The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills • Hacker News Board

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#351

Post by isostatic » Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 12:39 AM UTC

purple-again wrote: post #174

occultist_throw wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, We've tried. It does little good. This last Saturday, there was a peaceful protest of around 200 people held in DC in front of Congress. One of my friends attended this protest. Around 150 of them were arrested, and then given bullshit charges, like crowding, obstructing, incommoding, or resisting arrest (of what charge were they being arrested for, angering Trump...).* When you try to "peacably protes…

We have rules in place that allow the population to peacefully protest without interfering with the business of others. These people didn't follow the rules and were punished accordingly just like every other law on the books. If you are unable to enact the change you want from within the system it's because not enough people agree with the change you are proposing. Welcome to the complexities of Society. If you don'…

Rules like the first amendment?

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#352

Post by liveoneggs » Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 12:51 AM UTC

coreyp_1 wrote: post #22

I am having problems with my insurer at this very moment. I went to an in-network hospital for an ER visit, which turned into an 8-day stay (yes, it was serious). Evidently, none of the doctors at the hospital are in-network, however, (claims from various technicians are still "in processing", so I don't know how they will turn out) despite the fact that the hospital itself is definitely in-network. I had no choice a…

this situation is illegal in new york. I know that doesn't help you.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#353

Post by liveoneggs » Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 12:57 AM UTC

occultist_throw wrote: post #26

rwmj wrote: post #4

Over here (in Europe) we get the impression that US has such a crazy healthcare system. Why aren't people marching in the streets? Is it not as crazy as it sounds for most users? If you're taken to ER how are you supposed to know if the doctors are all part of "your network" (whatever that even means)?

Unfortunately, We've tried. It does little good. This last Saturday, there was a peaceful protest of around 200 people held in DC in front of Congress. One of my friends attended this protest. Around 150 of them were arrested, and then given bullshit charges, like crowding, obstructing, incommoding, or resisting arrest (of what charge were they being arrested for, angering Trump...).* When you try to "peacably protes…

in europe a $50/year increase in public university tuition results in 500 burned police cars. In france you can legally kidnap your CEO as long as you feed him.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#354

Post by rb808 » Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 1:04 AM UTC

Paul-ish wrote: post #279

richthegeek wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately the NHS is, in many ways, pretty bad. They're pretty good at dealing with pregnancies, cancers, and emergencies but try getting seen for a chronic pain and you'll follow this rough timeline: - Try see your GP. Wait 2 weeks until your appointment. - GP will give a cursory examination and recommend a dietary change, taking ibuprofen/paracetamol, and to come back if problem persists. - Problem persists. Bo…

It is interesting that people go straight to single payer in their mental model when they think of changing the healthcare system. Germany has a multi payer system (although the government does provide a large % of the total funds) that seems to work for them. Why do so many in the US look to single payer systems as the ideal model?

Because all the other English speaking countries have single payer. They dont know what happens in Germany/Holland/Singapore etc.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#355

Post by dboreham » Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 1:08 AM UTC

mistermann wrote: post #105

ydt wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had this same thing happen. My daughter was admitted via ER and it turned into a 6 day stay. At the end we received a bill for 40k for being out of network. Luckily I have friends in the industry and it turns out if they fail to inform you within 48 hours that you're not in network you don't have to pay the out of network cost. We ended up paying just our deductible after a letter was drafted. Do not take what the…

Can someone knowledgeable on the subject comment on whether the "Obamacare movement" has been up front in acknowledging this aspect of the problem with health care in the US? My perception is that the problem is typically framed as a lack of insurance problem for financially challenged people, but the "abuse" on the billing side to me seems like at least as big of a problem. And if this is being conveniently ignored,…

Yes there were attempts made in the ACA to control costs (hence the first 'A'). However 1. the clock ran out on the bill drafting due to people voting for republicans in mid-terms and 2. Corruption.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#356

Post by todd8 » Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 1:19 AM UTC

I have learned, directly from people that would know, that even in affluent cities in the US one-third of the people having surgery do not have insurance and simply refuse to pay any of their hospital bills. In some cities, hospitals have virtually no paying patients.

This surprised me, but I suppose it makes sense that cost have to be born by those of us that have the means to do so.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#357

Post by dboreham » Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 1:20 AM UTC

0xbear wrote: post #300

ComradeTaco wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obamacare only reduced the growth of healthcare costs, it did not stop the growth. The approach that most democrats believe would reduce cost is single payer or Medicaid for all.

As far as I can tell by looking at my premiums, it actually significantly sped up the growth of costs. I don't know how anyone could argue otherwise with a straight face.

There are a couple of forces at work: 1. Medical folks charge more over time, for...reasons. 2. Previously insurance could be sold tailored to the customer's ability to pay; but that insurance didn't actually cover many useful things and had a low cap (hence was almost worthless). ACA disallowed that and made insurance industry offer policies that cover the stuff a regular person needs covered.

So you could have the impression that you had "cheap insurance" as long as you never need to have significant healthcare paid for.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#358

Post by tunetine » Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 1:22 AM UTC

dboreham wrote: post #355

mistermann wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone knowledgeable on the subject comment on whether the "Obamacare movement" has been up front in acknowledging this aspect of the problem with health care in the US? My perception is that the problem is typically framed as a lack of insurance problem for financially challenged people, but the "abuse" on the billing side to me seems like at least as big of a problem. And if this is being conveniently ignored,…

Yes there were attempts made in the ACA to control costs (hence the first 'A'). However 1. the clock ran out on the bill drafting due to people voting for republicans in mid-terms and 2. Corruption.

Were there attempts very early on because I remember them drafting a bill no one even had time to read. Republicans were going to vote anything down and it seemed like Dems waited out the clock so it would be forced in at the last second, either way.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#359

Post by CWuestefeld » Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 1:23 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #249

mistermann wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone knowledgeable on the subject comment on whether the "Obamacare movement" has been up front in acknowledging this aspect of the problem with health care in the US? My perception is that the problem is typically framed as a lack of insurance problem for financially challenged people, but the "abuse" on the billing side to me seems like at least as big of a problem. And if this is being conveniently ignored,…

The fact that the problems addressed by the Democratic health care bill are orthogonal to some other problem you care deeply about is not, logically, evidence that the Republicans and Democrats are "indistinguishable" when it comes to health care. The status quo ante of the ACA was a system in which millions of people were locked out of insurance by fiat due to pre-existing condition bans. For those people, all provi…

The kind of problem described in the OP doesn't seem orthogonal to ACA. It looks to me like the problem is part of the adjustments that the market has made in response to the regulation. One of the biggest tools used in differentiating between the various levels of ACA marketplace plans is the breadth of the network they allow access to: getting more providers to accept your plan will cost you additional money.

It only makes sense to at least postulate that the converse is true as well: if you find yourself stuck out-of-network, it's because these regulations created an environment where the insurance companies could do better by eliminating the providers it partners with. So it's reasonable, at a first approximation, to guess that this problem is the result of ACA.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#360

Post by dboreham » Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 1:23 AM UTC

albinofrenchy wrote: post #184

jazzyk wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The single-payer option was quickly dropped by the Democrats in Congress. Their sponsors (the health-"care" industry) did not like it.

It was dropped because it was politically impossible and it wasn't worth burning political capital on it. Even just the public option wasn't able to gain traction; single payer was never going to happen in 2009.

As I recall, the rough idea was to adopt a Republican plan (RomneyCare) in order to achieve bipartisan support (and "stake holder" support). And then it became the evil spawn of the Democrats...