Two words - big bucks.

Schools that cater to children with 'issues' have (unfortunately) an agenda to their bottom line which supersedes the greater agenda of a child's development.
It's in the school's best interest to keep the children labeled as having a problem because they're funded based on how many children they have under their care.

I get this information from someone who's actually in this business (she just happens to be visiting us right now).

I know it appears that I'm painting with a large brush and I'm sure there are probably schools out there that don't fall into this category and to them, I tip my hat.
However, this observation isn't mine, it's my friend's.

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

********, don't you live in Canada? Canada's healthcare sucks period, but it's not alone, many Europeans countries are about as bad. Soon America might end up with a similar crappy system.

quote:

Originally posted by AsparTAME ********, don't you live in Canada? Canada's healthcare sucks period, but it's not alone, many Europeans countries are about as bad. Soon America might end up with a similar crappy system.

we might have great doctors, but i would hardly say that our system is stellar. i recently went to the hospital for kidney injury (fell while skiing) and i just got the bill yesterday in the mail: 15K for a 6-8 hour visit. Luckily I have insurance so i paid only 75 dollars. If i didn't have insurance my credit easily could have been ruined from the experience.

quote:

Originally posted by AsparTAME ********, don't you live in Canada? Canada's healthcare sucks period, but it's not alone, many Europeans countries are about as bad. Soon America might end up with a similar crappy system.

why don't you venture over to WHO's website....Canada's figures top figures in the U.S. pretty much all over the board
"soon america might aspire to attain a less crappy system" is what you should should have meant.

here's a funfact:

Probability of dying between 15 and 60 years m/f (per 1 000 population): US-137/80

Can-89/55
Sweden-78/49(Wake up from your socialist nightmare!hehe)
France-124/57
Germany-106/55
Italy-83/44
Iceland-68/49
Greece-106/44
Switzerland-80/47
Austria-105/51
Spain-105/44
Portugal-133/53
Norway-86/53
Denmark-111/65
Holland-81/59
Belgium-111/61
UK-98/61
Ireland-88/56
Luxembourg-109/55
Finland-132/57

well, i think that just about covers western-europe....unless you were proud that the US scored better than Belarus.

I noticed most of these countries kept a budget of around 10 percent of their GDP, with the Yanks spending 15-and not much to show for it either.

********-It's really the overdiagnosing of ADD that is distorting the shit out of these figures. Teachers having a bad day may suggest an irritating kid gets tested...from that point on I doubt there is as much objectivity as there should be. It sometimes comes down to said teacher wanting to make his own life easier by drugging up the lil irritants.

Half these ADD kids end up selling their meds in high school for profit anyways .

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Damerchi why don't you venture over to WHO's website....Canada's figures top figures in the U.S. pretty much all over the board "soon america might aspire to attain a less crappy system" is what you should should have meant. here's a funfact: Probability of dying between 15 and 60 years m/f (per 1 000 population): US-137/80 Can-89/55 Sweden-78/49(Wake up from your socialist nightmare!hehe) France-124/57 Germany-106/55 Italy-83/44 Iceland-68/49 Greece-106/44 Switzerland-80/47 Austria-105/51 Spain-105/44 Portugal-133/53 Norway-86/53 Denmark-111/65 Holland-81/59 Belgium-111/61 UK-98/61 Ireland-88/56 Luxembourg-109/55 Finland-132/57 well, i think that just about covers western-europe....unless you were proud that the US scored better than Belarus. I noticed most of these countries kept a budget of around 10 percent of their GDP, with the Yanks spending 15-and not much to show for it either.

what he meant to say is that america would have a crappier system for those already insured. There's no doubt in my mind that insured americans have better health care than people from each of those countries (after all, when the jordanian prince or saudi royalty need surgery they come to NYC, they don't go to europe). I have unlimited access to some of the world best educated doctors for almost any treatmentAlthough, the same can't be said for everyone in this country. Many many people slip through the cracks, or I should say, gaping holes. It's also much harder to maintain a 'high quality' health care system for everyone when you have a population of over 300 million. European countries are much smaller so it is easier to maintain a fairer system. The WHO report was based largely on the distribution of services (i.e., quality for the entire population).

quote:

Originally posted by jerZ07002 what he meant to say is that america would have a crappier system for those already insured. There's no doubt in my mind that insured americans have better health care than people from each of those countries (after all, when the jordanian prince or saudi royalty need surgery they come to NYC, they don't go to europe). I have unlimited access to some of the world best educated doctors for almost any treatmentAlthough, the same can't be said for everyone in this country. Many many people slip through the cracks, or I should say, gaping holes. It's also much harder to maintain a 'high quality' health care system for everyone when you have a population of over 300 million. European countries are much smaller so it is easier to maintain a fairer system. The WHO report was based largely on the distribution of services (i.e., quality for the entire population).

Hehe, the fat arabs love their mayo clinic. they get bedlifted-helilifted-airlifted-helilifted-treated,then return...

All this is true, large major cities in the U.S. will have more machines like MRI's and Cat scan's than an entire european nation of a much larger population. Doctors in Europe almost always head the U.S. to attend seminars. I can't argue against what the U.S. is capable of in terms of progressing worldwide medicine, and I never thought about the population factor. I thought that States individually took care of the nitty gritty beaurocracy?

So, its just a moral predicament for me-how can we stop people from falling through the cracks while protecting the capabilities of the hospitals/research centers for those currently benefiting? At the end of the day, these people falling through the gaps are having a substantial impact on mortality rates compared to their can/euro counterparts...so in my eyes the U.S.'s advanced medicine for the lucky is tainted by the trajic deaths of the unlucky.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Damerchi Hehe, the fat arabs love their mayo clinic. they get bedlifted-helilifted-airlifted-helilifted-treated,then return... All this is true, large major cities in the U.S. will have more machines like MRI's and Cat scan's than an entire european nation of a much larger population. Doctors in Europe almost always head the U.S. to attend seminars. I can't argue against what the U.S. is capable of in terms of progressing worldwide medicine, and I never thought about the population factor. I thought that States individually took care of the nitty gritty beaurocracy?

the fed gov't provides the signficant funding. states implement the policy with fed funding for low income and elderly.

another thing, US doctors tend to be older and more highly educated. In the US, a doctor needs a 4 year bachelors degree (typically biology, chemistry, or premed), followed by a 4 year medical degree (2 years classroom, 2 years clinics), typically finished with a 2-3 year residency. Thus, US doctors have 6 years classroom experience and 4-5 years of practical experience before breaking out on their own.

I'm pretty sure that in the UK (for example), students enter medical school at a much younger age (after high school), and spend a total of 6 years in training (incorporating both academic and clinical training).

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Damerchi So, its just a moral predicament for me-how can we stop people from falling through the cracks while protecting the capabilities of the hospitals/research centers for those currently benefiting? At the end of the day, these people falling through the gaps are having a substantial impact on mortality rates compared to their can/euro counterparts...so in my eyes the U.S.'s advanced medicine for the lucky is tainted by the trajic deaths of the unlucky.

administering a more equitable system over such a large population is not easy. The problem with a totally socialist health care system is that people like myself (who have good insurance through work) would either still have to pay or we would receive WORSE services because we would be more limited in the provisions we could receive. I'm not sure whether i'd rather continue paying (about 1K a year) or take worse services.