<p>Exact same pattern here. Annual exam, wait for months. Urgent problem, same day. </p>
<p>Me too. Same as it always was. Urgent problem, same day. Otherwise, wait for weeks.</p>
<p>"I need to have my annual physical. Made the appt, in January. 1st opening was for end of August. I could have gotten in earlier with the nurse practitioner, but I am in no rush, so. However, while I was dealing with the unknown medical issue, I was able to see my doctor that day since I was sick.</p>
<p>My Uro OTOH had nothing open until end of March but my gyno called and got me squeezed in.</p>
<p>There is nothing new about having to wait, sometimes months, to see a specialist. It has been like this for years."</p>
<p>Wow, that’s terrible. I don’t even know what I’m doing two weeks from now. I can get a physical scheduled with my doctor within a week, and any specialist I’ve needed, within a week or two. The only time I can remember waiting for months is when my child needed to go to an extremely good neurologist, at Children’s Hospital. The doctor spends much of his time doing research, and routine appts were hard to come by.</p>
<p>I mean, how long does it take to do a physical? They can’t schedule you for a 20-30 minute appt less than 8 months in advance? That’s crazy. </p>
<p>Fwiw, that hasn’t really been my experience. Annual exam is usually about a week or two wait, urgent same day. </p>
<p>My last check-up was a same week appt. (And that was with a Medicaid-accepting doctor!) </p>
<p>Except all those here who had to wait for medical care prior to Obamacare probably cursed out the capitalistic medical care system and were telling us how Obamacare would end this problem. The problem is definitely worse now, not better. </p>
<p>I never said that, GP. </p>
<p>There was a shortage of docs in CA for many years before ACA came along.</p>
<p>Probably one of the perks of your ultra expensive providers is short wait times. </p>
<p>My internist charges a $200 annual fee, not covered by insurance. Consequently, the wait times are very short.</p>
<p>@emilybee why wouldn’t you have your annual with the NP?</p>
<p>“Except all those here who had to wait for medical care prior to Obamacare probably cursed out the capitalistic medical care system and were telling us how Obamacare would end this problem.”</p>
<p>I was never under the illusion wait times would get better under ACA. Imo, they are pretty much how they always have been, in my experience. </p>
<p>Just look at the data from before ACA in the report I posted. </p>
<p>The problem is definitely worse now, not better. </p>
<p>Not in my experience. It’s been like it has always, been. </p>
<p>GP, so you have concierge medicine then.</p>
<p>“why wouldn’t you have your annual with the NP?”</p>
<p>Because I am in no hurry to get it done. I have a chronic condition which was just recently diagnosed in January after two months of running back and forth to doctor’s office. I wanted the break. </p>
<p>H, OTOH, had to reschedule his exam because he had to be out of town that day - so did go see NP instead. </p>
<p>“GP, so you have concierge medicine then”</p>
<p>No, he just charges a $200 annual fee if you want him as your doctor. He is still in the network for my insurance plan. I don’t mind paying it since it keeps all the obamacare subsidized policyholders from going to him. They would never pay $200 out-of-pocket just for the privilege of going to a particular doctor.</p>
<p>Ah. The $200 is so you don’t have to rub elbows with poor people. Gotcha. Not surprised.</p>
<p>Well, I am not waiting months to see a doctor; like you are.</p>
<p>I guess you missed the point. I was waiting months to see a doctor BEFORE Obamacare. Years before. It’s been a chronic problem in CA for a very long time. Sorry, you can’t pin that one on ACA.</p>
<p>It’s not really a good enough example to say one doesn’t have to wait as long as another. Different circumstances, different flexibility, different needs. Having a doc at your beck and call doesn’t make you a wise user or your “want” well considered. It may even waste his time.</p>
<p>And certainly not a measure that you won’t share time in the waiting room with people you consider undesirable. If you like a doctor, he/she sees you promptly enough and takes good care of you, no need to dismiss his/her other patients. </p>
<p>Sometimes, I wait for an appt. Other times I don’t. ACA has been no disruption. (The only aggravations is I keep getting friendly emails from them.) As for the recurring threat, “wait til you really need medical care or a doctor or some level of serious care,” do you not see that some of us, over this thread, have reported we’ve “been there” and it worked out? Us, a child, a spouse, a friend. And so far, GP, you have not reported needing this, just how frustrating it WILL be when we get there. </p>
<p>I have not found that Obamacare has impacted my health care at all.</p>
<p>Except for the fact that my primary care provider retired in June, and when I asked why, she groaned and said, “Obamacare”.</p>
<p>Though actually, my new pcp is a better fit for me. She actually believes in bio-identical hormones, and supports the things that I’m trying to do. Had my doc not retired, I would not have looked for another.</p>
<p>We have no extra waiting time here, just a data point. We have lots of docs around here. Basically only the one insurer in the state, but that means all the docs take them. It’s a kind of private universal health care situation, since doctors can’t really refuse to deal with BCBS in NC. </p>
<p>I did decide to change our coverage to my employer coverage because the individual market has gotten too expensive for us full pay folks. But… our health care remains unchanged.</p>
<p>I can get a GP appointment that day if someone is sick. I can get a referal to a specialist and an appt within a week or two, next day, I would assume if it was urgent. We have great health care here. </p>
<p>We have Saturday access to the docs (the internists) and they extended their weekday hours. Takes some getting used to. Most of our docs have 2 locations, sometimes more. So with electronic records, one can go wherever the scheduling works. We have a similar BCBS situation- as they phrased it to me, if a doc wants to accept BCBS, he or she accepts it from all subscribers. </p>
<p>razorsharp & poetgrl: regarding the law:</p>
<p>Section 1311 mandates that each state “shall” establish an exchange. So ACA starts by requiring that every state must have its own exchange by January 2014.</p>
<p>That is followed by section 1321, which is a what-if, fallback provision: that says a state can affirmatively choose to let the federal government run an exchange for them, and that if any state fails to do anything, then the federal government will automatically run their exchange. </p>
<p>The provision about about tax credit eligibility refers to 1311 (not 1321) – so it is referring to the mandatory exchange that every state is required to have. The law still leaves the states in charge – that is, </p>
<p>The federal exchange stands in the shoes of the state for each exchange - the law seems pretty explicit about that. So it’s analogous to a sign in a park that says that “dog owners” must keep their pets on leash. It doesn’t mean that dog-walkers and dog-sitters can let the dogs under their charge run loose – the phrase “dog owners” is understood to encompass “temporary dog caretakers.” Or you could compare it to the situation where you lend your car to someone and they get in an accident – you are still liable as the car owner, and a “permissive user” is seen to essentially be operating the vehicle as your agent (and of course your insurance will cover you). </p>
<p>The courts are required to attempt to read and construe different provisions of a statute in a way that will give effect to the overall purpose and effect of the law. So it’s not a matter that the courts can pick and choose between the two possible interpretations and decide which one they like best – they need to go with the one that validates the law. </p>