I just stumbled upon this article, which details an alleged Obamacare-induced horror story of a particular cancer patient. The particular claim of which I am skeptical is:
Within one hour of signing the bill into law, Jes was told that she could no longer receive her treatments “due to recent legislation.”
The implication, in the context of the entire article, is that as an immediate result of Obama signing the ACA, her regular cancer treatments were stopped.
I am skeptical of this for a number of reasons:
As the article itself goes to lengths to point out, very few people, including law makers, understood the entire contents of the ACA when they voted for it. So how would cancer-care providers have known so immediately that the new law would have allowed or required them to stop treatment?
Most, if not all, laws take effect at some future date, in part, precisely to allow time that those affected by the new law can be informed of the changes.
Note I realize there are at least three alternate explanations for the statements made in the article:
- There was some other legislation (perhaps even state legislation) which did take effect on or about March 23, 2010, which actually did affect the patient in the article, and the signing of ACA was coincidental.
- The patient's health providers were incredibly mis-informed, and denied her treatment without cause.
- The patient's health providers did actually understand ACA, and informed her that she would be denied treatment once the law took effect in the future.
I'm not interested in discussing these possibilities, since these, while technically within the bounds of the claim, are clearly not what the article intended to convey to the reader. Further, investigating whether any of these things occurred is quite a separate question, and answering it would require interviewing the patient and/or her health-care providers.