I'm starting this petition on the behalf of my son Allen A. Chambers who I no longer have with me due to insensitive hospital staff . My son went in for outpatient surgery at Sacred Heart Hospital to correct to his sleep apnea. After a successful surgery he was taken to triage to recover where he never woke up again. At the time of death I was notified that Allen came through the surgery fine but in triage the tube was pull out before he was able to catch his breath. After looking at the monitor they realized his breathing was off and tried to reinsert the tube but it was to late. All staff gathered and the surgeon gave his explanation , then followed by the anesthesiologist. I was informed that the problem lay with the triage staff. I was sent an anonymous letter by hospital staff informing me that the tube was pulled before he had time to catch his breath and the lady over that shift has done this several times before with no repercussions. I reside in North Carolina and I have tried numerous times to get an answer and my son's death's certificate that they will not release and no help is being offered. They closed my case and refused to give me any information about it. My son fought in the Army for twenty years, and he served his country well; it is heart breaking knowing that he lost his life at the hands of a cold hearted individual. It hurts me when I see my family and others out with their children and I have nothing but a memory. Allen deserves justice and I deserve an explanation. These senseless hospital murders have to stop!

Please be aware, under the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) it is health care policy to afford access to lifesaving treatment with provision of medical food to children and discriminate against prospective enrollees because of AGE for phenylketonuria (PKU), a liver enzyme deficiency or inborn error of amino acid metabolism (IEM) which requires a severely restricted, lifelong therapeutic diet. Failure to continuously treat PKU results in devastating clinical outcomes, even into adulthood – such as mental illness, psychological disorders and neurological deterioration that are otherwise preventable. It is the responsibility of the US federal government to assure EQUALITY in the provision of successful working conditions and BENEFITS for the recruitment and retainment of a world-class workforce, for all federal employees - including myself - who live with PKU and equally fulfill a critical role in the provision of safe, quality health care for the nation’s Veterans. Such inappropriate discriminatory health care policy compromises public health and safety for employees with IEM, fails to comply with the Affordable Care Act and many state mandates, and does not uphold key, quality measures that integrate scientific research with clinical practice as necessary to meet national patient safety goals and standards. America does not tolerate discrimination. Despite evidence from leading medical and scientific experts and governmental partners (NIH, FDA, academia, many medical specialty societies, and industrial leaders in nutritional therapy), individual constituent matters have been passed to bureaucrats who lack the experience and expertise in the clinical management of specialized, rare genetic disorders such as PKU. No action has been taken by policy makers to address the blatant discrimination, health care disparity and inequity under the existing FEHBP plan structure - as has been for years. I am calling on your executive authority to do whatever you can to intervene while the legislative branch has been stagnant and inadvertent – for decades – as evidenced by more than 35 years having passed since the original call for Medical Foods Equity. Because Congress has failed to pass any patient protections to resolve policy problems, these issues of the past have now evolved to 21st century obstacles to access medically essential treatment. This irresponsible governance leaves a minority population of federal employees unnecessarily and unjustifiably disenfranchised from the US health care system for which they contribute. This is not the American way, and goes against the principle, fundamental core values and freedoms of our American democracy for which this country was founded. Please heed the call and echoes from President Roosevelt’s 1941 Four Freedoms speech and remind Congress, “Since the beginning of our American history, we have been engaged in change - in a perpetual peaceful revolution – a revolution which goes on steadily, quietly adjusting itself to changing conditions.” The government needs to change and do more - Empower - Do Not Discriminate against essential health care workers who successfully serve an integral role in public health and as stewards of taxpayers’ dollars. Medical food saved my life and my children’s lives. Continuous provision necessitates the discriminatory policy be removed so the federal workforce’s most essential asset –the people - have equal opportunity to serve, and to live a lifetime with dignity, integrity, and respect. I refuse to be handicapped by the US federal government anymore.

I LOST MY DAUGHTER AND MY GRANDSONS DUE TO THE MENTAL HEATH LAW IN PLACE. PRIORITY NEEDS TO BE PUT IN PLACE. BEFORE A MENTALLY ILL PERSON COMMITS A CRIME .

Veterans that have served their country honorably should NOT have to pay a co-pay on prescription drugs. Especially veterans who are disabled and on a pension or social security disability. Isn't it hardship enough that the veteran is disabled?

My daughter's family has gone bankrupt due to medical expenses for their very ill child. This happened DESPITE having 'insurance'. They can barely afford decent food even though both are working. Extended family has helped out as much as they can. There is a very negative ripple effect when a crisis as described above happens: not only the immediate family is traumatized, but extended family and friends as well. Lives are put on hold, productivity goes down, depression sets in. It is in everyone's interest that we unconditionally take care of our young, if not out of noble intentions, then because the young will eventually be the ones who take care of us. HOW they take care of us may well be determined by how well we take care of them.

As a dental provider, I know that dental diseases are preventable. As a taxpayer, I don't want to pay for the creation of another dental provider to treat a preventable disease. Help the public understand that creating a midlevel provider, isn't the same as focusing on putting an end to dental diseases. We should be working to end dental diseases. Dental hygienists in schools, (with the goal of ending dental diseases for all children) in areas of LIMITED DENTAL ACCESS could happen now! Research is available that this type of intervention (done in 1979) ended dental diseases as we know them in schools, in Sweden. BMC Oral Health Proceedings Open Access The Effect of a Needs-Related Caries Preventive Program in Children and Young Adults – Results after 20 Years P Axelsson* Address: Department of Preventive Dentistry, Public Dental Health Service, Karlstad, Sweden Email: P Axelsson* - [email protected] * Corresponding author Abstract The risk for caries development in children varies significantly for different age groups, individuals, teeth, and surfaces. Thus from a cost-effectiveness point of view, caries preventive measures must be integrated and based on predicted risk from age group down to individual tooth surfaces. Based on this philosophy and experiences from continuously ongoing research on evaluating and reevaluating separate and integrated caries preventive measures, as well as methods for prediction of caries risk, a needs-related caries preventive program was introduced for all 0–19-year-olds in the county of Värmland, Sweden, in 1979. The goals for the subjects following the program from birth to the age of 19 years were: 1. To have no approximal restorations. 2. To have no occlusal amalgam restorations. 3. To have no approximal loss of periodontal attachment. 4. To motivate and encourage individuals to assume responsibility for their own oral health. The effect of the program is evaluated once every year on almost 100% of all 3–19-year-olds in a computer-aided epidemiologic program from 1979. Most of the individualized preventive program was carried out by dental hygienists or prophy dental assistants at clinics in the elementary schools. During the 20-year period the percentage of caries-free 3-year-olds increased from 51% to 97%. In 1999 as many as 86% of the 12-year-olds were caries free. Caries incidence was reduced more than 90% in all age groups. More than 90% did not develop any new caries lesions in 1999. As a consequence, caries prevalence was dramatically reduced. In 12- and 19-year-olds, the mean number of Decayed and Filled Surfaces (DFS) per individual was reduced from 6 to 0.3 and from 23 to 2 respectively. In 19-year-olds the mean number of approximal DFS was <1, and only 0.5 had to be filled. The mean number of occlusal DFS was <1. Since 1995 we have not been allowed to use amalgam in 1–19-year-olds in Sweden. As an effect of our high quality plaque program, approximal attachment loss was prevented, and by efficient education in self-care based on selfdiagnosis, needs-related self-care habits were established. Thus it can be concluded that nearly 100% of our goals had been achieved. from Biotechnology and Biomaterials to Reduce the Caries Epidemic Seattle, USA. 13–15 June 2005 Published: 10 July 2006 BMC Oral Health 2006, 6(Suppl 1):S7 doi:10.1186/1472-6831-6-S1-S7 <p>Biotechnology and Biomaterials to Reduce the Caries Epidemic</p> Rebecca L Slayton, James D Bryers, Peter Milgrom Proceedings http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1472-6831-6-S1-info.pdf © 2006 Axelsson; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Let's work to end dental diseases in Washington State NOW!

My brother Bob is one of 52,000 Rhode Islanders who suffers from Serious Mental Illness. I've witnessed him struggle with schizophrenia since he was a teenager - and I’ve seen how much healthier and happier he is because of the services he receives from his community mental health center. Due to recent State budget cuts, 1,000 people with Serious Mental Illness have been stripped of their case managers. Case managers ensure their clients receive the medications, housing, clothing, and food that they require to thrive. Without such fundamental rights being met, those who are in the greatest of need, such as my brother, will suffer unnecessarily. We are obligated to help people with mental illness stay on their path towards wellness. I, and each person that signs this petition, believe people with mental illness should be provided every possible resource to become - and remain - healthy. We understand what could happen when these individuals lose their support systems. And we are deeply concerned about how this will negatively impact our community as a whole. Due to the recent loss of CNOM (Costs Not Otherwise Matchable) funding, 1,000 Rhode Islanders with Serious Mental Illness will no longer have access to their case managers. This will inevitably lead to increased rates of depression and anxiety, hospitalizations, and incarcerations. By signing this petition, I am calling upon Governor Chafee and Rhode Island State Legislators to find a way to reinstate CNOM funding so we can help people with Serious Mental Illness continue to get the support they deserve.

Because tens of millions of lives and our economy depend upon it.

Despite warnings from the Health Policy Commission and leading health care experts that the merger of Partners HealthCare and South Shore Hospital – as well as Partners’ acquisition of Hallmark Health System – will drive up Massachusetts’ health care costs and hurt competition, Attorney General Martha Coakley approved the deal. Her decision to allow this merger is a disservice to the interests of patients, families, communities, and businesses throughout our state. It permits expansion of Partners’ market dominance in return for timid and unenforceable conditions of conduct. Furthermore, this deal is the product of secret, closed-door negotiations – a process bound to injure the public’s trust. The lack of an open dialogue involving the people of Massachusetts has denied residents, other health care providers, and employers the chance to voice legitimate and serious objections to this expansion of Partners’ market power. This is a time when rising health care cost is the most important single obstacle to the ability of businesses in our state to grow and hire workers. In addition, millions of individuals and families across Massachusetts struggle under the cost of care and worry about their continuing access to the providers of their choice. At bottom, the people of Massachusetts simply cannot afford this deal. It will harm the Massachusetts health care system for a decade. We urge Judge Sanders to reverse Attorney General Coakley’s unwise and imprudent decision. It will cause permanent and irreparable harm to the Massachusetts health care system.

I'm outraged by how "religion" is being used to undermine women's rights and how women constantly have to defend their rights. Religion is being used as the excuse to undermine women's rights, when it really comes down to men trying to control women. It's NOT okay for men to be provided male enhancing products (which are entirely recreational) through health insurance plans, but women are now being denied access to contraception (not recreational at all) - which is far more important than a man's hard-on! Take a man's ability to purchase male-enhancing drugs through health insurance away, and let's see how quickly the male judges on the supreme court give us back our right to contraception through these same plans. It's time we women began fighting back instead of just defending our rights. Give us our contraception back through health plans, and we'll let you keep your Viagra on your health plans!

Oregon’s health insurers must get permission from state officials before they can raise premiums on individuals and small businesses. For several years, OSPIRG Foundation has put a magnifying glass to premium hike proposals, and thousands of OSPIRG members have emailed and called the state’s Insurance Division. All this additional scrutiny has helped cut over $155 million in waste from health insurance premiums since 2010. Now, we've dug into the latest rate hike proposals from four of Oregon’s top insurers. None of them has done enough to justify the prices they’ve proposed. • Moda is proposing a 12.5% rate hike on over 95,000 Oregonians, without outlining a plan for passing along cost savings from health reform to their members. • PacificSource, which initially proposed a 15.9% increase, has already admitted that their proposal was based on errors that would have overcharged their customers. They revealed the mistake only after it became clear that the original proposal was more expensive than many other health plans – such as Providence, which is proposing a 16% decrease in premiums for identical coverage. • Health Net and United are paying more for emergency room visits than many other insurers, yet they are both proposing big rate increases without demonstrating that they are doing all they can to reduce these costs and keep their members out of the ER. With study after study showing that one-third of health care spending is waste, we can’t afford anything but a full-court press for more effective use of our health care dollars.

In less than two months, the prices for all Colorado health insurance plans for 2015 will be set in stone. Without proper scrutiny, prices could unfairly go up. Here’s the story: At the end of June, health insurance companies released their proposals for what their plans will cost Coloradans for next year. While some are proposing to charge less, some are proposing increases as high as 25%. It’s up to the Colorado Division of Insurance to review the insurance companies' proposals and ensure they are doing everything they can to cut waste before jacking up rates. These plans are complicated and with only two months to review them, we need to encourage the Colorado Division of Insurance to take out their magnifying glasses and dig deep. Tell the Colorado Division of Insurance: Stop any unjustifiable health insurance rates.