Print Search
Sort Posts:    
   05/03/2008, 18:57
Sprogster is not online. Last active: 27/11/2008 20:42:19 Sprogster

Top 500 Posts
Joined on 23/08/2004
Var & C.I.
Posts 359
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
Reply Quote

According to my sister and her husband who are both medical Doctors, broken bones are indeed life threatening, treated or otherwise. Apparently, the major risk arising from a broken bone are blood clots that break away and lead to a lung embolism during the healing process. Sadly, my wife's father died under exactly these circumstances some years ago.

Maybe this is information one would prefer not to know!

 


   Report 
   05/03/2008, 20:14
Logan is not online. Last active: 04/09/2008 09:19:27 Logan



Top 500 Posts
Joined on 23/08/2004
Posts 773
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
Reply Quote
 ErnieY wrote:

Absolutely none of the above was life threatning and I wouldn't even want to contemplate 30% of the cost of that lot Woot! [:-))]

Actually Ermie given thoses set of circumstances the CMU would be likely to pay the full cost. It is impossible to judge. However life is full of risk and I personally dislike contributing to something where I don't get value. I have a feeling that Mutuelles in France are simply a method of taxation by another name. Similar to tax habitation/foncieres for which I personally actually receive nothing in return. If you live in France you contribute to the social system. That I can accept. However as I seem to be contributing more and more with every year that passes to the health system I am questioning if the state simply plays on our fears to extract even more. Since doubtless the state gets some form of revenue from them

I have another example. My wife needed a crown recently and she obtained an estimate of 560 euros from the dentist. I contacted the Mutuelle and asked what they would contribute. Back came the answer after waiting weeks and a complicated formula with the pricely sum of 60 euros! I could go on with other similar stories.

Mutuelles are simply a poor deal.


Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.
(Horace).


   Report 
   05/03/2008, 20:32
ErnieY is not online. Last active: 01/12/2008 17:54:48 ErnieY



Top 25 Posts
Joined on 05/12/2006
W of Cahors (46)
Posts 4,156
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
Reply Quote

 Sprogster wrote:
broken bones are indeed life threatening, treated or otherwise
They of course mean can be not are, there is a distinction Cry Out [:'(]

I won't argue that virtually every operation carries a risk, my friends mother died of a blod clot the day after a simple routine varicose vein op, but with mutuelles being such a key part of the French system I simply don't accept that they can get routinely away with claiming every operation was life threatning per se Woot! [:-))]

Also, if this were happening the nett gain for Sarkozy and French health system from clamping down on them would far exceed that realised from kicking a relative mere handful of Brits out of CMU and I don't think he is one to miss a trick like that.

 


My doctor said one drink per day, I can live with that !
   Report 
   05/03/2008, 21:09
Caussenarde is not online. Last active: 10/11/2007 18:59:20 Caussenarde

Not Ranked
Joined on 10/11/2007
Posts 69
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
Reply Quote
Logan,

Are you saying that you have the financial resources to self insure yourself, and presumably conjoint, for 30% of the cost of the worst scenario?

Imagine for example, a very serious road accident. I leave you to estimate the cost of this, hospital, ambulance, post accident treatment, home visits.....

If you are sure you have the liquid funds to cover 30% of the total  then fine, you can choose to self-insure.

If you do not, then who exactly do you imagine is going to pay your costs?



   Report 
   05/03/2008, 21:13
Russethouse is not online. Last active: 30/09/2008 20:46:31 Russethouse



Top 10 Posts
Joined on 23/08/2004
Forum Moderator
Posts 10,144
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
Reply Quote
Logan,  I guess you have already researched that you have the best value mutuelle for your circumstances ?
www.quimperclub.org

99
   Report 
   06/03/2008, 8:58
Logan is not online. Last active: 04/09/2008 09:19:27 Logan



Top 500 Posts
Joined on 23/08/2004
Posts 773
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
Reply Quote

 Caussenarde wrote:
Logan,

Are you saying that you have the financial resources to self insure yourself, and presumably conjoint, for 30% of the cost of the worst scenario?

Imagine for example, a very serious road accident. I leave you to estimate the cost of this, hospital, ambulance, post accident treatment, home visits.....

If you are sure you have the liquid funds to cover 30% of the total  then fine, you can choose to self-insure.

If you do not, then who exactly do you imagine is going to pay your costs?


My point is the CMU in general pay for life threatening treatment in hospital. I have paid to be a part of CMU so I expect value in return. In the senario you describe I would expect the costs to be covered 100% by CMU. Not 100% of the tarif convention but the whole cost, apart from the daily forfait charge. I certainly do not expect anyone else to pay my costs. If I take a risk then it's my risk, period. I am suggesting here that the Mutuelles do not give value for money and you don't necessarily need to subcribe to one to live in France. There is another way.  For example a commercial insurer who will cover just hospital costs only which is far cheaper. However common sense tells me that apart from minor aliments anything that requires hospital treatment must be 'life threatening' in nature.


Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.
(Horace).


   Report 
   06/03/2008, 9:16
Russethouse is not online. Last active: 30/09/2008 20:46:31 Russethouse



Top 10 Posts
Joined on 23/08/2004
Forum Moderator
Posts 10,144
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
Reply Quote

Logan, I often agree with you but I'm afraid our common sense take on this matter, is at odds. I hope you do not find yourself, perhaps in poor health and feeling nothing like doing it, having to fight this point.

 


www.quimperclub.org

99
   Report 
   06/03/2008, 10:25
Caussenarde is not online. Last active: 10/11/2007 18:59:20 Caussenarde

Not Ranked
Joined on 10/11/2007
Posts 69
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
Reply Quote
Logan,

When you leave hospital (after life threatening event or not) you get a 'ticket', ie a bill, which you have to pay.

It represents the amount outstanding after deducting the proportion of the cost covered by CMU in your case, typically this is a bill for 20% of the cost of  the hospital treatment.

A person with no Mutuelle or money could  present this unpaid bill as a problem  to their CMU Caisse as a basis for their need for CMU complementaire.

But a person with sufficient resources, who has apparently declined to insure against this possibility (even a probability) should expect, I suggest, short shrift.

I'll leave you to it now, but you can see the situation for yourself at

 http://www.hopital.fr/hopital/vos_demarches/l_hospitalisation/les_frais_d_hospitalisation_et_remboursement

Bon courage, and don't get sick.

   Report 
   06/03/2008, 10:26
Ron Avery is not online. Last active: 02/12/2008 15:25:18 Ron Avery

Top 50 Posts
Joined on 29/11/2004
Aveyron 12
Posts 3,393
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
Reply Quote

As far as I can see the whole basis of Logan's arguement for dropping  the Mutuelle is totally flawed.

As far as I can find out there is no differential tarif of charges for medicines its 0.50€ per carton/bottle etc (perhaps Clare can confirm this) there is a differential tariff for other medical "actes" like blood tests and X rays.

The deductions are done in the same way as they deduct 1€ from your reimbursement for a visit to the doctor ie  CPAM deducts this from your next reimbursement for doctors, prescription items etc   It is different as you don't pay the charge at the chemist at the time, so there is no immediate charge, so its deducted later which is where perhaps the confusion has occurred.

"En pratique, que se passe-t-il à la pharmacie quand j'achète des médicaments ? Le pharmacien me fait-il payer plus cher la boîte ?
Non, vous payez le même prix que d'habitude.  Le montant de la franchise, 50 centimes, est déduit du remboursement effectué par l'Assurance Maladie pour la boîte de médicaments que vous avez achetée.
Par exemple, si vous achetez une boîte de médicaments 10 euros, et que ce médicament est remboursé à 65 %, l'Assurance Maladie vous remboursera 6 euros au final (6,50 € - 0,50 € de franchise).

However, is not getting 0.50c back for a box of pills grounds for dropping your mutuelle?    I have had a reimbursement from my Groupama Mutuelle for everything on a prescription at the chemists that was covered by the CMU, but there has always been are a number of medicines and other items like elastic bandages that are not reimbursable by CPAM and that list is ever growing, more were added in January2008.  So is it CPAM not reimbursing you or your mutuelle?  If the latter, change your Mutuelle.


Why not post a sensible answer, people will appreciate it more


   Report 
  Page 4 of 5 (45 items) < 1 2 3 4 5 >
France Forum » Living » Health » Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08

Powered by Community Server, by Telligent Systems

Please note that any unsolicited advertising will be removed