A modern democracy is a tyranny whose borders are undefined; one discovers how far one can go only by traveling in a straight line until one is stopped. – Norman Mailer
Just after midnight Wednesday night, I reached half a million total page views; thanks to all my readers for making it happen! And here are twelve other things that happened this week, in the form of updates:
The Rescuers (August 25th, 2010)
This story is an update both to “The Rescuers” and “Bad Girls”…which, strangely enough, was published the day before:
…Erik Garcia…ventured on to [sic] the Houston back pages [sic] website with the idea of calling up an escort service…”I would preach to that person and try to get them [sic] to change their [sic] ways, and low [sic] and behold, I got mugged,” Garcia said. Investigators say the woman who answered…was Jamie Vaughn…who’s been arrested more than 10 times…for drugs and prostitution…she picked up Garcia…and allegedly robbed him…
I also made a comment on the story, commenting on its numerous factual errors and pointing out that, while I’m glad Garcia wasn’t hurt, one might point out that he attempted to trick someone and was tricked in return.
What a Week! (November 28th, 2010)
Remember the man with half a head who was victimized by cops for trying to hire a hooker? Well, somebody who knows him made a video, as reported on Huffington Post:
…The Miami New Times, who first spotted the cheerful alleged prostitute-solicitor in its “Mugshots Friday” series, ran across a YouTube account…in which the gentleman himself explains the traumatic injury. Answering to the name “Halfy” and smoking what looks an awful lot like a blunt, he suggests it’s best to stay off drugs…[he] then alleges the president of the United States uses drugs, affirms his love of large women, and makes several sexually explicit remarks…
The video was removed from YouTube but is still available here, at least for now. As you can see Halfy’s statements aren’t anti-drug, they’re against impaired driving and marijuana criminalization.
The Coffee Klatsch (April 28th, 2011)
Our friend Kelly James is now a full-time libertarian activist in Keene, New Hampshire; some of you have probably seen her “Don’t Strip Our Rights” video, which documents her handing out anti-TSA pamphlets clad only in lingerie. Well, it’s attracted a lot of attention, including this recent story on Huffington Post. Congratulations, Kelly, and good luck!
A Procrustean Bed (May 19th, 2011)
Massachusetts has enacted a new law which defines all prostitutes as raped infants and all men who have anything at all to do with them as international gangsters. Fortunately, somebody at the Boston Herald thought to ask the actual experts their opinions:
…a sweeping new human-trafficking law…[is supposedly] aimed at protecting child prostitutes but also hits adult hookers’ clients with fines of up to $5,000 and up to 2½ years behind bars, as part of a broad crackdown aimed at snuffing out prostitution…women of the night…are treated as victims of human trafficking, still facing the same misdemeanor charges but with new rights to sue those who exploited them. “The penalties we’ve had have been far too low,” [said] Attorney General Martha Coakley…But one high-priced online hooker said she’s no victim — and she doesn’t know any women who are. “If you are an escort, you go into it of your own free will,” she said. “Absolutely no one is forced into doing this…” Another call girl who’s happily hooking online said she doesn’t feel like a victim either. Her johns even provide references from other prostitutes…Coakley said the law brings equity to enforcement that for decades targeted streetwalkers almost exclusively, often letting their clients and pimps walk away scot-free. “This is about leveling the playing field and making it fair…”
I’m sure you recognize the Swedish reek on all this, complete with Orwellian redefinitions. I wonder if any crafty attorney will be willing to take on a class-action suit in which escorts sue politicians for exploiting them for PR value by robbing them of a livelihood?
A False Dichotomy (June 22nd, 2011)
In Pardis Mahdavi’s new book Gridlock: Labor, Migration, and Human Trafficking in Dubai she joins Laura Agustín and many others in criticizing the whole “trafficking” paradigm; here’s a review from Rights Work:
…Gridlock offers a fascinating report of the negative consequences…the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Dubai [suffer] as a result of…the UN Trafficking Protocol and the U.S. anti-trafficking law. Mahdavi focuses…[on] migrant workers, ranging from…construction workers to…sex workers…[and offers] a powerful critique of the current paradigm of international anti-trafficking law…arguing that [the laws] hurt the very people they seek to protect…[She says] contemporary anti-trafficking discourse has been inordinately preoccupied with the increased criminalization of sex work…[and] successfully argues for reframing trafficking as an international migration and human rights issue…the term trafficking is used…primarily [to] connote women…who have been duped or forced into sex work…Consequently, the exploitative conditions under which a large percentage of Dubai’s migrant non-sex worker population labors is not considered seriously…[but] all sex workers…are considered to be trafficked…This has been reinforced by US influence on trafficking discourse, particularly, the US TIP Report…which…political and social actors in the UAE experience…as an instance of US imperialism and hegemony…
…sex workers cannot be easily characterised solely as victims or agents…Any attempt to ignore this reality and dictate that all sex workers are ‘victims’ translates into rescue operations, which go against sex workers’ wishes…women who can legally enter…domestic work often choose to enter…sex work for the relative autonomy and higher pay that it offers. They prefer sex work to the highly exploitative working conditions…they face as domestic workers…[furthermore, maltreated] domestic workers [may]…run away from their employers…[rendering] their immigration status illegal…many women [thus] enter sex work through legal migration channels…[US pressure drove] the UAE to step up law enforcement efforts…tighten borders…and dramatically [increase] surveillance of female migrant workers…anti-trafficking discourse…renders abuse in non-sex work sectors invisible, while ‘fetishizing victimisation’ in the sex industry…
Mahdavi characterizes “trafficking” hysteria as a “global moral panic” and states that officials need to stop obsessing about sex work and border crossing and instead improve migrant workers’ rights by improving work conditions. We need more researchers like her, and more organizations like Rights Work which are more concerned with facts and helping people than with promoting anti-sex agendas.
In Denial (Part Two) (August 16th, 2011)
I just love it when actresses clearly demonstrate that our professions haven’t diverged much: “…Justin Timberlake and Jessica Biel…got engaged over the holidays…’She wants a fidelity clause in the prenup giving her at least $500,000 if he [strays]’…[Timberlake]…is offering a cash settlement with no fidelity clause or alimony…”
Counterfeit Comfort (August 28th, 2011)
Control freaks won’t be satisfied until every conceivable behavior of “sex offenders” is criminalized; then they can get to work on expanding the list of registerable crimes to include everyone who isn’t a politician or cop:
A federal judge in…Louisiana has struck down a state law barring sex offenders from using Facebook and other social media…Chief Judge Brian Jackson ruled…that the law…imposed “a sweeping ban on many commonly read news and information websites”…The definition of “chat room” in the law is so broad…the court’s own website could fall under the ban, he said…
Unsurprisingly, a spokesman for Facebook said it supports the law, and the governor’s office opined that it was “necessary” to keep prostitutes, guys who relieved themselves in the wrong place while drunk and other “dangerous predators” from magically reaching through the internet to molest “innocent children.”
Neither Addiction nor Epidemic (December 4th, 2011)
Sex isn’t the only thing busybodies attack with ridiculous exaggerations and addiction rhetoric:
…Britain’s boozing has reached ‘scandalous’ proportions…UK prime minister David Cameron declared last week, referring to what he called the “rising tide” of irresponsible drinking across the country. But it’s not just loud yobbish drunks…it’s also the ‘hidden alcoholics’, the middle-class wine drinkers…As well as emphasising the ‘anti-social behaviour’ alcohol causes, the government and campaigners alike are quick to point to what the Observer…called “the intolerable burden being placed on the health services”. Even by overindulging on the vino by ourselves at home, we are apparently being irresponsible and causing a public nuisance – by potentially contributing to what David Cameron claims could be between £17 billion and £22 billion per year spent on “alcohol-related costs”…The precise way such figures are arrived at is questionable. It is certainly the case that the amount of revenue brought in through taxation on alcohol covers the NHS bill for alcohol-related issues, with a couple of billion pounds left to spare. And, strikingly, the increase in hype about a drinking ‘epidemic’ in Britain coincides with…a steady drop in the amount…drunk by people of all ages…
Just one teensy thing more; remember how some of you thought I was being alarmist when I pointed out that a government which provides health care will eventually make laws against consensual behaviors that tend to increase medical bills?
The More the Better (January 9th, 2012)
My heart lifts a little every time I see another article about how single mothers are increasingly turning to sex work to support their kids; here’s a long one entitled “The Family Prostitute” from LA Weekly. Think the prohibitionists will still be able to sell doom, degradation, “violence against women” and “no real choice” once most women at least have acquaintances who have been there, done that?
Scapegoats (January 26th, 2012)
Though Oklahoma is in the “Bible Belt”, even there the old religious rationalizations for bestiality laws are giving way to “abuse” rhetoric:
…[After a] Pittsburg County woman [traded a dog for two laptops]…she discovered videos depicting a man engaging in sex acts with a dog…[and] drove all the way back to Owasso to alert police about the former computer owner…she worried the dog she traded for the computers was in danger of being molested…[police said] the nineteen year-old Owasso woman [who previously owned the laptops] was being investigated for sodomy and crimes against nature, but once she was booked in jail, she was held on a felony complaint of…distributing obscene material…
The story also states that Lori Hall, the head of Tulsa’s SPCA, said animals can be victims of sexual abuse, “just like children”. Does anyone else wonder what the Owasso police were smoking? The video showed a man shagging a dog, but they arrested a woman instead? Did they suspect her of being a shapeshifter? And now she’s accused of “distributing obscene material”, i.e. giving someone a computer with porn on it. Don’t they have any actual crime in Oklahoma, or is this just the usual police preference for victimizing women rather than going after criminals who might shoot back?
Sex, Lies and Busybodies (January 27th, 2012)
Remember the claims that Aussie whores were spreading disease in mining towns?
Absolute total rubbish, was the response from Sexual Health Services specialist Dr Arun Menon to [newspaper claims]…that the rise in syphilis cases in the North West was due to dubious sex practices in illegitimate brothels in Mount Isa. “The problem isn’t with sex workers or brothels; it’s with young people aged 15 to 30…” Dr Menon said…Queensland Health’s senior director of Communicable Diseases, Dr Christine Selvey, also took exception to the article…”There have been NO cases of syphilis involving the sex trade industry, illegal or otherwise, or indeed the mining industry workforce,” she wrote.
The Course of a Disease (February 16th, 2012)
According to an article in the Jerusalem Post, a new poll shows that 59% of Israelis oppose the proposed client criminalization law, and only 34% claim to support it. But considering that proponents of the Swedish Model never care what sex workers, health experts or anyone else thinks, I hardly believe this will matter.
One Year Ago Today
“Crime Against Society” discusses activists’ efforts to defeat Louisiana’s vile “Crime Against Nature” law.
“The More the Better (January 9th, 2012)
“My heart lifts a little every time I see another article about how single mothers are increasingly turning to sex work to support their kids; here’s a long one entitled “The Family Prostitute” from LA Weekly. Think the prohibitionists will still be able to sell doom, degradation, “violence against women” and “no real choice” once most women at least have acquaintances who have been there, done that?”
I think the LA Weekly story is about two years old.
It is, but it only came to my attention this week. I’m afraid I don’t remember where I saw it…Twitter, perhaps?
@Maggie,
Please don’t tar and feather the concept of universal health care by blaming it for the fascist tendencies of the UK government.
The reason why they are trying to monitor private behaviors like this is because they want to eliminate very concept of universal health care by blaming the patient for his/her disease.
In short, this is NOT about “driving down costs”, it’s about eliminating social programs.
Frankly, libertarians should not attack social programs until they come up with better solutions. And so far, they haven’t, especially when it comes to health care.
Well, my solution would be to leave me alone and let me suffer the consequences of my own actions without social programs. That’s called liberty.
“Universal Health Care” is rubbish. It places too much power in the hands of government. Here’s the facts – health care isn’t free. If you need it – I, and others, are paying for it.
If I, and others are paying for your health care – then we sure ought to be able to limit your “risky” behaviors.
For instance, why should you pay the same taxes for health care that I do – when you live a safe life and I do things like ride motorcycles (too fast), scuba dive, and skydive (on occasion). And by the way – I’m also 50 years old and squat 400 lbs and deadlift 450 – at my age that’s risking serious back injury – shouldn’t I be told I can’t do that since the government is broke and everyone else is paying my health care.
It won’t work – and it don’t work anywhere it’s tried. Even Britain is talking about experimenting with “privatization” of health care.
Susan – look around – the Democracies of the west are broke – where does this money for universal health care come from? I’ll tell you where – it’ll come from reduced services and by government getting into your life to limit your risky behaviors.
Universal health care, nor any social program won’t work as long as a large percentage of the people are brain washing into the attitude of “Why should I pay for you?” That’s the attitude here in the USA and the conservatives have been trying to promote it in Britain since Thatcher.
Why? Because one day you too might be old and sick. Sometimes, we are affected by conditions beyond our control, no matter how hard working and smart you think you are. Because a society that isn’t dog eat dog is better than one that is. Human originally formed groups for mutual benefit. To survive. And that’s what a society is, on a large scale.
But Americans have been fooled into thinking mutual benefit is a scam. They think, making a small wage a year, that they can pay alone for any health care they might some day need. Not unless you’re the 1%, the people that attitude really benefits, and who are behind pushing you to think the way you do,
I can assure that isn’t my problem with it. My problems are A) I don’t want anyone else making personal decisions for me, as happened when I used to have “insurance” (I dropped it for exactly that reason); and B) the government isn’t good at anything not involving brute force. These “problems” didn’t develop until governments started interfering in medicine; if people were simply allowed to buy insurance for CATASTROPHIC events (i.e. real insurance rather than “managed care”) and pay for things like doctor visits and regular prescriptions themselves, and if malpractice were made a CRIMINAL offense where the burden of proof were on the complainant, you’d see a vast reduction in costs and the “crisis” would largely vanish.
I still think you’re being alarmist. What I saw here was an expose on yellow journalism, a setting straight of facts, and a government which, at most, was going to put on some annoying and possibly inaccurate telly ads.
All of which we’ve had here in the good ol’ US of A since long before even “Hillarycare” was being discussed, let alone “Obamacare” (or any real national health care reform). Britain still isn’t banning booze, cigarettes, or Big Macs, nor is France, or any other country with national health care.
WE banned booze back in the 1930s, and we didn’t have national health care. The two are unrelated, here and there, then and now.
Of course they’re related.
Track this out with me …
Is a smoker supposed to pay the same amount in taxes for universal healthcare that a non-smoker does?
Is an alcoholic supposed to pay the same amount of taxes for universal healthcare that a non-alcoholic does?
Look – when health care dollars are FINITE and in the control of ONE CENTRAL AUTHORITY (i.e. – the government) – then things like behavior start to matter. Smoking matters. Drinking (in any amount) – matters. Riding motorcycles – matters. Hell, it will even come down to how far you live from work because the farther away you live – the more chance you have of having an accident on the freeway.
This is how insurance has worked – and this is how it will work when government provides it. The only difference is – right now we can resort to the US courts to SUE insurance companies when they screw us. When the government is in charge – they ARE THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY – there’s no appeal.
And because some people can’t pay extra in health care taxes – the government will resort to BANNING what it deems to be “risky” behaviors. That’ s ALWAYS the government solution – make something illegal to solve a problem. So when someone points out that motorcyclists end up in too many accidents – voila! Motorcycling will be banned. And it’ll be the same for every risky activity out there – because once they start banning one – they won’t stop.
Just look at cigarettes – we really took those guys down in the 90’s – but I was saying back then – “Soda Companies are next” – and it’s happening. There are places where sodas are banned and there’s even a proposed tax on sodas – the benefits of course will be used to fund health care.
It’s already happening.
They WILL do this, they WILL do that, they WILL SURELY do this other thing…
But they don’t. From Canada to Britain to France to Norway to you-name-it, countries with universal health care DON’T ban booze, they DON’T ban hamburgers, they DON’T ban sodas, they DON’T ban cigarettes, they DON’T ban motorcycles, they DON’T tell you how far away from work you are allowed to live. You can go on until you are blue in the face (that isn’t banned either) about how it WILL happen, about how it MUST happen, about how INEVITABLE it all is. But the pure and shining FACT is that it hasn’t happened anywhere in the world.
Absolutely they do it. I travel to Europe all the time.
In Norway, the purchase of alcohol is restricted to certain days and times because of the perceived heath problems it produces. In Denmark – there are special taxes for “fat” foods. There is not a single one of the European Socialist nations with UHC that do not seek to influence human behavior through taxes and prohibitionist laws.
I mean – I spend at least three months out of every year in Europe or Japan – and I can tell you that everything costs more over there due their social programs, like Universal Health Care.
Sailor is right.
Besides, the idea is that with a national health care system, you spread the risks over a very large number of people.
There’s another, more important factor well beyond your control, and that’s genetics. You can live a pristine life, and still become very ill because the tendency is in your genes. There’s no help for that.
There’s No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.
I don’t know why we have to keep explaining this to Americans, it should be a self-evident truth. Universal Health Care is NOT free – someone pays for it. According to the American Tax Policy Center – 46% of Americans will pay NO federal INCOME tax on the money they earned in 2011. I suppose – that when Universal Health Care arrives, it means that these people will start paying more money into Medicare or some other National Health Insurance program – but this is ONLY a guess on my part because many seem to think that the “rich” can pay for their health care (which is fantasy).
But – someone will pay and …
Whoever is paying is going to scream like a stuck pig at the government about “risky behaviors” that cause national health care costs to increase for no good reason. To not believe that would happen is like not believing that there are a bunch of “busy bodies” already out there who have no other goal in life than attempt to control yours. Hand them National Health Care – and you’re giving them a legitimate billy club to beat you about the head with.
No thanks – seen this movie – didn’t like the ending.
Nothing is free – if you don’t pay for it with money – then you pay for it through voluntary enslavement to the government. You cannot trust any government – even a democratic one. People will argue, that “what’s the difference? Either the government pays for heath care or an insurance company!” The difference is – my insurance company has to answer to the government, and I can seek reparations through the US courts if my insurance screws me. When the U.S. Government is the supreme authority over health care – there will be NO APPEALS. Death Panels, which now reside with insurance companies – will be moved to the government where you will not be able to seek reparations when they screw you over.
Except that it hasn’t happened that way anywhere in the world. And you yourself now admit that in Norway you can buy all the fatty food you want. It costs a bit more, but you can buy it. I haven’t heard that the Norwegians are going broke trying to save up for hamburgers.
Maggie, I hope you are and stay healthy, because I like you and want the best for you, but also because unless you’re a lot richer than I think you are, you WILL NOT be able to just pay for it yourself if you get an expensive disease or injury. I’ve seen enough of my relatives go down that I know this.
Denmark, not Norway. Point is the same. BTW, in many communities in the US, you can’t buy booze on Sunday. We didn’t need UHC for that.
I do intend to eventually get insurance, as soon as I can find a reasonably-priced policy that pays only for catastrophes. How expensive would auto insurance be if it paid for gasoline, oil changes and spark plugs? Yet that’s what people want health “insurance” to do, which is insane.
Best of luck to you. I hope you find what you’re looking for, and enjoy good health until then and after that also.
Jumping Jesus on a trampoline, Coakley again?! Is there no depth to which she will not sink in her worship of law and prosecution? Let’s just be grateful she’s not a Senator.
At the risk of being called sexist, I must say I’ve noticed that female prosecutors are often far nastier than male ones. For male prosecutors its all a big, evil game, but some female prosecutors adopt law as a religion and seem to think it’s their sacred duty to “get” anyone accused of a crime.
They have to be nasty to prove that they aren’t “weak.” To prove they’re as tough as the guys, they have to be tougher. At the first sign of reasonable behavior or [shudder!] mercy, they will be denounced “tender-hearted dames” and their careers will die the Death (or at least so they fear).
And if they’re unlucky enough to have too many innocent people in their jurisdiction, well you can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs, now can you? Unfortunately, the eggs are people and the omelet is personal ambition.
Sexist!!!! 😉 In all seriousness, I think you may have a point. Mary Beth Buchanan comes to mind. And I noticed that about half of Balko’s “worst prosecutors” are female. But I wonder if the reason is that women feel they have to be even worse to prove themselves to a predominantly male law-enforcement establishment. It’s the same reason that some Democrats — notably the one currently in power — will crack down on crime harder and be worse on civil liberties. They are terrified of being labelled “soft” and thus overcompensate by going way too far.
Teach me to make a post before I finish reading the page. Yes, I agree with you.
Hi Maggie,
Here is more grist for the mill…
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/world/asia/13fat.html?_r=2&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all
Under a national law that came into effect two months ago, companies and local governments must now measure the waistlines of Japanese people between the ages of 40 and 74 as part of their annual checkups. That represents more than 56 million waistlines, or about 44 percent of the entire population.
Those exceeding government limits — 33.5 inches for men and 35.4 inches for women, which are identical to thresholds established in 2005 for Japan by the International Diabetes Federation as an easy guideline for identifying health risks — and having a weight-related ailment will be given dieting guidance if after three months they do not lose weight. If necessary, those people will be steered toward further re-education after six more months.
To reach its goals of shrinking the overweight population by 10 percent over the next four years and 25 percent over the next seven years, the government will impose financial penalties on companies and local governments that fail to meet specific targets. The country’s Ministry of Health argues that the campaign will keep the spread of diseases like diabetes and strokes in check.
I wonder what the response of the companies and the local governments will be vis a vis their employees and citizens when they are assessed these fines for not meeting the national government’s targets?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/jun/20/advertising.lifeandhealth
It was one of the iconic advertising slogans of its era, but modern consumers will not be urged to “go to work on an egg” after an advertising watchdog ruled that the ads do not encourage healthy eating.
The British Egg Information Service (BEIS) had planned to re-broadcast the famous series of television advertisements, which feature Tony Hancock extolling the virtues of an egg-centred breakfast, to mark the 50th anniversary of the start of the campaign.
But the Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre (BACC), which vets television advertisements before they are screened, said the campaign breached current Ofcom rules on promoting a varied diet.
A BACC spokesman said the issue was not whether a daily egg with your breakfast would be harmful; only that it should be served with fruit juice or toast.
Yep, cuz it be certain as anythin’ that ‘thout da gubmint tellin’ me dontcha do dat, I’d be ettin’ aigs all day long, ‘thout nuttin’ else wit ’em. [end rural Idaho accent]
Japan doesn’t have government-run healthcare. The have price limits. So again, the two are unrelated. Again, we manage to do all kinds of prohibition-leaning stuff here in the Land of the Free, without government-run health care.
The British thing is about public service ads, not about what you are or are not allowed to eat. There’s a difference.
Actually, America DOES have a single-payer health care system (like Canada). It’s called Medicare. We also have a socialized medicine system (like Britain). It’s called the Veterans’ Administration. I really feel sorry for all those soldiers, not allowed to ever drink beers, smoke cigarettes, or eat hamburgers. I mean, they’re a healthy bunch, but they have to live on health food all the time!
Japan employs a multi-payer system in which health care is funded by private and public contributions. However, much of the non-government funding is by defined contributions by employers and employees to regulated non-profit sickness funds. These contributions are compulsory and vary according to a person’s salary, and are effectively a form of hypothecated taxation.
This accords with my experience when I lived in Japan. As a gaijin I had to purchase a health insurance policy that would remain in effect during my stay – 15 months – there. They would not honor your visa without such a policy.
IIRC, the health care system was emplaced by MacArthur during the occupation and it evolved from there.
My brother’s wife is from Northern Honshu. Her father was a farmer and he was mandated to have insurance for himself and his family.
This same brother works in DC and at one time, his portfolio included the Veteran’s Administration including their hospital system. I don’t know if you recall the incident where they found unsanitary conditions in various VA hospitals back in 2003; it made headlines for about 2 weeks and then disappeared. I asked my brother about it. His response was that unsanitary conditions were the rule in the system rather than the exception. And that the best VA hospitals were those that had arranged reciprocating agreements with local hospitals; apparently the administrator for the Northwest was particularly good at these cooperative ventures. But he said that conditions overall were very bad; Congress knew about that but still would not budge on the budgeting and oversight needed to clean things up.
I had a memorable experience in the University hospital in Gifu City, Gifu Prefecture. This was in 1982. I had gone in for an exam because I had developed a hernia; this is a genetic defect that seems to have originated from my paternal grandfather who suffered a multitude of them in his lifetime, his first being in the 1920’s.
I waited for about 3 hours before I was ushered into an exam room where I waited another 1.5 hours. The doctor came in; I explained that I had a hernia and wanted to know what they recommended. The doctor took a blood sample by slicing my earlobe and drawing out the blood with a mouthtube. He came back about an hour later and gave me the good news. I didn’t have appendicitis.
I thanked him and reminded him that I had come for a diagnosis of a hernia. He reiterated his finding of “No Appendicitis” and ushered me out. I presented my insurance card at reception and there was no charge.
Now, at that point I was fluent in Japanese. This was not a question of mis-communication. And the word for hernia in Japanese is a borrow-word from English; it is he ru ni a.
I later went to an American endowed hospital in Kariya in Aichi Prefecture. The Japanese MD there was Harvard educated. He did a 5 minute consultation, verified the hernia and then told me that I should return to the United States. When I asked him why, he said, “Because here they will keep you on bed rest for 30 days after the surgery. In the US you’ll be out in 3 days.” Apparently the Japanese government regulated what kind of surgery could be performed and the new American techniques were not approved yet.
30 days of bed rest was the prescribed post-surgical care that my grandfather underwent in the 1920’s. By the 1940’s they tried to get the patient up and around as soon as it was feasible as they found that bed-rest contributed to muscle atrophy which either exacerbated the condition or led to future hernias. (I have a timeline on this because my grandfather had 17 major hernia operations in his lifetime, the last being in the late 1960’s) The Japanese medical system was 60 years behind the times.
Oh, but the Harvard MD wasn’t quite right. When I got back the US, they performed the surgery as an outpatient procedure.
That’s pretty wild. It’s at odds with everything I’ve heard about the medical experience in Japan. Now, I haven’t actually been to Japan like you have, much less gone to the doctor there. But your experience was utterly different than everything else I’ve heard. I know that experiences in the States vary from place to place. I don’t know about Japan. Did you just have bad luck that day?
Do you have any idea why they would mix up “hernia” and “appendicitis?” If it wasn’t a language barrier thing, then was the doctor just an idiot?
Yeah, I remember Walter Reed and the big stink about it. They were privatizing it. Less government and all that.
I only went to the doctor 3 times while in Japan; the two mentioned above and once for breaking my middle toe tripping over a threshold at the bathroom door.
I think that the problem might have been that I was a gaijin and thus, a priori couldn’t speak Japanese.
Now my sister-in-law used to compliment me on my pronunciation but my niece, who is bi-lingual, would just laugh when I spoke Japanese. (My niece wasn’t old enough to have garnered the polite face that most Japanese show to the world, so she was probably more honest in her evaluation.) It is possible that my Japanese accent was to blame. But I did write down, in katakana, what my complaint was, so it might just be the gaijin thing.
Funny story on the topic of accents.
Beginning in 7th grade, English is compulsory in the Japanese school system, so by the time you’ve graduated high school, a Japanese student would have 6 years of English instruction. Problem is, they don’t use native speakers so what you get is English vocabulary and grammar with Japanese pronunciation.
When I was in Ise (Mie Prefecture) I came across an American couple who were trying to get directions from a Japanese schoolgirl. The man was doing the typical thing of, IF THE NATIVES DON’T UNDERSTAND MY LANGUAGE I WILL REMEDY IT BY SHOUTING LOUDER routine.
They were looking for the Shinto Shrine and I gave them the directions.
As they were leaving the guy demanded, “Why don’t these people speak English!?”
I replied, “Well, ‘cuz you’re in Japan?”
As they walked away, the girl, (a 2nd year high schooler, by her uniform) looked at me plaintively and said, “But I was speaking English…”
I told her, “I know. He probably had trouble with your accent.”
If I ever get to go (I’d love to), it’s going to be their mangled school-learned English vs my even more mangled anime-learned Japanese. I’ll probably memorize a dozen phrases and carry a phrase book. Or, since they’ll probably be available as a free download soon, a cell-phone translating app.
@Lailah
The only “liberty” you have without decent health care is the liberty to die.
Perhaps health care is much cheaper out there in Outer Bumfuck where the town doctor will accept a shot of whiskey in exchange for mending a broken leg, but in Gotham a broken leg will cost you a year’s salary. No, that’s not a joke. We are fortunate to have retroactive Medicaid for such emergencies, but other large cities don’t have this policy. And before you start blaming Medicaid for exorbitant health care costs, perhaps you should take a look at the extortionist, for-profit medical supply industry instead.
@Krulac
If we have enough money to invade countries for a billion dollars a week and bail out banks for a trillion dollars, then we certainly have enough money to pay for everyone’s health-care.
If given a choice, Krulac, I’d rather pay for your lifestyle than give one more red cent to a bank or a war. It would be cheaper in the long run and your daughter would still have her father.
Concerning government control of medical insurance, I have Medicare because of kidney failure. It’s a good thing I have it because if I didn’t it would be impossible to pay all the enormous medical bills that I have. It’s a never ending stream of medical bills since the condition I have is chronic, it’s treatable but not curable. This condition was not due to lifestyle but due to genetics.
On the other hand though one of the drugs I take which is actually paid for by separate medical insurance I had from work is now being controlled by Medicare. There have been studies showing possible side-effects of taking that drug and now Medicare is putting severe limits on it’s usage. I’ve been taking it now for about 14 years without developing any side-effects. So now the doctors have to follow along with Medicare guidelines since most of their patients get payment for that drug from Medicare. Cutting back on this drug causes weakness and a lower quality of life. Even though I’m willing to assume the risks of taking it my doctor tends to just go along with what Medicare dictates.
So anyway although universal health care(which is what Medicare is after all) has it’s benefits the government involvement in health care can certainly cause problems.
If I had the choice between shit loads of booze or one of the cheapest health care systems in the world I would choose our NHS every damn time.
It’s not about “liberty” it’s about what WE as a people want, and this want is actually a bloody good one which is good for society as a whole.
@Dudes
And I’m saying that we shouldn’t have to choose between booze and healthcare. Why settle for a false choice?
“…officials need to stop obsessing about sex work and border crossing and instead improve migrant workers’ rights by improving work conditions.”
God, no. That’s never going to happen because then the corporate hogs, who are BANKROLLING their pet politician’s campaigns, would have to take their snouts out of the best swill, and start paying their exploited workers more money.
Which they are not going to do, because they are rich on the backs of the masses, and DONT GIVE A FUCK because they are “alright, thanks very much; be grateful you have a job, peasant”.
It’s all about money. It’s about the inequality of wealth, and the greedy ones (Politicos, Bankers, Lawyers, Cops) are, like turds, always rising to the top.
I don’t blame prostitutes for using their natural advantages for climbing out of the sweatshop these arseholes are perpetuating. Not for one cotton-picking minute.
You go, Girls. If i’m lucky, I might be able to afford your time, just once, without getting pinched by the Rozzers. X ❤