California Geriatrics Society Newswire

The online home of news and information about Geriatrics and Gerontology in the golden state

Home
Newswire page 1
Newswire page 2
Webinars
AGSandMORE
FEATURES
FEATURES2
FEATURES3
Grants/Posters/Proposals
LEGISLATIVE STUFF
Site Map
Important Links
About Us
Contact Us

Age March

Sunday, August 8, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.

Crissy Field at Sports Basement, San Francisco
610 Old Mason Street, The Presidio

The Age March will be the first time in history when people of all ages, races, genders, sexualities and economic walks of life join together to celebrate aging as a positive experience.

March to Promote Age Awareness

The Age March’s intention is to raise age awareness and begin to break down the myths, stereotypes and social pressures causing age discrimination, shame and negative attitudes towards aging in our culture.

March to End Age Discrimination

At a time when we are living longer lives than ever before we need to be free to Shine On at 50, 60, 70, 80, and beyond and not be limited by ourselves or others as we continue to seek new experiences and opportunities to make our contributions.  Don’t be ashamed of your age –  be proud and celebrate it.

March to Celebrate Your Real Age

Many younger people have missed out on the opportunity to spend quality time with grandparents and other older adults in their lives.  There is a special connection between the young and old which needs to be nurtured and supported.  So much can be gained from the wisdom to be shared between generations.

March to Support Your Parents, Grandparents and other older relatives and friends

 New Study Shows Impact of Program Allowing Patients to Document Wishes for End-of-Life Treatment

Medical order program available in California is linked to lower rates of unwanted hospitalization
Oakland, CA — A new study has found that nursing home patients participating in a program enabling them to record their wishes for end-of-life treatment are far less likely to receive unwanted hospitalization and medical interventions than are other patients.
The program, known in California as Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST), uses an innovative medical order form signed by physicians — and, in California, patients — that allows patients to specify whether or not they prefer to receive CPR, hospitalization, and treatments like antibiotics, feeding tubes, and other medical interventions. POLST was first developed in Oregon in 1990 in response to concerns that traditional Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders and advance directives do not adequately communicate patients' wishes for the many treatment decisions they face at the end of their lives.
The process has been adopted in 250 nursing homes, hospitals, and long term care facilities in California.
The study found that patients with POLST forms saying they wished to receive care primarily focused on relieving their pain and suffering were 59 percent less likely to receive unwanted treatments such as hospitalization than those who had only a DNR order. At the same time, the study showed that patients with POLST forms requesting fewer medical interventions continued to receive pain management; when compared to other patients, they were found to receive identical levels of treatment for pain and other symptoms.
"Traditional approaches such as DNR orders don't tell us about a patient's wishes regarding other kinds of treatments. In our study, 98 percent of residents with POLST forms had orders about medical interventions in addition to resuscitation, compared with just 16 percent of residents without POLST forms," said lead author, Susan Hickman, Ph.D., associate professor in the Schools of Nursing at Indiana University and Oregon Health & Science University. "The bottom line is that POLST translates patients' wishes about a range of treatments into medical orders that are easily understood by health care professionals and can be acted upon immediately."
The study was published in the July 2010 issue of the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.


What Health Reform Means for California

The historic passage of a national health care overhaul has triggered an avalanche of questions as to just how the law will be implemented. Below, the California HealthCare Foundation examines how some Californians with varying employment, income, and demographic profiles will be affected by the new law.

 Q: What will this law mean for a 22-year-old in excellent health who has two part-time jobs, but earns only about $21,000 a year, with neither employer offering health insurance? Would such a person be eligible for coverage as a dependent under his or her parents' health insurance policy? And, if not, will this person be required to obtain health insurance on their own at some point?

A: Six months after the health reform law is enacted, a young person in this situation will be eligible for coverage as a dependent under his or her parents' plan until age 26. There will, however, be some incremental costs (in the range of $150 to $350 per month) depending on how comprehensive the parents' coverage is.

In 2014, four years out, a person in this situation will be subject to what is called an "individual mandate" -- meaning that he or she will be required to obtain health insurance. Because this salary in 2009 puts this person at about 200% of the federal poverty level, however, he or she will be eligible for subsidies from the federal government to help cover the cost of insurance premiums.

With annual earnings of $21,000, he or she will not be required to pay premiums higher than 2% to 3% of their total income. Responsibility for any out-of-pocket costs will not exceed $1,983 per year.

If a person in this situation fails to obtain coverage, he or she will be subject to a tax penalty of $95 in 2014. That penalty would grow to $695 by 2016 if the person were to remain uninsured.

 Q: What would this law mean for a 37-year-old with no children earning about $12,500 a year working part time for an employer who doesn’t offer health insurance, but who is also not currently eligible for Medi-Cal?

A: Since this individual's income puts him or her at between 90% and 120% of the federal poverty level, under the new law such a person will be eligible for Medi-Cal in 2014. An individual in this situation will receive comprehensive benefits, and won't be required to cover much of the cost of care. In some counties, he or she may be required or encouraged to participate in a managed care plan. In other, predominantly rural locations, new federal funds to increase Medi-Cal reimbursements for primary care providers may make it easier to find doctors who will accept Medi-Cal payments than it is today. But finding specialist physicians who accept Medi-Cal could continue to be a challenge for Californians enrolled in the program.

Q: What would the law mean for a married couple who are both 45 years old and healthy; with a combined income of $50,000 per year? The husband’s employer offers coverage, but they cannot afford the 50% share of the monthly premium and still pay their other bills. Their two children are now covered by the state's Healthy Families program, since the couple doesn't have health coverage through their jobs.

A: Under the new law, by 2014, the couple will both be required to purchase health insurance. If their income stays between 200% and 250% of the federal poverty level, they will qualify for subsidized coverage through the new health insurance exchange -- a centralized clearinghouse that facilitates shopping and administers government subsidies. They will qualify to receive credits toward their health insurance premium, which would limit their premium contribution to about 7% of their total annual income (approximately $3,500 per year or $300 a month).

The comprehensiveness of the health coverage they purchase would have to meet certain standards and, no matter what health problems the family developed, the most they would have to pay out of pocket for health care services would be $5,950 per year. If they don't obtain coverage, they would be subject to a tax penalty of $95 per person, per year starting in 2014. That penalty would grow to 2.5% of household income ($1,250 per year) by 2016 if they remain uninsured.

If the wife's employer is small and hires mostly lower-wage workers, new tax credits beginning in 2010 may make it more attractive for the employer to offer health coverage.

 Q: What would this law mean for a would-be entrepreneur who has health insurance through his full-time job, but who wants to start his own business? A 50-year-old, single person earning $80,000 a year, he now contributes about $1,000 each year toward his health insurance premium. Since he has an existing health condition, he's afraid he would never be able to get health coverage on his own.

A: As soon as 90 days after the law’s enactment, new federal funds will establish a temporary national high-risk pool that makes coverage available to those who have been turned down by insurance carriers because of their health status. People would have to be uninsured for six months before they’d be eligible to enroll, however. There remain unanswered questions about whether these funds will be available to California’s existing high risk pool (the Major Risk Medical Insurance Program or MRMIP) and if so, whether California’s share would be adequate to meet the state’s need.

By 2014, under the new law, an individual in this situation will qualify for "guaranteed issue" individual coverage. This means that any health plan selling individual coverage in California would have to offer a full range of products at the same price to everyone within a particular age range. With new age-rating rules, a basic plan might be available for between $325 and $500 per month. Out-of-pocket costs would be limited to $5,950 per year. If and when this individual starts a new business and his first employees are hired, he could obtain a group policy at prevailing market premiums.

 
Q: What would this law mean for a 60-year-old single, self-employed woman earning about $95,000 per year, who happens to have a pre-existing condition? She has a heart condition, so she is now buying health coverage through the Major Risk Medical Insurance Program (MRMIP). This coverage provides her with an annual coverage limit of $75,000 and a lifetime limit of $750,000. Her plan now costs her $1,200 per month through Blue Cross of California.

A: In the short-term, to remain insured she would need to maintain her coverage through the program. It’s possible, but not likely, that new federal funding opportunities associated with the temporary national high-risk pool would expand benefits or reduce MRMIP premiums for existing enrollees.

By 2014, she will qualify for guaranteed issue individual coverage. With new age-rating rules, a plan with basic benefits might be available for an estimated total premium between $400 and $700 per month. Her out-of-pocket costs would be limited to $5,950, and there would be no annual or lifetime limits.

- from the California HealthCare Foundation