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.
Yes this is actually another issue that is causing major problems in this country. We need a more efficient, affordable method for ensuring all Americans have equal access to appropriate health care. Unfortunately, given how influential the insurance lobbyists are, I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessame10
The hospitals 'write off' billions every year in uncompensated care that is given to these 'indigent' people. They make up for it by raising the prices for people who 'can' pay including the health insurance companies. This results in higher premiums - and is now a cause of the middle class not being able to afford health insurance and care.
For example, my DH had an arthritic flair up from an old sports injury last summer when we were on vacation.....he was in extreme pain and had no choice but to go to the ER (in a very rural hospital) to get a prescription for vicodin. The MD did nothing but write out a prescription for him for 10 vicodin and send him on his way. This visit cost $500! This was in a community where no doubt there is a high indigent and uninsured population, so it is nice to know we were able to help that hospital stay in business.....we were probably a small fraction of the pts who actually paid the bill (actually his ins paid some of it) or weren't on medicaid.
The hospitals 'write off' billions every year in uncompensated care that is given to these 'indigent' people. They make up for it by raising the prices for people who 'can' pay including the health insurance companies. This results in higher premiums - and is now a cause of the middle class not being able to afford health insurance and care.
For example, my DH had an arthritic flair up from an old sports injury last summer when we were on vacation.....he was in extreme pain and had no choice but to go to the ER (in a very rural hospital) to get a prescription for vicodin. The MD did nothing but write out a prescription for him for 10 vicodin and send him on his way. This visit cost $500! This was in a community where no doubt there is a high indigent and uninsured population, so it is nice to know we were able to help that hospital stay in business.....we were probably a small fraction of the pts who actually paid the bill (actually his ins paid some of it) or weren't on medicaid.
I didn't say this was a good thing or that I agreed with it. I was simply stating for the poster who was saying people can't get healthcare, that yes they can. And if they can't pay it will get written off. By no means do I agree with this. Just like I don't agree with welfare or the war. I was simply stating facts.
I think we all could agree on preventative care.....it is very cost effective to catch a health problem in it's infancy - before it get's worse
It is cost effective to do that, but it is expensive to subsidize a preventative care program because you are treating far more people than you do in a system that covers mainly reactive care. That's why most insurance companies don't cover much more than an annual check-up for preventative care. It is cost effective for individuals, but if it was more cost effective for the for-profit insurance companies they would have done it years ago.
It is not appropriate that people have to go to the ER to get care for a condition that started as a common cold, but they couldn't afford the Dr's visit initially. That is NOT appropriate care and unfortunately NOT an uncommon occurrence for many working Americans right now. This practice is not only becoming an economic blight on our country and our citizens beyond to ignore the ethical ramifications of this type of system is beyond unconscionable. Americans need to wake up and stop listening to the insurance lobbyists and special groups who try to scare us away from ensuring our own best interests.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sean98125
Who gets to decide what is appropriate? The doctors? The people paying the bills (insurance companies)? Government?
Actually we as taxpayers are absorbing the costs of ER care for illnesses that could've been treated with a simple Dr's visit. Unfortunately, it is becoming more & more common that working American's cannot afford to take these type of precautions so we are becoming the land of ER medicine treating major illnesses that could have been headed off much more efficiently. The current system just does not work for anyone but the insurance companies..
Quote:
Originally Posted by sean98125
It is cost effective to do that, but it is expensive to subsidize a preventative care program because you are treating far more people than you do in a system that covers mainly reactive care. That's why most insurance companies don't cover much more than an annual check-up for preventative care. It is cost effective for individuals, but if it was more cost effective for the for-profit insurance companies they would have done it years ago.
Actually we as taxpayers are absorbing the costs of ER care for illnesses that could've been treated with a simple Dr's visit. Unfortunately, it is becoming more & more common that working American's cannot afford to take these type of precautions so we are becoming the land of ER medicine treating major illnesses that could have been headed off much more efficiently. The current system just does not work for anyone but the insurance companies..
I agree that the current system doesn't work for anyone but the insurance companies.
The taxpayer "subsidy" of emergency room visits is based on the tax-write off of the for-profit hospitals that provide this charity care and on ED visits to the tax-supported general hospitals in certain areas. There are some people who go to the ER with Medicaid, but Medicaid's reimbursement rates are pathetically low. Folks with Medicare are the best at getting preventative care. Those tax supported hospitals also provide routine, preventative charity care to the indigent.
The non-profit hospital I work for provides more in charity care than the two largest tax-supported hospitals combined, and we don't get any kind of a tax write off (since we don't pay taxes) and we don't get any direct government reimbursement except through Medicare and Medicaid. None of the indigent ED care here is paid for by the taxpayers.
Who thinks that our next president (whoever it may be) will do something about this issue? Who is the best bet? Does anyone actually think the insurance co's are scared to death of hilary?
There's not a whole lot the president can do, frankly. If there is going to be a major change to how we pay for healthcare in this country it's going to have to go through Congress.
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.
