More aid for Medicaid
Area families to lobby in D.C. for MUSC Children's Hospital
Melissa Haneline
The Post and Courier
Nurse Jodie Powell preps Amauri Bowman, 9, for a blood transfusion at MUSC Children's Hospital on June 13 while Amauri's mother, April, waits. The Bowmans are traveling to Washington today to lobby for increased Medicaid funding for pediatric hospitals.
Why Medicaid matters to pediatric care
Children comprise 52 percent of South Carolina's Medicaid population, yet they account for only 24 percent of state Medicaid spending.
Medicaid payments to children's hospitals cover only about 79 percent of the cost of care.
An estimated 102,625 children, about 9.5 percent, in South Carolina are uninsured. Forty-eight percent of those uninsured children are eligible for Medicaid or State Children's Health Insurance Program but are not enrolled.
Each Medicaid-eligible child costs the state $1,710 per year, on average, compared with an adult enrollee of $5,801.
Source: National Association of Children's Hospitals, 2007.
Healthy red blood cells are round and soft. But those circulating through 9-year-old Amauri Bowman's body can become hard and pointed, clumping together and blocking blood flow.
Amauri has sickle cell anemia. When her own blood blocks her vessels, she feels debilitating pain lasting as long as three days.
Having the Medical University of South Carolina Children's Hospital nearby is vital, said April Bowman, Amauri's mother. 'Pain can strike anytime,' she said.
The Bowman family is traveling to Washington today to lobby for federal support of children's hospitals through better Medicaid funding. They will join families served by more than 30 hospitals across the country in an effort organized by the National Association of Children's Hospitals.
More than 50 percent of the patients seen at MUSC Children's Hospital receive Medicaid, according to hospital Administrator John Sanders. '(The legislators') decisions on funding affect the services we provide,' Sanders said.
Medicaid payments to children's hospitals are low, covering only about 79 percent of what providing care actually costs, according to the National Association of Children's Hospitals.
There are about 250 children's hospitals in the U.S., comprising 5 percent of all hospitals, the association reported. Children's hospitals offer highly specialized care for children with complex and rare conditions. This month, U.S. News & World Report ranked MUSC's pediatric hospital 19th for its heart and heart surgery services.
Sam DeLongchamps, 3, and his parents, Dean Stephens DeLongchamps and Caroline DeLongchamps, are going to the capital on behalf of MUSC's Children's Hospital. WCIV anchorman Stephens does not use his full name on air.
In 2005, Sam suffered a horrific head injury when Nina Sossamon, a former WCIV anchor who worked with Dean Stephens and lived in the same neighborhood, accidentally ran over the then-11-month-old in the driveway of the family's Mount Pleasant home.
'His head was smushed flat like a pancake,' Caroline DeLongchamps said. She apologized for being so graphic. 'How can I make you understand really what happened and how they were able to help him?'
Sam underwent reconstructive surgery and was released three weeks after the accident. He will face cosmetic issues, his mother said. Otherwise, Sam is a bubbly, energetic child.
Medicaid is important to the DeLongchamps because Medicaid funding affects what services hospitals can afford to provide. 'The governor and the president are trying to cut Medicaid, which will in turn affect services,' Caroline DeLongchamps said.
In addition to funding, Medicaid eligibility is a concern, Sanders said. Many children come to the hospital who might be eligible but are not yet signed up. It's a concern how many hoops those children and their parents have to jump through to get coverage, he said.
Requirements for the State Children's Health Insurance Program are in flux on a federal and state level, he said. Recently, Gov. Mark Sanford vetoed a South Carolina cigarette tax increase that could have been used to raise the income threshold for that insurance.
Families talking directly to legislators helps them understand what children's hospitals mean to the community, Sanders said. 'These families have had their kids go through some pretty rough times.'
Reach Jill Coley at 937-5719 or jcoley@postandcourier.com.
E-mail this story 
Printer-friendly version
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. The Post and Courier does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our Web site.
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
Comments
This article has 34 comment(s)
Posted by flowerchild55 on June 16, 2008 at 8:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Medicare is for the elderly, this is medicaid that they are speaking about. It is to help low income individuals and families.
The problem that I have found over the years it that they do not assist those really in need and make qualifying almost impossible.
Years ago, I was a single parent of two. I made just $30 more per month than they allowed. Did this $30 make me any more capable of paying more for healthcare? No.
Again, my mother was eligible but we had to practically beg to receive benefits. They made us jump through hoops that would make most folks give up even trying to attempt to apply. For two years they denied her benefits, mainly because they failed to ask for more documentation or lost what they were already given. We were finally able to get her into the system just a year before she passed.
In my opinion, they need to look at these programs and assist those who are truly in need. The elderly and families who are trying to have a better life. It's not quite right to support those who do not even try to better themselves. They need to concentrate on those who are working and need a hand up, not a hand out.
Posted by jk_newhard on June 16, 2008 at 9:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
flowerchild55 - I applaud your comments. Kids in need should also be covered regardless of whether their parent(s) are trying to be responsible. It's wrong to make them bear the burden of bad parents.
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 9:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So what is it ColdBeer? You agree that children in need should be taken care of....but continuing to do so fosters the "have another baby" attitude?
I'm sure seeing how difficult it is to even qualify for receiving Medicaid benefits, people are just running out to have kids because they know they will be taken care of.
I truly believe the attitudes of some people in this board are egotistical and selfish at best. It's often along these lines that you individually are somehow suffering because you have to pay for sick poor children or poor "lazy' adults. I assume you mean taxes. Taxes will come out of your paychecks regardless. If it's not for something, it will be something else and yet it still significant less than most industrialized countries. The amount you pay in taxes probably won't change significantly in the next few years....so all of your griping and complaining about how the burden has fallen on you as a person is pretty much silly. I pay federal, state and city taxes...I'm not going to complain about it, its a part of life and that's just it. When it actually goes to something where I can see tangible benefits then good. But taxes are how the government runs, like it or not.
Posted by LadyTarHeel on June 16, 2008 at 10:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I have to agree that it's extremely hard to qualify for medicaid. I applied a few years back because I didn't know if I would still have health coverage under my dad's current policy. It's ridiculously hard hard to qualify. They denied me simply because of my educational background when I know some people who don't do anything, but sit up and have babies and they get medicaid AND disability. How that works, I have know idea.
Coldbeer: I understand what you are saying. As I stated before, I know some women back home who knowingly have child after child just so they can keep medicaid and increase their checks. This type of abuse has got to stop.
Posted by KidYendor on June 16, 2008 at 10:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You have to look at liberal, socialist, government created problem stopping welfare/healthcare programs as looking at a great pyramid. The top point of the pyramid represents the beginning-a small problem for a few people to pay for things. Government steps in to answer the liberal's call to intervene and pay for the people's things. Soon it becomes a lifestyle and the government pyramid point spreads and spreads and spreads down swallowing more and more money and people into its system. This creates problems and havoc in society and will until the welfare pyramid is scaled down. Medicaid must not be expanded and sterilization for current welfare mothers is a good start.
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 10:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
KidYendor you must be a socialist/communist yourself, speaking of "sterilizing mothers". That's disgusting. The people on this board are ridiculous, and you are no exception.
Posted by eyfigueroa on June 16, 2008 at 10:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There is no happy medium where a sick child is concerned.
Unfortunately there are many who post here regularly that do not have a problem denying a child like the one featured in this article health care. For some, letting a welfare baby die is equivalent to culling the herd. I’m sure they wouldn’t publicly say so, but it’s what they want, all in the name of not using ‘tax dollars’ to support lazy parents.
However, the guidelines should be strict and adhered to. Yes, there are families who will miss the cut-off point and they will need to do what it takes to make themselves more marketable and therefore make more money to provide health care for their families.
I had to.
And I did.
I hate to sound harsh or callous but Medicaid really needs to shorten its list of eligible users. The only benefits that should be made available to children are:
*post-natal care
*well-baby check ups through year one
*immunizations (public health concern)
If a family does not fall under the income guidelines for Medicaid then taking a second job, going to charities or even family assistance should be utilized to get care for children. I did.
Catastrophic care is already free to those who cannot pay, by federal law no one is turned away from the E.R and I’ve never heard of ANYONE, much less a child being allowed to die simply because of lack of insurance. I have no problem with using tax-dollars to care for a child with sickle-cell, leukemia or any other serious health problems in spite of the fact that their parents may be lazy welfare leeches. However, to advocate not taking care of subsequent children of welfare queens just to make a point is just beyond cruel.
We’re not China; state-sponsored killing of our children is not what America is about.
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ColdBeer and others, it seems like since you've known one or two individuals that abuse the system the assumption is that everyone does. What about the hundreds of thousands that don't. Take away all the abusers there will still be many people in need.
And how exactly are you suffering due to the laziness of others? (This is an honest question)
The people that preach about laziness, welfare abuse, and how the system is ruining American life, I agree. But I wonder if you advocate the same sort of solutions I do. Creating a more prepared work force through our broken education system. Fixing our broken education system by modernizing schools and the way they teach, paying our educators more, RESPECTING our educators more. Letting them do their jobs instead of letting politicians run the show. All of these thing will require (gasp) money provided by your taxes. They aren't free. Better education is the key to eliminating many of the social problems in our society. If a child had options created by education other than following the same path as their parents, or drug dealing or stealing or being a ward of the system, our society will be better because of it. Like it or not you can't dictate the way people live their lives, responsibily or irresponsibly. There will always be bad parents (there always have been) and bad children. But it's been proven that the more options, role models and opportunity a child has, regardless of their background , the better off they will. And that begins with education.
But I suppose you will be the first to say..."well I don't want my tax dollars going to support ...blah blah blah (insert anything here that people feel as if they shouldn't have to pay for) "
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 10:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Eyfigueroa you did all of those things because you are a good parent (I'm sure :) )
HOWEVER, you are giving too much credit to many families out there. Many will not complete those steps to take care of their children and their children's health. Some can't. What then happens to those children? You can call the parents irresponsible, say they shouldn't be allowed to have kids (as Cold Beer and KidYendor love to claim) but when it comes down to it you can't control who procreates and who doesn't. Trust me sometimes even I wish I could...but that's not in my hands. Whether you like it or not, these kids that fall after these three required health care measure you mention, even outside of serious health concerns STILL need basic health care.
I remember reading last year about a little boy who died because of a rotting tooth that let to a bad infection. All because his mother never took him to a dentist (she said she couldn't afford it). These things should not be happening here...period. It's easy to see we should shorten the list of eligibility, but I doubt that will make more parents and families responsible it just might increase the number of children without basic health care in our state.
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Early, I suppose I've been fortunate enough to have to **think** about health insurance. I was always covered under my parents even through undergrad and grad school. Now that I'm working, all I konw is that I have it and they take approximately 75 dollars out of my pay every month to pay for it. (8 dollars for dental). I don't have a deductible (Thank God , that sounds horrible...sorry). However, I work for an international organization which is mostly on what we say is the "European" system of benefits.
I think your experience also proves that for most Americans the health insurance system does NOT work well and that healthcare in America by evidence by your experience and this article is in need of some serious repair.
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 11:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh I meant NOT have to "think" about health insurance.
Posted by KidYendor on June 16, 2008 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
My explanation of the problem pyramid has not sunk in. Let me explain again. Say you have 500 poor people evenly divided men and women. Government steps in giving them food and a house and healthcare. The poor men and women have whoopy over and over and soon you have 250 couples times 4 poor children per couple. So now you have 1,500 poor people on the dole because of government "solving the problem". The statement by deacin, "you can't control who procreates and who doesn't," is incorrect. We can and should control procreation of welfare system participants by taking a stand and saying either accept sterilization after two welfare dependent childbirths or opt out of the system. It is as easy as that. Medicaid must be scaled down because of the destruction it has done and is doing to our country.
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 11:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Sorry, I don't believe in pyramid schemes.
Sorry, but your equation doesn't make since because that's not it happens. Poor couples don't all have four children a piece. Hardly any do. You are just spouting the same 1800s paranoia people had about over population and poverty. But you scheme doesn't work because it's a severe over-statement.
Economic theory has proven that the rising tide theory and greater education and betterment of all parts of society leads a decrease in population. (mostly because of the increasing practice of contraception...which is because of better education and openness of a society)
As Eyfig stated, this is not communist China or Nazi Germany. Our country became dangerously close with is Eugenics movement in the first half of last century....first it was sterilizing those who were deemed "mentally ill" ( a vague term by those standards) or "slow" then it moved to those who were just considered "unfit" (also a vague terminology), tens of thousands of people were sterilized. The program later went on to inspire the Nazi Eugenics movement. If you start saying things like "they should be sterilized", its a slippery scale indeed.
Posted by drp7773 on June 16, 2008 at 11:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What ever it's called, nobody should suffer because of a health issue, some companies do not have insurance, some people can not pay the very high cost for ins for the family because the business is too small to get a good rate, there are many reasons but none justify letting a person suffer. We piss money away for wars, pet projects, illegals getting whatever they want because we don't want to do anything about it, we piss money away on doggie parks,on cewll phones for state employees, on bridges that go nowhere, etc etc etc etc.....but we have no money to help with health cost..America is too great to let this happen reel in all the corruption in federal, state, county and city and I am confident you will find more then enough money. Same as SS monies, keep their greedy hands off it and put back the money that congress stoled from it and it would be ok. waste waste waste greed greed greed....Clyburn is just one fraction of the waste..
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 12:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Early, IMO the solution is...(as many states have done) to force employers to pay into their employee's health care costs. I believe Maryland just passed a similar bill...mostly targeting places like Wal Mart which intentionally skirt the costs for their employee's health care. I know some people on this board will frown on the idea, because it's the big bad government involving itself in business matters. But I don't care.
It will never happen in this state, because our politicians don't want to get the disdain of big business. But let's face it, it's either or. Either you force companies to adequately help pay for their employee's health care ...like they should. OR, the state will be paying the price eventually. In Maryland, there were too many people at the burden of state care, too many working people (contrary to what many people on this board believe about federal assistance, a lot of people who receive it are working and just don't make enough to receive health care or don't have adequate care)were relying on the state for their primary health care.
This HAS to be changed. I say force corporations/companies of a certain size to care for their workers.
Posted by sc4peace on June 16, 2008 at 12:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I had a daughter young- right into college- I was neither prepared nor responsible enough at that age to have a child, but I did and I grew up very fast. I had her on Medicaid while I finished college and as soon as I began my career and received benefits, I pulled her off. My case worker called me and told me I made under the guidelines and that she could remain on medicaid- I told her no thanks, we have insurance and even though I have to pay 380 dollars a month for both of us- I do it because the state did not have my child- I did.. and I could not go to sleep at night knowing that I wasn't taking responsibilty for the beautiful child I made. My point is, I didn't have more children and I appreciated the help because I needed it- but at the same time- I made my situation better, I got an education and moved on instead of wasting away my life looking for handouts-so I don't feel sorry for anyone who can't help themselves- Medicaid is for those who need it based on a disabilty or for situations that are on a temporary basis- not permanent. It should be a system to provide short-term help- not charity.
Posted by Test2007 on June 16, 2008 at 12:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Coldbeer, I think that is kind of what Early was explaining earlier. Do you believe that if it was left up to the companies they would actually participate? Seriously, this is corporate America we're talking about. Speaking as someone who works in it, I can tell you that the almighty dollar is what is important, NOT employees well being.
Posted by eyfigueroa on June 16, 2008 at 2:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh Lordy Early, have you been cheating on me?!?!?!?!
Congrats allwoman. I'm a little envious. the only way i could get a boy baby in my house was to go to the pound!
always wanted a boy but apparently the creator thought me raising girls would be enough entertainment.
Posted by Tammie on June 16, 2008 at 3:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Allwoman, congrats!!! 2 more days and I find out what this active child is inside of me!! Yayyy!!
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 3:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
allwoman, you need to do what my mom did...either leave it braided or just put some crazy ponytails in it all the time. By the time we were old enough to care we had very well learned to do our OWN hair.
Posted by Tammie on June 16, 2008 at 3:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dayum Early, aren't YOU a fertile turtle? Lmao
Posted by whome on June 16, 2008 at 3:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Social security is pay-go, and entitlements can only from the payroll tax. Medicare and Medicaid entitlements can and do come out of general federal revenue. Medicaid is a state-federal payment scheme, where the feds create basic guidelines for coverage, but the states determine the mechanism and eligibility guidelines, especially because poverty limits are often geographic-dependent. The problem with the state-federal scheme is it incentivizes state government and ngo's from increasing eligibility with the carrot of "free" federal funds.
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 3:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
yeah I should also say I wasn't much for doing hair so I was happy to "go natural" which is where I've been for over 8 years now. It's so carefree and has little maintenance requirements....mostly just wake up and go. I don't have the patience or money to go to the salon often...it IS expensive.
Posted by Tammie on June 16, 2008 at 4:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Allwoman, if I am carrying a girl, she will rock natural hair until SHE chooses not to, once we have that Mommie/daughter talk. Thank God my cousin, my godsister, and my best friend all do hair. I can braid but its sickening! I havent been to my hairdresser in 3 years, I love having natural hair also! Plus its too damn hot down here in the summertime to get a relaxer!
Posted by Test2007 on June 16, 2008 at 4:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
uh oh NATURALS in the house. I have been natural for about 6 years and I love it. I am a recovering permaholic.
Posted by Tammie on June 16, 2008 at 4:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Me too Test, me too. I just wish I could decide on a haircolor for my tips. Lol
Posted by Tammie on June 16, 2008 at 4:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Allwoman, that's too much maintenance. Plus it's too hot. I wish I would. Lol
Posted by SCdeacinNYC on June 16, 2008 at 4:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Very seldom do I blow my hair out...right now its either in little curly Qs from my two strand twists or some combination of a huge curly/kinky fro.
Flat ironing is a LOT of work. Besides, the last time I blew my hair out I looked like Diana Ross on a VERY bad day.
Posted by normski on June 16, 2008 at 5:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
SC Medicaid stats
.Population Distribution by Race/Ethnicity, states (2005-2006), U.S. (2006)
SC
# SC
% US
# US
%
White 2,731,604 65% 195,720,465 66%
Black 1,222,572 29% 35,877,972 12%
Hispanic 142,586 3% 44,772,587 15%
Other 100,085 2% 19,685,812 7%
Total 4,196,848 100% 296,056,836 100%
read and weep race baiters
Posted by coolfreaknbeans on June 16, 2008 at 8:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
normski the dumbaski- Those stats are from 2005-2006.Are you unaware of the year?
Posted by LadyTarHeel on June 16, 2008 at 8:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Allwoman, Test, Tammie: I commend you guys for going natural. I did it for about a year and a half and I gave in. Hello! My name is Jessica and I'm a permaholic. Okay, maybe not a permaholic. I rock a sew-in. It's so much easier to take care of and it makes my natural hair grow.
Allwoman and Tammie: Congrats on the little ones! I don't have any and I can't wait to have some after I finish my degree, find a job, and get married....how ever long that will be:o)
Posted by Time4action on June 16, 2008 at 10:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Tarheel don't know why you were denied Medcaid but education is NOT A criterial for Medicaid. only ressources and income.
Posted by FiscalConservative on June 17, 2008 at 3:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Helping out people in need is for charities. I shouldn't have to use my taxes to pay for welfare, medicaid, etc. I work hard so my family can have a good life and that is all that matters to me. I shouldn't be forced to pay for these kind of things.
Posted by LadyTarHeel on June 17, 2008 at 7:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Time4: That's the same thing I said. Since I am over the age of 18, I had to apply for disability, which I got temporarily as well as temporary medicaid. After 6 months, they sent me a letter saying that because of educational background and employment history, I didn't qualify for either. I was like, I can't work anymore and if I don't work, I can't buy my meds that cost upwards of $2500 a month. Not counting visits to my neurologist. And I made well below the income limit at the time since I was in college.