Should all who want WLS be able to get it??

This one should get some good discussion going.  If a man or woman could benifit from the procedure and they follow the basic requirements such as psych. evaluation, lose the necessary pounds for the making the liver smaller, supervised diet for a few months...should all who want it, get it??  Are we willing to have all our taxes raised so others can have a better quality of life.  We know these procedures work...They are not unproven anymore.  So few get WLS who want it.  They come to this site...Find they can't qualify...Then move on.
Don't want this to be a Republican vs Democratic type of thing.  We know we all will have to pay for it in someway or another.  Then should PS be allowed too...and for whom?  Time for your soapboxes people!!  Brian 

Thought I would add this one to the mix...

What about the old..."Hey dude...eat less and exercise!!"  "You want me to pay for that cheeseburger and fries!!"

Great question!  We are going to "pay" one way or the other.  All the diseases which are complications of morbid obesity cost BIG bucks.  My husband, a diabetic, takes 2 medications a day.  One of those alone is $250 a month.  Thank goodness we have insurance.  The research is currently heavily suggesting wls may be a "cure" for Type 2 Diabetes.  I think having the surgery would not only make him healthier from the diabetes standpoint, but it also keeps him in the work force and a very productive member of society.  Obesity isn't about just get out there and exercising.  They discover more and more reasons why some of us seem programmed to be mo.  Not paying to make these people healthy seems discriminatory to me.  Nobody seems to question upwards of a million dollars to care for a premie weighing less than 1 pound although that baby may be damaged from such a low birth weight and have years of expensive care.  We pay for the terminally ill that choose to fight every day to stay alive long after it is obvious they will never be well.  MO can be healthy, happy and should not be discriminated against.  Incidentally, please no flaming.  I am not suggesting premies and people with terminal illness should not receive care!

No flaming here.  I get that you don't endorse withholding treatment from critically ill people.  I agree with you.  Our society has alot more compassion towards babies and terminally ill people than it does towards obese people.  Even from a strictly dollars and sense perspective, I think the long term costs on society would be lower if people could obtain WLS and regain more normal health.  That being said, I do believe that people shouldn't be approved lightly.  Meeting medical eligibility and being psychologically ready and willing to stay the course are important steps in the process.

Short answer, no.

The nanosecond my 57 year old mother became a kidney dialysis patient, her medical insurance turned Medicare...not that she and Dad could not afford the dialysis...they could...but it was the LAW that Medicare took over the medical needs of dialysis patients. Nope, I didn't/don't understand either. (She has been dead 11 years now)

I digress...It has not yet been proven that WLS truly costs the insurance company, the employer, or the government, more or less, in the long run for that patient. If long term studies conclude a financial or societal gain to keep a population (the obese) alive and healthier via WLS, then will the government intervene and DEMAND insurance approval or subsidize insurance compensation for WLS.

I don't look forward to it...then the $$$ incentive will leave for the bariatric surgery professionals. Surgeons will, as with all "socialized" medicine scenarios, no longer strive to identify themselves as experts, but instead just add  WLS to their mix of general surgery options. Mistakes will happen and we, the consumers/constituants, will just have to "make-do" with whomever/whatever we are assigned.

These days are coming forward. I have read of some states beginning legislation to demand insurance approval for WLS. I don't know which states or if legislation was passed to law.
My two cents...your mileage may vary.

No. 

I *do* genuinely feel bad for those who have truly done everything possible, exhausted their resources, are 100% committed to the lifestyle their surgery would dictate and then are denied. 

My reason for "no" is for a whole host of other people and reasons. 

anyone who meets NIH guidelines?  sure

anyone who "could benefit" ?  no, there are risks associated with this medical treatment.  Here is an extreme example to illustrate my point.  Giselle, a healthy, twig thin, fictional super model should not be able to get a VSG to help reduce her stomach volume and gherlin hormone and thereby benefit by more easily keeping her contract with Ford.   Though in reality, If Giselle has enough $$$ she probably could get a VSG, but in my opinion, she should not.  The risks just don't outweigh the benefits, in my opinion.  Giselle's opinion may differ.  I shouldn't be able to prevent Giselle from making her own decisions.  I most certainly am not going to willingly pay even a single nickel for Giselle's surgery.  Though, I might buy a copy of a "Shape" upon which she occupied the cover...hmmm

interesting question
d2k

edit typo

What's the differance. Our tax dollars goes to help out people in foreign countries every year in the form of Foriegn Aid. Alot of these countries are the same ones year after year and I don't see you objecting to that nor having your taxes raised. If it means a little increase in taxes to help someone less fortunate, then I would say yes.

Hmmm, a very good question.

First let me say that insurance wouldn't cover one iota of my initial RNY nor have they paid for any subsequent PS I've had.  I'm totally out of pocket and am supremely grateful that I could afford it.

One of the problems with WLS is that too many see it as a quick fix and focus is placed on how a person will "look" afterward.  We've all been there as it is only natural, but WLS is about health.  I think that more study must be done to say conclusively that WLS saves the insurance company money.  It all boils down to dollars and cents.

What bothers me at times are those individuals who fail to realize that they have commited to a lifestyle change that is not temporary, but rather permanent.  We see so many start to regain weight at a couple of years out because they thought the surgery would take care of all their problems.  This then skews the statistics as they regain weight because this surgery does nothing to fix the emotional aspects of obesity.  Frankly I would like to see more emphasis placed on these issues of our relationship to food as a part of a follow-up program.  It really must be a "whole person" approach to be completely successful.

Trisha
RNY 02/05/05 -164lbs
PS 4/13/08 TT anchor cut, BL, Auxilla removal
PS 11/20/07 Brachioplasty, lipo of thighs, revision of TT, mons lift
PS 07/15/08 MTL, UBL, lipo, revision of Brachioplasty, tt revision, outer thigh lift--I'm DONE!