Health Insurance Redux

The other day I chided Rep. Condotta for his attack on insurance benefits for public employees; today's mail brought more ammunition.

My district offers 12 different insurance plans, which in and of itself might be a problem. Today I got a packet about our upcoming benefits fair that contained a spreadsheet comparing all of the plans that we offer, showing what the co-pays are, deductibles, benefits, etc.

I'm on the Group Health $15 Copay Plan, which is by far the most expensive of the Group Health plans but looks reasonable when compared to Premera. Go down to the lines about "Hospitalization" and "Outpatient Surgery" and you'll see why the thought of one of Rep. Condotta's high deductible plans terrifies me:

Hospitalization
$15 Copay Plan: $300 maximum copay, then covered in full
$500 Deductible Plan: $1,000 maximum copay, then covered at 80% after deductible is satisfied.

Outpatient Surgery
$15 Copay Plan: $15 copay
$500 Deductible Plan: $100 copay, then covered at 80% after deductible is satisfied.

I've talked before about my profoundly deaf daughter. Her left ear works for now with a hearing aide, but her ENT doctor has said that she could easily be a cochlear implant candidate if her hearing degenerated any farther. Given that the surgery and equipment can cost $50,000 a shot, even 80% coverage would still mean that I'm out $10,000 (or, 5 months of take-home salary) to pay for the procedure.

NYC Educator has been doing some incredible writing about health insurance, the health care industry, and how it all relates to teachers. My project for back to school, before I speak to the membership, will be to line up our health plans with the state offerings and see if they compare. If they do, maybe that's the way we go. If they don't, then we keep doing what we're doing.

It's going to be a fight either way.

Read more here, if any.

Watch Kelly Linville Bait Joe Zarelli Into Bashing the WEA!

So Austin Jenkins was all, like, "Hey, schools cost money!" and Joltin' Joe was totally like, "Eh, the WEA is teh suxor", which made Kelli get all up in his bidness and try to nail him down on specifics, but then he started talking about health care and I fell asleep because the Basic Health Plan is both boring and will give you cancer, which is the kind of dichotomy that I should find fascinating but meh.

Seriously, though, I've heard this "Make teachers be on the Basic Health Plan" line before, and as a union guy I thank God every time that it comes up because that would be a wonderful gift for anyone trying to do organizing. It's useful, in a "Democrats want to take your guns away!" sort of scheme--it may not be true, but it gets attention.

Edit: Advanced embed, my ass. The good stuff starts at 49:30.

Read more here, if any.

What Role Should the School Play in Public Health?

There’s a neat article in the November 9th edition of The Chronicle Review that looks at how public health initiatives have changed in the last century. Written by Philip Alcabes, a professor at City University of New York, it’s a well-written examination of how the role of the public health professional has evolved from the smallpox and polio era of 1920 to the concerns over MRSA and avian flu today.

If you believe that common schools are for the propagation of the common good, and that having a healthy community and society is part of the common good, then it follows that schools have a place in helping to promote public health. My question to you is, what should that role be?

In my school we have a part time nurse, who works for a total of 20 hours a week. She’s mainly charged with giving hearing and vision screenings, as well as handling any outbreaks of lice that come along. Beyond that she functions as a sort of dispensary, giving out prescribed drugs like Ritalin and ice packs to the kids who scrape their elbows. I suspect that this is the model in most schools. Our PE teachers are charged with the health part of the puzzle, including promoting active lifestyles and showing the kids how exercise can be fun and healthy. In the classroom we do those units on nutrition and the body that are mandated by the state.

Yet it’s inarguable that we’re only providing the basics, just as it’s also inarguable that there are schools where the basics aren’t enough. When you consider situations like the obesity epidemic, the numbers on sexually transmitted diseases, or dental health, something in the system is screwy. Two thoughts, here:

1. At what point, if ever, do you demand parental responsibility? Does anyone have the right to suggest, “Ma’am, your son is too fat,” or, “You really need to get that kid to a dentist”? With lice we’ve mandated proof of eradication before the child comes back to school, because of the risk to other children—should that standard ever be applied because of a risk to the child themselves?
   
2. There’s an interesting economic argument to be had here as well. It takes taxpayer money to make anything happen in a school; is that a wise use of the monies available, or just another instance of wasteful spending? Are we slapping the invisible hand of capitalism if the school takes on roles that can be served by private companies (i.e., dentists?).

I’ve been doing some reading on community schools, those schools that have a full-time nurse and invite health professionals into the building to work with the kids right there in the schoolhouse. It feels like there’s a lot of potential there to positively impact the lives of kids—it could fall under the broad heading of “early intervention”—if only for the want and the will.

What’s the state of health education in your school?

Read more here, if any.