Baldies' Blog began originally in the UK by a 26 year old journalist with a blood cancer on a mission to inform the world about bone marrow donation.

He has since died, and I took on the cause of making cancer care more transparent for everybody.

Cancer is a disease that will touch everybody through diagnosis or affiliation: 1 in 2 men will be diagnosed and 1 in 3 woman will hear those words, "You Have Cancer."

I invite you to read how I feel along my journey and
how I am continuing to live a full life alongside my Hodgkin's lymphoma, with me controlling my cancer, not my cancer controlling me.

I hope that "Baldies' Blog" will prepare you to handle whatever life sends you, but especially if it's the message, "You Have Cancer."

Get a playlist! Standalone player Get Ringtones

Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Pitts-Stupak Amendment

WHOA, to the hater who thinks health care reform means tax payers will be funding abortions: The Pitts-Stupak Amendment enforces that government funded healthcare agencies or plans can not perform abortions unless deemed medically necessary or risk losing their funding.
Please check the facts and read the opposite view of yours at:
This article worries that the inclusion of this amendment will interfere with a woman's right to choose.
Health Care Reform will not interfere with America's current system of providing abortions.
Tax Payers will not be paying and neither will insurance companies.
Planned Parenthood and Free clinics will continue to exist, and any person determined to have their abortion will be able to access them for an out-of-pocket fee based upon income as so many do.
However, hopefully with health care reform measures insurance companies will not be able to suddenly drop providers from their in-network providers mid-treatment, as happened with me when I was pregnant with my son.
I had started prenatal care in July only to be told in January my insurance no longer covered my Obstetrician or the hospital where she assisted in deliveries.
My due date was set for March, and being in college, my obstetrician had agreed to a "social induction" on the first day of my spring break so I wouldn't have to miss too much school.
Nursing Schools will fail you for one clinical absence.
I was forced to either change providers or pay the $1500 out-of-network deductible to have my child close to home with a group of clinicians I was comfortable with.
I chose to pay the $1500 to have the best birthing experience, but not every woman is so fortunate.
Now, how did that affect my right to choose?
The current system allows insurance companies to dictate where people can receive care based upon where they will reimburse costs for treatment.
If the proposed system was in place then, I would have easily been able to change to another, equally affordable insurance company that did cover my hometown doctor.
Since I was still under my parents insurance and this insurance was tied to my father's employment, I had no other option but to move or pay.

I think the Pitts-Stupak Amendment is the best possible compromise to this sensitive issue.


Anonymous said...

First of all, I'm not a hater. I love small children, even when they are still in the womb.

Secondly, if you haven't been following the machinations of the Senate, the Democrats are doing everything in the power to remove the Pitts-Stupak amendment from the final bill.

If you're going to advocate for something, you need to be a little bit more informed in my opinion. At least research both sides of the issue. I've been following the issue of taxpayer funded abortions for 10 years.

I am a two time Hodgkins Lymphoma survivor and agree there are issues with healthcare and reform is needed. But I would never support legislation that funds the murder of unborn children.

Anonymous said...
- December 08, 2009
10 Million Could Lose Employer Coverage Under Senate Health Bill, CBO Says

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that up to 10 million people could lose their employer-based insurance coverage under the Senate's health care reform bill.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that up to 10 million people could lose their employer-based insurance coverage under the Senate's health care reform bill.

In new figures out Monday, the nonpartisan office said the net loss would add up to about 5 million -- the anticipated loss of employer coverage on one end would be offset in part by the expectation that a new mandate would drive other employers to cover millions more workers who are not currently covered.

But the estimate assumes many employers, particularly small businesses with low-wage workers, would opt to pay the fine and drop their insurance plans. The CBO estimated this would affect between 9 million and 10 million workers.

The estimate was provided after Republicans pressed the CBO for details on employer coverage, and it added fuel to the GOP argument that President Obama's claim that nobody will be forced to give up their private coverage is bunk. It comes in the middle of a heated debate in the Senate over whether and how the government should enter the market with its own insurance plan.

"If you like what you have you can't keep it," the Senate Republican office said in an e-mail highlighting the CBO report and keying off the president's refrain.

Read more at:

brynn said...

if you guys are going to slam my girl Hil at least have the guts to write you name. don't say stuff and then don't even write who you are. at least she is stating her opinion...don't hate on that!