Caregivers Get What They Deserve

As of January 1, 2014 Caregivers are entitled to overtime pay. Any time worked beyond a 45 hour work week will be compensated for and they will receive time and half of their hourly wage. There are about 200,000 housekeepers and caregivers that work in California and the majority of the are immigrant women just trying to survive in the United States. Most of the people being cared for are the elderly and if their caregivers are not being taken care of financially the elderly will only get the quality of care that the caregivers are being paid to provide.

https://www.capradio.org/articles/2013/12/31/paid-caregivers-in-california-get-overtime-pay-in-2014/

 

Health Care Law Providing Relief and Frustration

Health Care Law Providing Relief and Frustration

Travis Dove for The New York Times

Kay and Mike Horrigan of Charlotte, N.C. He was in a high-risk insurance pool, and her policy was canceled under the law.

By JOHN SCHWARTZ and KATIE THOMAS

Published: December 6, 2013

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Mike Horrigan is a lifelong Democrat with heart problems who supports President Obama’s health care law because he expects it will help many people obtain better insurance, including himself.

But under the new law, the Affordable Care Act, Mr. Horrigan’s coverage by a state high-risk insurance program was eliminated, then replaced by a more expensive plan. His wife’s individual plan was canceled for being substandard, then suddenly renewed — also at a higher price.

So while Mr. Horrigan, 59, believes the law will improve health care in the long run, its short-term effect has been chaotic and trying for him and his wife, Kay. “It’s more stressful than it needed to be,” he said.

For a measure of the tumult that has accompanied the arrival of the federal health care overhaul, there may be no better place to look than in the politically mixed state of North Carolina, where both the anxiety and the promise of revamping the health insurance system has left hundreds of thousands of people struggling to sort out their options.

Many will end up with better coverage than they had, and may get help paying for it. Others will see their costs rise and are wondering if the change is worth it. And some, like the Horrigans, may find themselves falling into both camps.

The agitation has been building for months. This fall, insurers notified about 260,000 North Carolinians that their individual health plans no longer complied with the law’s more stringent requirements, and many learned that the plans they were being offered as replacements would cost hundreds of dollars more per month. Then, after Mr. Obama said on Nov. 14 that insurers would be allowed to renew their plans for one year, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina announced that 230,000 of its customers in the state could keep their own plans — but at prices that rose 16 percent to 24 percent.

Kathleen LaFleur, a broker who works with people who have individual plans at Employee Benefit Advisors, an insurance agency here, said many of the callers to her office had two things in common: confusion and anger. “They are confused before they call,” she said. “After they call, they’re not confused anymore. They’re angry.”

Travis Dove for The New York Times

Kathleen LaFleur, an insurance broker, said callers are initially confused, then angry. With help, she said, they calm down.

Adding to the confusion is the fact that many consumers have been unable to fully evaluate their options because the federal health care website, which serves residents of North Carolina and 35 other states, did not work very well until recently. Those who qualify for subsidies must sign up through the federal marketplace. Consumers have until Dec. 23 to sign up for coverage beginning in January.

“It has obviously been extremely frustrating for individual policyholders who have received cancellation notices at a time when there’s such a short window for them to decide what their coverage options will be,” said Wayne Goodwin, North Carolina’s insurance commissioner, an elected Democrat.

Still, for some, the new law is working well. Rachel Bryant, a small-business owner who lives just outside Winston-Salem, felt unlucky when she received a notice from Blue Cross saying that her plan was being canceled and that the replacement would raise her monthly bill to $675 from $408.

But when Ms. Bryant, a single mother of two young children who earns about $30,000 through her legal services business, finally succeeded after many tries to log onto the online marketplace, HealthCare.gov, she learned she was eligible for subsidies that would bring down her premiums to just $150 a month.

“I’m extremely happy,” said Ms. Bryant, 36. “I’m not going to go bankrupt because of medical bills. I’m looking forward to it, and I’ll put up with the frustration and the bother.”

About half of those buying individual insurance in the existing market will be eligible for a subsidy, according to a national study by the Kaiser Family Foundation. That does not include an additional one million people who buy individual insurance now but, under the provisions of the health law, will be eligible for Medicaid beginning in 2014, according to the study.

For others, like the Horrigans, the transition is proving uncomfortable.

Ms. Horrigan, 61, is a former psychiatric social worker; Mr. Horrigan is a former corporate human resources expert who started a consulting business in Charlotte after atrial fibrillation required two heart surgeries. Because of his heart problem, he was denied insurance and found coverage through North Carolina’s high-risk insurance pool.

So they understood, Mr. Horrigan said, why the Affordable Care Act was necessary. The new law was designed to fix flaws in the old market in which people with existing medical conditions, like Mr. Horrigan, could find themselves uninsurable and without limits on out-of-pocket costs — people for whom serious illness often meant financial ruin. Under the new law, such people cannot be turned away or be charged more by insurers, and subsidies are available to those whose incomes fall below a certain level.

“I was a poster child for why folks should have this opportunity,” Mr. Horrigan said.

Then realities set in. Because of the law, the state eliminated the high-risk pool that provided his coverage, for which he paid about $400 a month. Then Ms. Horrigan learned that her insurer, Blue Cross, was discontinuing her plan — which was deemed substandard under the new law — and replacing it with one that would cost $620 a month, up from $325, with a higher deductible as well.

Obama Recalls an Aide to Guide Health Care Law (December 7, 2013) Now, after Mr. Obama’s reversal, Blue Cross says it will extend her policy, though at a higher cost: She will get a one-year rate of $402, an increase of 23.6 percent, she said. After all the confusion, she will renew — and her husband has selected a midlevel plan through Blue Cross that will cost about $670 per month.

Calling the increases “unreasonable,” Ms. Horrigan acknowledged that they may be necessary to make the new system work.

“I appreciate the irony of complaining about my premiums being increased when it protects somebody like my husband,” she said. “I reluctantly say we will probably be better off even though it hits us hard in the pocket.”

Prices are rising for several reasons, including the law’s higher standards for coverage, and fees and taxes associated with it, said Barbara Morales Burke, vice president for health policy at Blue Cross in North Carolina. But she said the sticker shock some are feeling also has another cause: For years, insurers could charge people different prices based on factors like their health or gender. Now that the law prohibits such practices, some who benefited from the old system will be asked to pay more, while those who had been at a disadvantage will see some relief.

“This is a disruption to the marketplace,” she said, and estimated that about a third of Blue Cross’s individual insurance customers would see a significant increase in their rates.

Dr. David Naftolowitz, a psychiatrist in Durham, is among them. He was offered a replacement plan that would raise his monthly cost to $410 from $199. His deductible would rise to $5,500 from $5,000. He plans to extend his existing policies for a year, but said the extension was “like a teaser” that “takes the heat” off the president for the moment.

“You’re going to be hit a year from now,” he said.

Ms. LaFleur, the broker, said that once her clients have been through the process and make their choices, they tend to calm down. “They can exert some control, and that makes them feel better,” she said.

There is one silver lining in the tumult: Suzy K. Johnson, Ms. LaFleur’s boss, says she plans to expand. “I’m growing my team,” she said. “This is an opportunity — they need us more than ever.”

----------------------------------------------------THE END----------------------------------------------

The article related to the new health law, the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

The Affordable Care Act is the federal statute signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010.

 

The ACA includes many changes to insurance standards.

Many people will pay higher price for insurance than before.

Like Mr. Horrigan, his coverage by a state high-risk insurance program was eliminated, then replaced by a more expensive plan.

However for others, like Ms. Bryant, they will save a large money for their insurance.

For my opinion, I support the new law, because it will help real poor people to get out of their trouble. 

New California Law Allowing Children to Have More Than Two Legal Parents

On January 3rd, 2014 California passed a new law where children are able to have more than two legal parents. The purpose of this law is to allow judges to grant additional parental rights in they find that recognizing only two parents would be detrimental to the child. It will only be on rare circumstances, such as when a child sees a certain person as a parent figure and that person has the ability to take on the responsibilities and obligations of being the parent of that child. Many critics feel that the new law is going to create confusion and chaos in the lives of the children and in  many of the child custody cases. Under the new law the immigration status of the parent, legal guardian or relative will not be disqualified from receiving custody.

Comparison of China vs. California Marriage Law

http://www.usmarriagelaws.com/search/united_states/california/marriage_licenses/

“306. Except as provided in Section 307, a marriage shall be licensed, solemnized, and authenticated, and the authenticated marriage license shall be returned to the county recorder of the county where the marriage license was issued, as provided in this part. Noncompliance with this part by a nonparty to the marriage does not invalidate the marriage.
301.An unmarried male of the age of 18 years or older, and an unmarried female of the age of 18 years or older, and not otherwise disqualified, are capable of consenting to and consummating marriage.
302. (a) An unmarried male or female under the age of 18 years is capable of consenting to and consummating marriage upon obtaining a court order granting permission to the underage person or persons to marry.
(b) The court order and written consent of the parents of each underage person, or of one of the parents or the guardian of each underage person shall be filed with the clerk of the court, and a certified copy of the order shall be presented to the county clerk at the time the marriage license is issued.
310. Marriage is dissolved only by one of the following:
(a) The death of one of the parties.
(b) A judgment of dissolution of marriage.
(c)  A judgment of nullity of marriage. ”



There are a lot of differences between marriage laws in California and in China. I will compare the rules of two countries by three aspects as follows:
Marriage license:
Same: marriage shall be licensed and both parties must appear in person and bring valid picture identification to the County Clerk’s Office to apply for a marriage license in California. It is same as in China.
Difference: The blood test is strongly recommended to obtain the license in China.

Marriage age:
Same: The both of parties must be unmarried.
Different: In California , the minimum age of both is 18 years or order.
                 In China, the minimum age of male is 22 years or order, and the female is 20
                 years or order.

Marriage dissolved :
In China, except the death and a judgment will be canceled the marriage, the government has the right to decide to dissolve the marriage.

 Marriage for gender:
In China,   same sex marriages will be prohibited.

For my opinion, I support same sex marriages. Marriage should be built on the love and happiness. If their activities don`t hurt anybody, people have right to do anything. The two persons fall into love and then they can marry whatever they are same sex or not. Research even found that same-sex unions are happier than heterosexual marriages.

North Carolina Possible Ban on Same Sex Marriage

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/us/map-same-sex-marriage/

On Tuesday, May 8, the people of North Carolina will vote on an amendment to the state constitution that would effectively ban the state from recognizing any relationship other than a marriage between a man and a woman.  And while many other states already have such bans in place, North Carolina is the only state in the South to have staved off such a ban – for now.  The ban will appear on the ballot as Amendment 1 and has overreaching consequences, well beyond prohibiting marriage equality.  If passed, Amendment 1 would ban civil unions and strip domestic partnership benefits – including for opposite-sex couples, eliminate health care, prescription drug coverage and other benefits for public employees and children receiving domestic partner benefits, and even threaten protections for all unmarried couples in North Carolina.
Americans across the board favor equality and oppose discrimination.  In fact, 71 percent of Americans support allowing gay and lesbian couples to enter into legal agreements with each other that would give them many of the same rights as married couples.   Over the last few years, more and more Americans are opposing measures like Amendment 1 that discriminate against committed and loving gay and lesbian couples.  Since 2005 the average vote margin on state marriage bans has decreased by 16 percent.
I personally am not against same sex marriage. I believe that each individual should have a right to marry the person they love. Even though many may believe that it is against Bible principles; I believe that people have the right to believe otherwise. Same sex couples should have equal rights as those couples that consist of a man and women, including health care benefits for themselves and their partners and children. Each individual should have equal rights regardless of their sexual orientation. I believe that more people in our society should be pro same sex marriage.

Same Sex Marriages  
Did you know that the first lawsuit seeking legal recognition of a same-sex marriage was in 1971? I think most people believe this a new thing in the last 15 years or so. There has been attraction between same sex individuals for a very long time.  Let’s take Tchaikovsky for instance, he was known for his musical master pieces during the mid to late 1800’s. He lived a life of frustration and was an introvert because he struggled significantly with the fact that he was only attracted to men. He never married and died a lonely man because it was not something that was acceptable at that time. Now, it may not be acceptable today either, however our world today is much more open minded to the idea and act of it. Grant it, we have few states that actually legally permit same sex marriage and a few more states that will recognize it if performed in another state. It is a wide spread topic across the United States and seems that more states become accepting of it each year. In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court found key provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. This means married lesbian and gay couples living in states that allow same-sex marriage are entitled to the same federal benefits and protections extended to married heterosexual couples. Same-sex marriage is permitted by law in 17 states and the District of Columbia as of today.  Even so, this remains a highly controversial topic in the United States.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/13/politics/virginia-same-sex-marriage-unconstitutional/
http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/the-defense-of-marriage-act-and-the-call-for-a-constitutional.html

Coat of arms for Health & Science

“Happiness is spiritual, born of truth and love. It is unselfish; therefore it cannot exist alone, but requires all mankind to share it.” 
― Mary Baker Eddy

“To live and let live, without clamor for distinction or recognition; to wait on divine love; to write truth first on the tablet of one's own heart - this is the sanity and perfection of living, and my human ideal.” 
― Mary Baker Eddy