Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,693,648 times
Reputation: 10256
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by britinspain
As if, there are millions and millions of Americans without any healthcare at all ,they will, treat you with excellent healthcare of course, then bankrupt you with the bill afterwards!
PFFFT, it’s my pet hate, America should be ashamed
62% is all bankruptcies are caused by the cost of healthcare.
Most of those lovely old people working in Lowe’s and Homedepot are working because they have to, to ensure they can pay any healthcare bill that’s coming their way.
I’ve been in emergency care and seen a woman crying on the phone because she couldn’t get the treatment she needed because of her $2000,00 deductible, after half hour I was getting my wallet out to pay at the same time her boss came through over the phone, it was awful.
I was there because I’d forgot tablets I take for hypertension, in Spain they cost around $4 for a months supply, in the US the racket deems you have to go to a Dr first for a prescription, they won’t take your Drs from home, no insurance, $200.00 to see one, they then charge for the prescription and the same tablets cost me $160.00 in the Walmart ?
I employ a lady now who is an American citizen and once had a miscarriage and needed to go to hospital afterwards to have her womb cleaned in Miami. She was in and out in hours but was given a bill for over $8000,00, she couldn’t afford it at the time and was hassled so much she was suffering mentally, luckily a mother’s charity group stepped in and paid the bill for her.
Don’t get me wrong, I love America and it’s now my second home but I wouldn’t live there where one sudden illness could take away everything I’ve worked for.
One nation under God , Never leave a man behind ! no it’s so selfish and short sighted, you all pay way too much in insurance and do it thinking your all right and sod those who can’t afford it, if it was set up properly you’d all pay a lot less and everyone would be covered.
Capitalism gone mad
US citizen reporting in. You are absolutely right. I've been paying off cancer surgery for 9 years.
Every time I see the posts calling people names or hear people mouthing off about people with medical bills, I cringe. They are too stupid or too selfish to realize that they are one catastrophic diagnosis from major medical debt, themselves.
As if, there are millions and millions of Americans without any healthcare at all ,they will, treat you with excellent healthcare of course, then bankrupt you with the bill afterwards!
Not always true.
Chances are that the treatment hospital will waive all or part of the debt owed. Especially municipal hospitals, sure Cedars-Sinai, or John's Hopkins probably isn't going to waive it, if you elected to use them (different story if you're sent by your physicians) but places like Seattle Swedish often do, or have financing options that require literally pennies on the dollar costs. The former owner of the bar, trading post and post office where I used to live got transferred to John's Hopkins for pulmonary issues, and paid squat, including transfers and medical flights from Fairbanks AK to Baltimore MD. Bills were impressive, but meaningless.
That's not to say everyone avoids paying the full bottom line, you have to explore your options after the event.
Chances are that the treatment hospital will waive all or part of the debt owed. Especially municipal hospitals, sure Cedars-Sinai, or John's Hopkins probably isn't going to waive it, if you elected to use them (different story if you're sent by your physicians) but places like Seattle Swedish often do, or have financing options that require literally pennies on the dollar costs. The former owner of the bar, trading post and post office where I used to live got transferred to John's Hopkins for pulmonary issues, and paid squat, including transfers and medical flights from Fairbanks AK to Baltimore MD. Bills were impressive, but meaningless.
That's not to say everyone avoids paying the full bottom line, you have to explore your options after the event.
You shouldn't have to explore options after the event, it isn't right to help someone in an medical emergency then bankrupt them afterwards,.
Your point being some don't have to pay the full amount doesn't help the debate that really should be going on in the US.
It's shameful and no dressing it up makes the system look ok.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,180 posts, read 13,461,836 times
Reputation: 19498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greysholic
The thing is I don't think the UK's healthcare is very good when you compare it to other developed countries. The US is like the lowest of the lowest bar, UK should be compared to the likes of France and Germany and the end result wouldn't be favourable to say the very least. The waiting at A&E and ambulance response are both very long.
In terms of accident and emergency, in recent years it has been reviewed and there are different types of casaulty centres and ambulance response.
In terms of very serious trauma, the UK has developed a network of Major Trauma Centres backed up by a fleet of ar ambulances.
In terms of accident and emergency, it usually has a triage system with less serious conditions) patients being encouraged to go to their local urgent treatment centres (a network of local walk in centres) designed to take the strain off the accident and emergecy system.
The family doctor (general practitioner) system is also a good system and allows most issues to be dealt with at a local level, with some practices having an impressive array of facilities.
In terms of ambulance times, they are graded according to priority and emergency ambulance responses are generally very good in the UK.
In terms of the median waiting times in Accident and Emergency despite an increasing population and an ageing population, the average median wait is 2 hours 38 minutes. It also should be noted that in recent years there have been flu virus outbreaks, which out extra pressure on the NHS during the busy winter period and also reduce available staff due to flu.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kings Fund
More detailed data1 on waiting times shows that in September 2013, the average (median) waiting time in A&E for all patients was 2 hours and 9 minutes, with 95 per cent of patients leaving A&E within 4 hours and 32 minutes. By September 2017, the median waiting time had increased to 2 hours 28 minutes, and 95 per cent of patients departed A&E within 7 hours of arrival.
In terms of most healthcare systems, they have their own problems and no system is perfect. However in terms of universal heathcare generally the higher the gdp spent on heathcare the better the resources and coverage for everyone.
You shouldn't have to explore options after the event, it isn't right to help someone in an medical emergency then bankrupt them afterwards,.
Your point being some don't have to pay the full amount doesn't help the debate that really should be going on in the US.
It's shameful and no dressing it up makes the system look ok.
Well if we want to discuss what shouldn't be we'll be here for the remaining time in the universe. At least you'd be around to explore options.
What I'm saying is, that the impression non-US Citizens have is that if you do not have the means to pay for treatment, you'll not receive treatment. That's false, critical life saving treatment by law cannot be withheld.
The system is what it is, all systems are. There are good points and bad points to all. The UK chooses one path, but here's a question, can the NHS diagnose and begin treatment for cancer in 5 days? It certainly does in the US, that is better treatment albeit for people with insurance coverage or cash. 5 days isn't going to seriously affect prognosis, 5 weeks, and it can. The US certainly has the best care available if you can afford it, there's no doubt (having prevailed of both the US insured health system, and NHS), however if you can't it can be limited, UK healthcare by comparison is limited, due to resource limitations. So which is better is strongly a matter of opinion.
That said creating imaginary issues either intentionally, or repeating a falsehood is dressing down the system, and it does not need that either. It's like US residents churning up annual NHS shortfalls (which surprisingly always are most strident at around the budget period).
Well if we want to discuss what shouldn't be we'll be here for the remaining time in the universe. At least you'd be around to explore options.
What I'm saying is, that the impression non-US Citizens have is that if you do not have the means to pay for treatment, you'll not receive treatment. That's false, critical life saving treatment by law cannot be withheld.
The system is what it is, all systems are. There are good points and bad points to all. The UK chooses one path, but here's a question, can the NHS diagnose and begin treatment for cancer in 5 days? It certainly does in the US, that is better treatment albeit for people with insurance coverage or cash. 5 days isn't going to seriously affect prognosis, 5 weeks, and it can. The US certainly has the best care available if you can afford it, there's no doubt (having prevailed of both the US insured health system, and NHS), however if you can't it can be limited, UK healthcare by comparison is limited, due to resource limitations. So which is better is strongly a matter of opinion.
That said creating imaginary issues either intentionally, or repeating a falsehood is dressing down the system, and it does not need that either. It's like US residents churning up annual NHS shortfalls (which surprisingly always are most strident at around the budget period).
Nobody's saying you don't get care in the US.
The US doesn't do very well at all according to the WHO though.
Like everywhere you get what you pay for, Mick Jagger this week will be paying for the best healthcare that money can buy.
If You are a millionaire or have the best health insurance then you'll have great healthcare, but the majority do not have this.
The majority of US citizens live in fear of getting ill and many even though insured would struggle financially to pay their deductible let alone the full cost of healthcare.
Mental health is also a BIG problem in the US very visible in most communities because there is, in most cases no care for these people at all.
The UK is struggling under the load for sure but it is still a better system for the vast majority of citizens.
Last edited by britinspain; 04-06-2019 at 09:48 AM..
Like everywhere you get what you pay for, Mick Jagger this week will be paying for the best healthcare that money can buy.
If You are a millionaire or have the best health insurance then you'll have great healthcare, but the majority do not have this.
The majority of US citizens live in fear of getting ill and many even though insured would struggle financially to pay their deductible let alone the full cost of healthcare.
Mental health is also a BIG problem in the US very visible in most communities because there is, in most cases no care for these people at all.
The UK is struggling under the load for sure but it is still a better system for the vast majority of citizens.
It's nice that you patronizingly tell the US citizen what US healthcare IS.
You know, some of us can only live there on sufferance, others are invited through outstanding achievement.
The thing is you're conflating quality with availability. Just because everyone has some healthcare doesn't make its quality higher than somewhere that some don't have healthcare. Sure it sucks to not have it, but ask a newly diagnosed cancer patient if they'd prefer 5 days before treatment can begin or 5 weeks, and you'll see a totally different perspective.
I don't know that ieither is a better system, because the WHO uses overall coverage as a metric, that's like determining the quality of your car by how many people own or have owned one. By that measure the highest quality car is a VW Beetle, which shows how it distorts perception.
Now sure socialized healthcare removes concern of costs, but introduces other concerns, like rationing, waiting, selective neglect. I mean waiting doesn't seem a biggie, until the waiting for a hip replacement results in a 4" necrotic full thickness pressure sore, because the patient can't stand for more than 5 minutes a day, to say nothing of the loss of fitness, cardiac issues that result from lack of aerobic activities, and depression at being stuck in a chair.
It's nice that you patronizingly tell the US citizen what US healthcare IS.
You know, some of us can only live there on sufferance, others are invited through outstanding achievement.
The thing is you're conflating quality with availability. Just because everyone has some healthcare doesn't make its quality higher than somewhere that some don't have healthcare. Sure it sucks to not have it, but ask a newly diagnosed cancer patient if they'd prefer 5 days before treatment can begin or 5 weeks, and you'll see a totally different perspective.
I don't know that ieither is a better system, because the WHO uses overall coverage as a metric, that's like determining the quality of your car by how many people own or have owned one. By that measure the highest quality car is a VW Beetle, which shows how it distorts perception.
Now sure socialized healthcare removes concern of costs, but introduces other concerns, like rationing, waiting, selective neglect. I mean waiting doesn't seem a biggie, until the waiting for a hip replacement results in a 4" necrotic full thickness pressure sore, because the patient can't stand for more than 5 minutes a day, to say nothing of the loss of fitness, cardiac issues that result from lack of aerobic activities, and depression at being stuck in a chair.
Just saying...
I’m not patronizing anyone, I’m calling out a broken system that stinks
I can’t believe you are happy to say this system works when it’s so obviously broken !
The majority of Americans would swap their healthcare for the UKs in a heartbeat.
And the US is no faster than most of Europe, someone posted earlier the UK wasn’t a great comparison
I’m currently in Spain and I’d put my money on it being equal to the very best of care in the US in terms of speed.
The original poster was asking about the UK which I agree is a little slower but you will be seen fast regardless in the first instance.
If you then can’t wait for follow ups due to pain or other reasons you can pay in the UK and it won’t be anywhere like the US prices.
Coincidentally you mention hip replacement, I was talking to an Irish friend earlier this afternoon from Dublin who had to wait 6 months for an op in ireland for his wife , she was in pain the way you described, they looked at their options, immediate operation in Lithuania ! €4000,00 , UK €10,000 in the end they nipped over the boarder to Belfast and she had the operation on the NHS in less than 4 weeks and ireland will be given the bill due to the EU reciprocal agreements.
Can you imagine the price of a hip replacement in the US !
I’ve just googled it, around $40,000, quick edit , someone else paid, $154,000 so it’s not so clear and I’ve read some deductibles are up to $10,000.
Last edited by britinspain; 04-06-2019 at 11:16 AM..
The healthcare situation here in the US is shameful. For the rich, the destitute, and those over age 65, it's ok. We have socialized medicine for people over age 65. They paid into it and they continue to pay, but at affordable prices.
For working age people, you better have a really good job. And you'd better not lose that job. Don't take a better job unless it comes with good healthcare. Don't try to be self employed either.
I had a good job but was still left with $10,000 to pay after surgery. Healthcare is the #1 cause of bankruptcy over here.
BTW, an ER does not take the place of being able to go to the dr. They will stabilize the person, then send them home to nothing.
It's nice that you patronizingly tell the US citizen what US healthcare IS.
You know, some of us can only live there on sufferance, others are invited through outstanding achievement.
The thing is you're conflating quality with availability. Just because everyone has some healthcare doesn't make its quality higher than somewhere that some don't have healthcare. Sure it sucks to not have it, but ask a newly diagnosed cancer patient if they'd prefer 5 days before treatment can begin or 5 weeks, and you'll see a totally different perspective.
I don't know that ieither is a better system, because the WHO uses overall coverage as a metric, that's like determining the quality of your car by how many people own or have owned one. By that measure the highest quality car is a VW Beetle, which shows how it distorts perception.
Now sure socialized healthcare removes concern of costs, but introduces other concerns, like rationing, waiting, selective neglect. I mean waiting doesn't seem a biggie, until the waiting for a hip replacement results in a 4" necrotic full thickness pressure sore, because the patient can't stand for more than 5 minutes a day, to say nothing of the loss of fitness, cardiac issues that result from lack of aerobic activities, and depression at being stuck in a chair.
Just saying...
If you are looking at comparing healthcare 'systems' rather than just healthcare coverage for a particular individual then surely access is a huge part of how well that system performs. At the extreme if a country has 1% of the population with access to the very best care in the world and 99% with no access to any healthcare whatsoever then that would be a completely lousy healthcare system regardless of how good the care for the 1% was.
The US obviously isn't in that extreme position, but the access problems are a big negative. That's why life expectancy in the US is below that in other developed countries and falling further behind despite spending much more than anywhere else in healthcare and undoubtedly having some of the best doctors and medical facilities in the world.
All systems ration care in one way or another, no system provides everything every patient could ever demand, the main difference is whether that is rationing by wait times, by clinical need, by ability to pay, by level of insurance coverage etc.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
