Numerous doctors are on record saying they won't accept obamacare coverage for payment (e.g., as many as 70% in NY will not). Now many hospitals may not accept it.

Also, you should make sure when you have a medical procedure done, that EVERYONE involved accepts this coverage. The surgeon may but others like the anesthesiologist, etc., may not and you'll receive a (large) bill in the mail for that portion. This can happen under private plans too, it happened to me once, but it's rare. It sounds like it may be much more common going forward. But hey, it's the law based on lies and deceit and time will tell...

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/362757/top-hospitals-opt-out-obamacare-wesley-j-smith

I read this earlier.  Thanks for posting it.

Here is the link to the original US News and World Report story, referenced in the opening post.

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/hospital-of-tomorrow/articles/2013/10/30/top-hospitals-opt-out-of-obamacare

The result of our investigation: Many top hospitals are simply opting out of Obamacare.

Chances are the individual plan you purchased outside Obamacare would allow you to go to these facilities. For example, fourth-ranked Cleveland Clinic accepts dozens of insurance plans if you buy one on your own. But go through Obamacare and you have just one choice: Medical Mutual of Ohio.

Of course, how many hospitals do you need when only 6 people signed up for Obamacare?  LOL

EDIT:

In support of my "6 people" comment

I find the health care situation in the US to be so abysmal. It's bad enough that you don't know who is going to accept what, but that you have to make sure EACH professional involved will accept it on top of that! People shouldn't have to calculate all of that and figure all that out when they are sick.

Will see if the wishful thinking and the bad press makes a dent on the program....lets give them a few moths before we write the orbituary

Wattchdog.org (the source of that article) gets its funding from the right wing tea party supporting Koch Industries
and Watchdog.org:

"They're certainly not legitimate journalists, but they've established their "bureaus" in state capitals across the country, and some state capital correspondents' associations grant them press credentials.  Unfortunately that includes our very own Virginia Capital Correspondents Association, of which Watchdog's Kenric Ward -- unlike any other blogger or lobbyist -- is allowed to be a member.

Thanks to some investigative journalism done about them, here's what we do know about the shadowy Watchdog.org:"

http://bluevirginia.us/diary/9949/rightwardfacing-dog-who-is-watchdogorg

They spend lots of money to spread propaganda and support de-regulation all the while supporting their agenda so they can continue to pollute our environment!

This thread is in the wrong place IMHO since the OP cited an article from a right wing propaganda machine such as Koch Industies.

Can you knock off the propaganda talk, please? This is a support forum and you're creating a hostile environment.  Thank you, hugs, Devlyn

Update: 51,000 people made "applications" in the first week (not enrolled for coverage, just got far enough along to see the subsidized prices).  According to the targets, the program needs 39,000 enrollees per day to hit the goal, and in the correct categories.



It does not appear that this program that promises to take over 1/6th of the domestic economy, will support much of anybody in the community.  We are still excluded, and not covered for many essential TG services.

Propaganda is the opposite of truth and facts.

Sure as long as the article mentioned is rightly attributed to who funds Watchdog.org.
That is not legitimate news and has no business here.

Koch is aginst O'Bamacare so go figure?

If its not REAL news what would you call it?

Quote from: Jamie de la Rosa on November 01, 2013, 08:22:10 PM
Update: 51,000 people made "applications" in the first week (not enrolled for coverage, just got far enough along to see the subsidized prices).  According to the targets, the program needs 39,000 enrollees per day to hit the goal, and in the correct categories.

Beck is about as biased as one can get!

Quote from: Jamie de la Rosa on November 01, 2013, 08:22:10 PM
Update: 51,000 people made "applications" in the first week (not enrolled for coverage, just got far enough along to see the subsidized prices).  According to the targets, the program needs 39,000 enrollees per day to hit the goal, and in the correct categories.



It does not appear that this program that promises to take over 1/6th of the domestic economy, will support much of anybody in the community.  We are still excluded, and not covered for many essential TG services.

Propaganda is the opposite of truth and facts.

Well then try posting some REAL facts from real unbiased sources!

Quote from: michelle gee on November 01, 2013, 08:22:22 PM
Sure as long as the article mentioned is rightly attributed to who funds Watchdog.org.
That is not legitimate news and has no business here.

Koch is aginst O'Bamacare so go figure?

If its not REAL news what would you call it?

These things don't matter to me. I only wish for a respectful conversation in a healthy, helpful setting.  Hugs, Devlyn

Quote from: Devlyn Marie on November 01, 2013, 08:38:07 PM
These things don't matter to me. I only wish for a respectful conversation in a healthy, helpful setting.  Hugs, Devlyn

The is the Science & Medical forum one would expect to see some worthy news articles in posts instead of opinions from the right and even the OP says:
" it's the law based on lies and deceit"
This does not make for a healthy thread starting off.

Lies and deceit is the same as propaganda.

Wiki: : ideas or statements that are often false or exaggerated and that are spread in order to help a cause, a political leader, a government, etc.

Why am I the only one being asked to stop saying this?




/hugs Michelle Gee

Quote from: michelle gee on November 01, 2013, 08:34:28 PM
Well then try posting some REAL facts from real unbiased sources!

Just for you, because you asked:

EXCLUSIVE: Just 51,000 people completed Obamacare applications during the website's first week, out of tens of millions of Americans in 36 states

Daily Mail (UK) Online | David Martosko, U.S. Political Editor

Just 51,000 people completed Obamacare applications during the first week the Healthcare.gov website was online, according to two sources inside the Department of Health and Human Services who gave MailOnline an exclusive look at the earliest enrollment numbers....

The career civil servants, who process data inside the agency, confirmed independently that just 6,200 Americans applied for health insurance through the problem-plagued website on October 1, the day it first opened to the public....

'I don't have any hard numbers beyond what HHS and the state-based exchanges have released,' said spokesman Justin Nisly, who insisted that Americans have been 'enthusiastic' and 'grateful' for Obamacare.

The White House did not respond to emails seeking comment.

But several administration officials have claimed this month that they didn't have access to the kinds of raw figures MailOnline obtained from the people who work for them. And the anemic totals suggest a far lower level of interest in coverage through the Affordable Care Act than the Obama administration has hoped to see....

CNN host Wolf Blitzer agreed on Wednesday that the White House should consider granting Republicans' demands for a one-year delay of the rule requiring individual taxpayers to buy insurance, given the failings of the glitch-prone enrollment website that has produced more headaches than new customers.

Gosh, when you lose CNN, I think you've lost the argument.



They've lost Wolf: CNN personality Wolf Blitzer, who seldom aligns
himself with Republicans, said Wednesday that the White House
should give Republicans the Obamacare delay they seek, if only
to give tech issues time to sort themselves out

There is an Obamacare navigator in Colorado that hasn't signed up anyone, and it's not because of a lack of interest. People come in, see what the rates are, and then they leave - they can't afford it.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamacare-navigator-hasnt-signed-anyone-because-its-too-expensive_765629.html

I also read a story that said that people ARE using the website - but they are using it to sign up for Medicare. Only a very small percentage of the sign ups are for the actual health insurance. Unfortunately I don't have a link to that story handy at the moment or I would post it here.

Edit: found it: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/31/in-first-month-the-vast-majority-of-obamacare-sign-ups-are-in-medicaid/

It's sad to me that the politicians took this great opportunity to improve our existing healthcare system and gave us something that has so many issues.

 "MailOnline's sources are two Health and Human Services workers who have access to the data as it's crunched"

There you go again.
How convenient that these people are anonymous.
Once again no real facts!

Which Top Hospitals Take Your Health Insurance Under Obamacare?

U.S. News and World Report | By Watchdog.org

Americans who sign up for Obamacare will be getting a big surprise if they expect to access premium health care that may have been previously covered under their personal policies. Most of the top hospitals will accept insurance from just one or two companies operating under Obamacare, Watchdog.org reports. The organization looked at the top 18 hospitals nationwide as ranked by U.S. News and World Report for 2013-2014, contacting each hospital to determine their contracts and talking to several insurance companies as well.

List at the link.

(Provided as a service to the community)

Quote from: Eva Marie on November 01, 2013, 08:58:01 PM
There is an Obamacare navigator in Colorado that hasn't signed up anyone, and it's not because of a lack of interest. People come in, see what the rates are, and then they leave - they can't afford it.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamacare-navigator-hasnt-signed-anyone-because-its-too-expensive_765629.html

I also read a story that said that people ARE using the website - but they are using it to sign up for Medicare. Only a very small percentage of the sign ups are for the actual health insurance. Unfortunately I don't have a link to that story handy at the moment or I would post it here.

It's sad to me that the politicians took this great opportunity to improve our existing healthcare system and gave us something that has so many issues.

Wiki:The Weekly Standard is an American neoconservative opinion magazine published 48 times per year. Its founding publisher, News Corporation, debuted the title September 18, 1995. Currently edited by founder William Kristol and Fred Barnes

I don't trust that as fact either I am sorry.

Quote from: michelle gee on November 01, 2013, 09:01:35 PM
"MailOnline's sources are two Health and Human Services workers who have access to the data as it's crunched"

There you go again.
How convenient that these people are anonymous.
Once again no real facts!

Please provide a list of your "approved" sources.  I will try to oblige.

Quote from: Jamie de la Rosa on November 01, 2013, 09:09:18 PM
Please provide a list of your "approved" sources.  I will try to oblige.

The unbiased ones just a little research will tell you.

Quote from: michelle gee on November 01, 2013, 09:06:28 PM
Wiki:The Weekly Standard is an American neoconservative opinion magazine published 48 times per year. Its founding publisher, News Corporation, debuted the title September 18, 1995. Currently edited by founder William Kristol and Fred Barnes

I don't trust that as fact either I am sorry.

How about youtube with an interview of the navigator?