him?

No, that’s just how it works for everyone in the military. They have a standard process to enroll dependents in DEERS and Tricare. It’s the same for everyone. She could even have been enrolled in DEERS without a social security card. DEERS will take documents from other countries-including Mexico.