[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 101 (Friday, July 24, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H6420-H6421]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       EXPANSION OF MEDICAL AND PATIENT RIGHTS FOR ALL AMERICANS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, with all of the pandemonium 
that transpired just a few short minutes ago, I imagine that some of my 
colleagues might have gathered from the discourse that many of us do 
not come to the floor of the House with passion and concern and 
personal stories. And, so, I thought it was extremely important that we 
cleared the dust and put a face on the debate that we had today.
  Sadly, we lost that debate, those of us who care about the expansion 
of medical rights and patient rights for all Americans. This morning as 
I rose, I was determined not to share my personal story, for the people 
send us to this Congress to stand and to represent their interests, but 
I do think it is important for the people to realize that we are human, 
too.
  I have had a personal story and personal loss. For, recognizing that 
all of us care about our loved ones, I experienced the denial of 
service in the care of my father. So this is not a frivolous and 
baseless debate for me, but I thought it was more important to share 
with my colleagues the story of the Chiang family.

  This young couple, with a husband and wife, left a position and the 
father was the sole breadwinner, and the mother was determined to keep 
a certain HMO so that her son could continue to go to that same 
pediatrician. They kept that HMO, and the son had the pediatrician, but 
the mother became ill.
  She had constant pain in her stomach. She went to the HMO doctor, and 
continuously he said, ``We will put you on a certain diet.'' But the 
pain became so debilitating she went back again because she thought it 
was something that had to do with her ability to give birth again.
  She went back and further service was denied, until finally, some 
three months later, she was sent to a specialist and it was then 
determined that that mother, 34 years old, had colon cancer. And 
subsequent to that late determination, after the denial of service, 
that 34-year-old died.
  Today I read to my colleagues a letter from Lula Somers, a senior 
citizen who has been in the medical profession for many, many years 
from Pasadena, Texas, the community that I come from. She said, ``This 
letter is directed to you from a working senior citizen who has served 
a lifetime in the medical profession and who is deeply concerned about 
the direction we are heading. Dedicated healing physicians are having 
their once regarded highest standard of ethics and devotion be dictated 
to by people who have not the first clue of the onerous problem being 
cast upon innocent citizens.''
  She said she worked at a time when doctors saved a gravely ill child, 
sutured bleeding patients, sat at the bedside of someone dying, and 
maybe wound up with vegetables or eggs from someone's farm.
  We may not be able to go to that, my colleagues, but the Patients' 
Bill of Rights the Democrats and bipartisan Republicans were supporting 
realizes that we must stand with the physicians and the providers of 
health care like nurses and nurses assistants and the patients.
  The bill we pass today will hurt my State of Texas. It will probably 
hurt my colleagues'. Texas already has provisions for well-child care, 
mammography screening, minimum maternity care, breast reconstruction, 
diabetes supplies, alcohol abuse treatment, drug abuse treatment. The 
bill we pass today will overcome all of that, supercede that. Mental 
health care and bone mass measurement. All of that Texas had. Now with 
this Federal bill that the Republicans will pass, we do not have it.
  Just think for a moment if they have a heart attack and go straight 
to the nearest hospital but the hospital does not participate in their 
plan. The Republican bill will allow their plan to force them right out 
of the hospital. That is what we passed today.
  If their plan denied them an X-ray for a broken arm because the plan 
did not think the X-rays were medically necessary, they could not 
appeal on the basis of merit. They can only appeal on the basis of what 
the plan says is a necessary medical condition. It takes away that 
decision of the physician and their pain and the need for service and 
puts it in the hands of some accountant in an office far, far away.
  If they are a woman and they want direct access to their nurse 
midwife,

[[Page H6421]]

their plan does not have to give it to them. They can only require them 
to see a physician. So many women want nurse midwives and have found 
that to be a comfortable way to give birth.
  If they are terminally ill and their only hope is an approved 
clinical trial, the Republican bill would not allow it. So many of my 
constituents have said, ``I beg of you to allow me to participate in a 
clinical trial. I will go anywhere, do anything to save my life or that 
of my loved one.''
  If they are about to deliver their baby at a hospital and their 
health plan drops their doctor, the Republican bill allows their plan 
to make them get a new doctor at the very time that they are in need. 
And if they are scheduled for a cancer operation and their health plan 
drops their doctor, under the Republican plan they have to find a new 
doctor.
  My colleagues, what we did today was a travesty. I hope that we will 
be able to repair that and pass a bill, Mr. Speaker, that really 
responds to the life and the death of Mrs. Chiang.

                          ____________________