UO Thursday 5/4

Elyse1384

Lets hear those UOs ladies

Elyse1384

Mine is a UO/rant...

I HATE people who think they and their little snowflake children deserve special treatment.  Looking at you Beyonce and JayZ!!!  I just heard about the absurd list of demands they have of the hospital in LA.  The one that really pissed me off was a requirement for all security cameras to be removed.  Are you F'ing kidding me!?  You want to compromise the safety of every other patient because you think you're the most important people to ever have a kid?  Get over yourselves.  I'm not down with them and their rabid fans.  I know people love those two, but they couldn't irritate me more.  Queen Bey my ass.  

mkrel

Maybe I just don't  "get it" because I don't have kids yet... but my husband and I are new to the area and really don't know many people so I have looked into different moms groups and they all seem to be for SAHMs only. I don't get why we have to be so segregated. I read op articles all the time about SAHMs vs working moms and how there shouldn't be judgement etc....but clearly people are doing it to themselves. Do the other moms have no value? Sure I can't go to a playdate at the park at 1030 on a Wednesday, but there are other things I could participate in. I guess this was more of a rant but it irritates me.  I guess my real UO that spans a million topics is I cant people stand how people preach inclusion, but only want to surround themselves with people who are just like them. 

FSUNole31

@Elyse1384 the entitlement from people these days astounds me too.  I just can't with it. 

lovesclimbing

MKRLTX said:

Maybe I just don't  "get it" because I don't have kids yet... but my husband and I are new to the area and really don't know many people so I have looked into different moms groups and they all seem to be for SAHMs only. I don't get why we have to be so segregated. I read op articles all the time about SAHMs vs working moms and how there shouldn't be judgement etc....but clearly people are doing it to themselves. Do the other moms have no value? Sure I can't go to a playdate at the park at 1030 on a Wednesday, but there are other things I could participate in. I guess this was more of a rant but it irritates me.  I guess my real UO that spans a million topics is I cant people stand how people preach inclusion, but only want to surround themselves with people who are just like them. 

I've never really seen this, but I do think it often tends to happen naturally. As a SAHM, I want pretty much everything to be planned during the weekday so I and the baby can have as much time as possible with H/daddy in the evenings and on the weekends. 

Kylieslip24

lovesclimbing said:

MKRLTX said:

Maybe I just don't  "get it" because I don't have kids yet... but my husband and I are new to the area and really don't know many people so I have looked into different moms groups and they all seem to be for SAHMs only. I don't get why we have to be so segregated. I read op articles all the time about SAHMs vs working moms and how there shouldn't be judgement etc....but clearly people are doing it to themselves. Do the other moms have no value? Sure I can't go to a playdate at the park at 1030 on a Wednesday, but there are other things I could participate in. I guess this was more of a rant but it irritates me.  I guess my real UO that spans a million topics is I cant people stand how people preach inclusion, but only want to surround themselves with people who are just like them. 

I've never really seen this, but I do think it often tends to happen naturally. As a SAHM, I want pretty much everything to be planned during the weekday so I and the baby can have as much time as possible with H/daddy in the evenings and on the weekends. 

I think so too. I'm a sahm and all my friends are working moms so I just rarely see them. It's kind of sad. But weekends and nights are our family time. Sometimes we will have bbqs all together though. 

mkrel

@lovesclimbing I can understand that, but does every SAHM have a spouse with a traditional work schedule? Coming from a hospital background I know there are so many people that work nights and weekends etc. I don't know. Just rubbed me the wrong way to be so exclusive. I have also been incredibly overly sensitive these last couple of days and missing everything about where we used to live so that could be playing into how much it irritated me.

neludelu

I liked Ivanka Trump up until this week. But seeing all her posts and articles trying to relate to normal working moms just grinds my gears. I would love to see her balance the stuff normal working moms do. I understand what she is trying to do but I think it's going terribly wrong.

ellie111227

@MKRLTX You mean things are advertised as only for sahms, not just that they happen during the regular work day? I've never seen that. I did find hard when I was working that mom/kid stuff always happened during the time I was at work, but like you said, I got why it was that way. I never saw anything that specifically excluded working moms though if they were available at the right time to come. That's weird to me, too. What have you seen that's that way?

Wino0920

@MKRLTX I also feel this happens "naturally" and doesn't mean to be inclusive. I am a SAHM and don't belong to one, but have heard from other SAHMs. I feel the reason they start is because SAHMs feel bored or hungry for interaction with others during the day. They feel confined to their homes and need out. Then I feel the time comes into play. During the day, when dad or mom is out, they have a better time scheduling. 

I harldy ever was out at night with our babies, because that daddy's time. He would be upset if he got home and they weren't home ( not saying once in a while I would because something was scheduled for that time).

I can see how that could be frustrating for you and I hope you find a group that works for you. 

@Elyse1384 This is is the reason I hate Beyoncé and Jay Z. They did this last time and it separated parents and infants and it drove me bonkers. 

My UO: I'm sick of hearing of airplane kick offs and fights. I feel now people are going to start taking advantage of the general bad press and bad taste people have of airline right now. 

Stankonia2014

@Elyse1384, yup, I said this when she announced that I wasn't a fan. According to accounts from other patients on the floor, they kicked out NICU parents so they could have privacy and one dad missed the birth of his child because security wouldn't let him through.

Elyse1384

Stankonia2014 said:

@Elyse1384, yup, I said this when she announced that I wasn't a fan. According to accounts from other patients on the floor, they kicked out NICU parents so they could have privacy and one dad missed the birth of his child because security wouldn't let him through.

@Stankonia2014 OMG that poor dad!  I heard the BS about parents being separated from their babies which would have been enough to send my postpartum ass over the edge, but for someone to miss the birth of their child because of those selfish jerks

I would have been picking DH up from jail because he would have tried to fight his way through security.

mkrel

@ellie111227 The FB and meetup moms groups in my area specify that they are for SAHMs. I did find one for working moms one town away. I just find it odd that they need to be specific to one or the other I guess. 

momma2char

I don't care if someone's dog is well behaved and friendly (big or small), every dog needs to be leashed at the park. If I'm taking my daughter for a walk around the park and it's not an off-leash park, I don't want a random dog that I don't know running up to my 18 month old and getting in her face! It was finally sunny today so I took DD to the park and we had about 5 dogs run up to her and I had to keep picking her up so they would stop getting in her face, and the owners were all like "ohh my dog is so good with kids, he/she would never hurt a fly" etc. At 36 weeks pregnant, constantly bending down to pick up my kid to get them away from a dog that should be leashed was super annoying. Off leash parks? Not a problem- but parks where I want to have my toddler run around and burn off energy? No way! I love dogs but feel very uncomfortable having a dog I don't know unleashed and running up to my toddler. 

ellie111227

@momma2char I agree! That drives me crazy, too.

@MKRLTX That is so weird! I would be confused and annoyed by that, too.

My uo is that all pets should be contained to their owners yards/houses, including cats. I don't get why it is acceptable for someone's pet cat to be running loose all over the neighborhood in everyone else's yards. I don't want myself or my babies getting toxoplasmosis because my neighbors cat pooped in our garden or sandbox! No one would think it was ok let their dog out to run around in other people's yards, so why is it ok to do this with a cat?

neludelu

Here's another. I reckon I'm on a political rampage today. All this talk about the healthcare bill. The media is so biased you can't get the meat of the changes. I wish there was a neutral place to go for the news where they explain what's changing. All of this biased bs keeps feeding the great divide here in the US.

erinh84

neludelu said:

Here's another. I reckon I'm on a political rampage today. All this talk about the healthcare bill. The media is so biased you can't get the meat of the changes. I wish there was a neutral place to go for the news where they explain what's changing. All of this biased bs keeps feeding the great divide here in the US.

From what I understand, Trumpcare basically is a huge F-you to women. Pregnancy, C-sections, rape, PPD and domestic violence can all be considered pre-existing conditions now. Apparently Lord Cheeto is going to be signing an executive order to legalize anti-LGBT discrimination next, like this week I think. He is the absolute worst IMO.

edited so I don't get a warning. I'm just super annoyed about this.

Elyse1384

@erinh84 Ugh I mean really.  All of those things being "pre-existing" are absurd and offensive, but a c-section being a pre-existing condition???  Clearly they don't understand how the human body even works.  Those asshats can bite me.  Apparently it has never been any of them whose daughter is wheeled in for an emergency c-section because their grandchild's heart rate drops or their daughter's life and grandchild's life are at risk from the baby getting stuck or some other issue. 

hopeful808

Elyse1384 said:

@erinh84 Ugh I mean really.  All of those things being "pre-existing" are absurd and offensive, but a c-section being a pre-existing condition???  Clearly they don't understand how the human body even works.  Those asshats can bite me.  Apparently it has never been any of them whose daughter is wheeled in for an emergency c-section because their grandchild's heart rate drops or their daughter's life and grandchild's life are at risk from the baby getting stuck or some other issue. 

I disagree the problem isn't that c sections etc are considered pre existing conditions because any condition that occurred before the start of a plan should be considered pre existing. Ideally, this would be used to prevent a person from having to jump through insurance hoops a second time. There should not be a consequence or penalty for having pre existing conditions. That is my issue with it.

Stankonia2014

erinh84 said:

neludelu said:

Here's another. I reckon I'm on a political rampage today. All this talk about the healthcare bill. The media is so biased you can't get the meat of the changes. I wish there was a neutral place to go for the news where they explain what's changing. All of this biased bs keeps feeding the great divide here in the US.

From what I understand, Trumpcare basically is a huge F-you to women. Pregnancy, C-sections, rape, PPD and domestic violence can all be considered pre-existing conditions now. Apparently Lord Cheeto is going to be signing an executive order to legalize anti-LGBT discrimination next, like this week I think. He is the absolute worst IMO.

edited so I don't get a warning. I'm just super annoyed about this.

Where's Ivanka telling Daddy Dearest that this is not how it works and advocating for women as she said she would do?

Heliumgirl717

ellie111227 said:

My uo is that all pets should be contained to their owners yards/houses, including cats. I don't get why it is acceptable for someone's pet cat to be running loose all over the neighborhood in everyone else's yards. I don't want myself or my babies getting toxoplasmosis because my neighbors cat pooped in our garden or sandbox! No one would think it was ok let their dog out to run around in other people's yards, so why is it ok to do this with a cat?

Preach!!!! This is 100% the reason we're getting a fence installed this summer.

mombod

He signed the executive order this morning.

Elyse1384

hopeful808 said:

Elyse1384 said:

@erinh84 Ugh I mean really.  All of those things being "pre-existing" are absurd and offensive, but a c-section being a pre-existing condition???  Clearly they don't understand how the human body even works.  Those asshats can bite me.  Apparently it has never been any of them whose daughter is wheeled in for an emergency c-section because their grandchild's heart rate drops or their daughter's life and grandchild's life are at risk from the baby getting stuck or some other issue. 

I disagree the problem isn't that c sections etc are considered pre existing conditions because any condition that occurred before the start of a plan should be considered pre existing. Ideally, this would be used to prevent a person from having to jump through insurance hoops a second time. There should not be a consequence or penalty for having pre existing conditions. That is my issue with it.

Umm what???  I disagree with your reason for disagreeing.  I'm not providing an opinion on pre-existing conditions and whether or not they should be covered.  I'm stating it's absurd for an emergency C-section to be considered pre-existing.  This would be like a car insurance company refusing to provide coverage on a claim for an accident because you purchased the car 6 months before you got insurance through them.

mkrel

@erinh84 Do you have a source on all of that? I just tried looking it up and I am seeing a lot of generalities not specifics. Something like rape or a csection being preexisting as someone who has worked in both hospital and insurance case management just seems crazy to me. 

ETA: I did find an article, I just wish there was more explanation on how that could be. If that is all true it is disgusting.

lmc929

erinh84 said:

Lord Cheeto 

erinh84

MKRLTX said:

@erinh84 Do you have a source on all of that? I just tried looking it up and I am seeing a lot of generalities not specifics. Something like rape or a csection being preexisting as someone who has worked in both hospital and insurance case management just seems crazy to me. 

ETA: I did find an article, I just wish there was more explanation on how that could be. If that is all true it is disgusting.

I've been researching it all afternoon trying to find a copy of the bill itself to read. I've found several articles, but nothing super in depth, which has annoyed me. As far as the pre-existing conditions are concerned, every source I've found has all said the same thing on that front. DH, DS and I are all insured through Obamacare, so I really want to know what this all means for us. I know "trumpcare" still has a lot of hurdles to jump through, so I'm hoping it will fall flat.

Knottie42089123

I can't with Ivanka. The whole situation makes me sick. i don't know enough about the healthcare bill to say anything. I do know that Jimmy Kimmel had me tearing up until he got political. I used to work in healthcare and a child would not be denied lifesaving surgery. And many hospitals offer charity care for families making up to some percent over the federal poverty level. I get that bills will run people into bankruptcy but that does not come up when you are dealing with life and death. 

And im saying this as someone who hates trump with the fury of a thousand nuns

Xath

I can't find the text on c-sections, but I'm wondering it it's a prior cesarean that would be considered a pre-existing condition that would allow them to waive (or hike up the rates for) coverage for subsequent pregnancies.  Cesareans are expensive and you're statistically more likely to have one if you've already had one.  

I'm not a fan from what I've heard, but I'd like to read the actual bill.

Kylieslip24

ellie111227 said:

@momma2char I agree! That drives me crazy, too.

@MKRLTX That is so weird! I would be confused and annoyed by that, too.

My uo is that all pets should be contained to their owners yards/houses, including cats. I don't get why it is acceptable for someone's pet cat to be running loose all over the neighborhood in everyone else's yards. I don't want myself or my babies getting toxoplasmosis because my neighbors cat pooped in our garden or sandbox! No one would think it was ok let their dog out to run around in other people's yards, so why is it ok to do this with a cat?

You make me feel better about myself! My family all make fun of me because our cats are strictly indoor. We are planning on cat proofing our patio this summer (their first, almost 1 year old!), but dh is very annoyed at this. Reason 1- cars reason 2- fleas reason 3- I want to know where they are, not wandering around the neighborhood reason 4- cats are constantly getting eaten around here by coyotes and mt lions and other wild animals. I believe it's our responsibility to keep pets safe. 

Ps our neighborhood does not believe dogs need to be fenced either we have about 10 regulars constantly in our yard and the streets because no one seems to care. Well they should, those dogs could bite a kid, attack a cat, or cause a car accident running around like that. Never mind their own safety. 

This is leads me to my uo at least for around here:
fix your animals!!! So tired of the feral kittens showing up at our door, every few months we have a new batch that end up eaten or sick, or hurt and I have to pay for them to get fixed! 

Sorry for the rant, but this all majorly bugs me. 

lmc929

Hopefully this is NOT an UO...

As someone with a sister who has ulcerative colitis needing her colon removed when she was 20 and now lives her life having to have bowel movements through a catheter in a port on her torso, and DEFINITELY has a pre-existing condition.... I find it ridiculous that she should have any more trouble than anyone else finding affordable healthcare. 

mkrel

@Knottie42089123 I felt the same way. A patient would NEVER be denied an emergent life saving surgery. The doctors and nurses don't even know the patient's financial status at that point. 

@erinh84 If you do find something more detailed or the actual bill, please post it. My own issues with insurance and preexisting conditions are in a round about way what led me to become a nurse. There are so many problems with our system, and I feel like everyone just wants to get their own plan in place and stamp their name on it without taking the time to really assess what the country and people need. It's frustrating. 

mombod

Finally found where you can read the full bill
https://housegop.leadpages.co/healthcare/ 

Edit to add: you have to download the bill, then read the amendments for the changes that were in todays actual vote. 

ellie111227

erinh84 said:

MKRLTX said:

@erinh84 Do you have a source on all of that? I just tried looking it up and I am seeing a lot of generalities not specifics. Something like rape or a csection being preexisting as someone who has worked in both hospital and insurance case management just seems crazy to me. 

ETA: I did find an article, I just wish there was more explanation on how that could be. If that is all true it is disgusting.

I've been researching it all afternoon trying to find a copy of the bill itself to read. I've found several articles, but nothing super in depth, which has annoyed me. As far as the pre-existing conditions are concerned, every source I've found has all said the same thing on that front. DH, DS and I are all insured through Obamacare, so I really want to know what this all means for us. I know "trumpcare" still has a lot of hurdles to jump through, so I'm hoping it will fall flat.

My understanding is that the text of the bill has not been made public, so the information we have is essentially leaked. I think it is really backhanded to be keeping the actual text of the bill from the public, especially because it seems like the only reason could be that they know most people would find it appalling. We have a right to know what it says so we can call our representatives (Call your representatives!).

Eta- looks like I am wrong about this. Maybe this was the case earlier today before the bill passed in the house?

erinh84

mombod said:

Finally found where you can read the full bill
https://housegop.leadpages.co/healthcare/ 

Edit to add: you have to download the bill, then read the amendments for the changes that were in todays actual vote. 

Thank you. I've been trying to find this. Reading it now. Hopefully I'll have a better grasp on what it means as far as pre-existing conditions and being insured with Obamacare(like my family).

ugh Lord Cheeto babyhands has officially ruined my day.

mombod

Good luck! Its essentially impossible to read bc only the full text of the original version is available and the amendments arent very clear on actually where/what to replace.

hopeful808

Elyse1384 said:

hopeful808 said:

Elyse1384 said:

@erinh84 Ugh I mean really.  All of those things being "pre-existing" are absurd and offensive, but a c-section being a pre-existing condition???  Clearly they don't understand how the human body even works.  Those asshats can bite me.  Apparently it has never been any of them whose daughter is wheeled in for an emergency c-section because their grandchild's heart rate drops or their daughter's life and grandchild's life are at risk from the baby getting stuck or some other issue. 

I disagree the problem isn't that c sections etc are considered pre existing conditions because any condition that occurred before the start of a plan should be considered pre existing. Ideally, this would be used to prevent a person from having to jump through insurance hoops a second time. There should not be a consequence or penalty for having pre existing conditions. That is my issue with it.

Umm what???  I disagree with your reason for disagreeing.  I'm not providing an opinion on pre-existing conditions and whether or not they should be covered.  I'm stating it's absurd for an emergency C-section to be considered pre-existing.  This would be like a car insurance company refusing to provide coverage on a claim for an accident because you purchased the car 6 months before you got insurance through them.

To my knowledge a pre existing condition is any condition that occurred before a set date in time. With insurance it is often the date a policy becomes effective. A csection is a major surgery. If you have one then you receive different medical care in subsequent pregnancies than those who had a vaginal delivery or who have not given birth before. Yes, emergency c sections are not a choice but one can say that about all conditions that are "pre existing". This is why I think is so important that pre existing conditions be covered and those people protected because people do not schoolers to have them nor can they be prevented. In the past I believe that the list of pre existing conditions that were discriminated against was limited to very expensive to treat conditions not more routine conditions or past treatments. However if the ACA is repealed insurance companies can do whatever they want and I can see insurance companies broadening the list of pre existing conditions that result in higher rates or being denied coverage to include many new things. 

neludelu

mombod said:

Good luck! Its essentially impossible to read bc only the full text of the original version is available and the amendments arent very clear on actually where/what to replace.

But to be fair the ACA was the same way and it was widely known public knowledge that many people who voted on the bill did not read the actual bill because it was too long and tedious. 

Elyse1384

Again @hopeful808 I'm not commenting on pre-existing conditions.  I know what they are and in fact my DH has one that requires regular medications and this legislation change would be problematic for us.  I am specifically saying how laughable it is to consider an emergency c-section pre-existing. They are emergency for a reason.  There was nothing pre-existing about the pregnancy that necessitated one being scheduled.  

neludelu

erinh84 said:

neludelu said:

Here's another. I reckon I'm on a political rampage today. All this talk about the healthcare bill. The media is so biased you can't get the meat of the changes. I wish there was a neutral place to go for the news where they explain what's changing. All of this biased bs keeps feeding the great divide here in the US.

From what I understand, Trumpcare basically is a huge F-you to women. Pregnancy, C-sections, rape, PPD and domestic violence can all be considered pre-existing conditions now. Apparently Lord Cheeto is going to be signing an executive order to legalize anti-LGBT discrimination next, like this week I think. He is the absolute worst IMO.

edited so I don't get a warning. I'm just super annoyed about this.

So this is part of the problem. Your rant is pretty much word from word from every article that already has an issue with the Conservative party. People aren't understanding or getting the actual information, they are just repeating scar tactics passed down to them. I am by no means a Trump supporter but I think that this is a huge issue- people aren't being given facts they are being fed scary information that might or might not be true. 

mombod

neludelu said:

mombod said:

Good luck! Its essentially impossible to read bc only the full text of the original version is available and the amendments arent very clear on actually where/what to replace.

But to be fair the ACA was the same way and it was widely known public knowledge that many people who voted on the bill did not read the actual bill because it was too long and tedious. 

Absolutely agree! Just providing the link and the warning that its not easy to read.

neludelu

mombod said:

neludelu said:

mombod said:

Good luck! Its essentially impossible to read bc only the full text of the original version is available and the amendments arent very clear on actually where/what to replace.

But to be fair the ACA was the same way and it was widely known public knowledge that many people who voted on the bill did not read the actual bill because it was too long and tedious. 

Absolutely agree! Just providing the link and the warning that its not easy to read.

I was hoping I didn't come across as argumentative or defendIng it!