Hiya Jan, I'm not an expert on this, and other Aussies feel free to correct me, but here goes...
Everyone in Australia (Australian residents anyway, I'm not sure of that criteria) is entitled to free medical care. Pretty basic hospital accommodation sometimes, but good care nevertheless. You do not get your choice of doctor or hospital, and with the current waiting lists for some services or surgeries, it could be a while - up to 2 years or more - before you are attended to surgery-wise. But there are no payment gaps, I believe the government pays for all.
So we have the option of taking out private insurance. This ensures you get your choice of surgeon and hospital, with significantly less waiting time for surgery. Specialists, that's another matter, there can be a significant waiting time, but they do ask up front if you have private cover, so I suspect they're screening time-wise. The private fund will only pay so much, the surgeons and hospitals all have a different idea of what is chargeable, and there are sometimes very sizeable gaps between what you pay and what you are reimbursed. You are supposed to be entitled to a private hospital room on the top cover, as I am, but I've never been able to score that either! You can be referred by your fund to a doctor and hospital with minimum gap, but I guess whether or not you wish that would depend on the situation.
This private cover can also cover optical, physio, dental, etc. CAN. Mine does not cover CPAP (surprise) and many other items. If it did, it would be a once in a blue moon benefit anyway (5 years I think). Went to the dentist last year, got back about 10% of the bill. Bought new glasses last month, over $700, and they gave me $45! Supposed to be a pair a year, but apparently they've changed that to 2 years (?). So you can pay a lot, and get very little back, as is my case. I'm intending to cut down to hospital only, no extras. I pay $121 a month, and get $45 back! Don't claim anything other than dental and glasses, so am pretty frustrated myself, to say the very least.
Grandmma, guess what ages are going to be rationed, according to this article? All those of retirement age.
For this very reason, I'm intending to retain hospital cover. It does cut down on waiting time. But once I retire (if ever), it could be a different story if I cannot afford to continue it. Don't intend to ever retire, but you never know what fate has in store....!
Said that over a given age, if you get Breast Cancer, no treatment will be given . . .
That's barbaric. Won't legalise euthanasia or the right to opt out of intense and pointless pain - not for humans anyway - and then decide that those with breast cancer won't be assisted. Don't want to start world war III here, but sounds like a contradiction to me! Do as I say, not do as I do? I don't think we've any evidence of that, but I do think that the elderly would wait longer for assistance, and many do die waiting, yes. Amounts to the same thing, but whether it's the system or the age of the patient, I'm not sure.
Having said all that, the squeakiest wheel definitely gets the oil. My elderly aunt is pushy, but a charmer. They love her. She wheedles and cajoles her way to the top specialists, surgeries, and hospitals, with little waiting time, and all on the public purse.
