Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Emergency room patients can face steep bills even when treatment is declined

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 249 posts

Re: Emergency room patients can face steep bills even when treatment is declined

#171

Post by briandear »

Bjartr wrote: post #121
ajross wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> into thinking paying ~$450 / month per adult for basic health insurance with high deductibles is a bargain because it "saves" them from $100,000+ hospital bills in an emergency scenario It is, though. Insurance is expensive, but it's not a scam. That money tends to go mostly for care, overall. Someone has to pay it. It's true that on the whole, the US tends to overpay for care and that other systems tend to get sim…

Health care has a cost, sure. But you haven't explained why that cost is so much higher in the US if outcomes aren't proportionally better.

When an OB doc pays 6 figures a year in malpractice insurance — that’s why.

The party on the left who complain the loudest about health cost are incidentally heavily supported by the plaintiffs lawyers. Look at who opposed tort reform in Texas — it wasn’t Republicans, they are the ones that proposed it; it was plaintiff lawyers and the candidates they purchase.

Literally billions a year is paid in malpractice claims and punitive damages in the 7 figures is common. Who pays those awards? We do. Try suing the NHS. Or in the case of Alfie, try even having someone else willing to pay to leave the hospital — not happening.

There is also cross-subsidation as well. When an uninsured “undocumented” person visits the ER for a sore throat — that money is almost never collected, hence the $100 bed pan. When services are effectively shoplifted, everyone else covers the loss. For data on this, look at the finances of south Texas hospitals compared to a hospital in Wyoming. Or better yet, go work in a hospital billing department. Those that disagree with this have never worked in an ER.

Ironically, in Mexico, if you need an emergency surgery, you better have proof of funds or they will literally let you die in the waiting room.

Even the “beloved” NHS will deny care to non-citizens: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pregnant-bri...

But the US? Pregnant woman walks in to any US hospital, they’ll be treated regardless of ability to pay or citizenship — which is a good thing, but then we can’t be surprised when we get to pay for that when we visit the ER.

Re: Emergency room patients can face steep bills even when treatment is declined

#172

Post by brewdad »

Meekro wrote: post #113
toomanybeersies wrote: post #9

How can people read and hear about stories like this, and even possibly think it's OK or even normal? How do lawmakers in the USA convince people that this is acceptable? I have never directly paid a single cent for healthcare, and neither has anyone I know. When I had to get 6 stitches in my forehead at 2 AM on a Sunday morning, it cost me nothing. When my friend needed to get the tip of his finger reattached, it co…

I've never met anyone (of either party) who thinks that stories like this are acceptable. The issue, as always, is how do we fix it? Pointing to European democracies merely shows that it can be done, it doesn't necessarily offer a blueprint for how to make it happen in a country with very different size and culture. Bernie Sanders' "medicare for all" is the plan I've seen get the most support. If we got single payer…

We are on pace to run a $1 trillion deficit this year thanks to the Republican tax cuts. Simply rescinding the cuts and putting things back they way they were in 2017 gets us about 2/3 of the way to paying the cost of Medicare for all.

It can be done, we the people need to stand up and demand it while voting in leaders who will make it happen.

Re: Emergency room patients can face steep bills even when treatment is declined

#173

Post by esbranson »

For all the people railing against hospital corporations, please note:

1. Los Angeles County, of 10.1 million people, runs its own hospital system.

2. New York City, of 8.6 million people, runs its own hospital system.

3. Colorado, of 5.6 million people, runs its own hospital system.

Etc etc. (All of them quickly add up to the population of Canada.) They still do these horrible things we're talking about here, even though they're ultimately accountable to the people and must do what our laws says they must do.

And we think we're gonna suddenly be like Canada, like magic? If so, get the five people running the LA County hospitals to do so. (Yes, five people represent 10.1 million people, lol.) And the same goes for NYC and CO and the rest.

Re: Emergency room patients can face steep bills even when treatment is declined

#174

Post by refurb »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #124
OnMyPhone wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate it all, and would rather pay much more taxes if we had universal healthcare. That aside, I had a few different people give me the following reason why this is acceptable to them. "Why should we pay any of our hard earned money to the government so some drug addict can get their fix?" "Why should I pay for single mothers who made bad decisions?" It is almost always other people making poor decisions or getting…

A simple retort to that would be "Why should we pay any of our hard earned money to the government so it can send our children off to some fucking desert to fight in an unwinnable war that was started before they were even born?" 60% of the US budget is spent on the military. Reduce that to just 50 or 40% and suddenly, hundreds of billions would become available to spend on health care, education, infrastructure, etc…

60% of the US budget is spent on the military.

No, it's 16%.[1]

[1]https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-bud...

Re: Emergency room patients can face steep bills even when treatment is declined

#175

Post by assblaster »

justherefortart wrote: post #93

Just don't pay it. That's the solution. Hospitals have these bullshit inflated fees, once they accept the insurance payout that is all they're getting from me. They're all "non-profits" that scam the system by writing all this shit off as goodwill or bad debts.

The insurer only pays part of the bill because you entered into a contract with the insurer that specified that as such.

No insurer pays 100% of every medical bill, no matter what, with no expectation of copay or deductible. Even if you had that sweet deal, you would be paying premiums that nobody could afford.

Do you have a right to receive services from another human without appropriate payment?

Re: Emergency room patients can face steep bills even when treatment is declined

#176

Post by refurb »

ttul wrote: post #27
charlesdm wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will bring up one point. The wages medical practitioners make are generally higher in the US. So the cost of medical care is higher. I live in Belgium, mostly good and free healthcare (barring payment of a few euros here and there). I have 3 cousins who are (or are studying to become) doctors and while specialised doctors can make decent money (€75 -> 450k), they don't come anywhere close to what a US based doctor…

This is not the reason US healthcare is costly. Canadian doctors do very well - there isn't much incentive to work south of the border. The reason US healthcare is expensive is because you have multiple payors and a ridiculously complex web of rules for everyone to navigate.

Wages certainly are a contributing factor to the cost of US healthcare. Canadian physician salaries are high by any normal standard, but still much lower than US salaries, especially when you get into specialties.

Re: Emergency room patients can face steep bills even when treatment is declined

#178

Post by briandear »

HillaryBriss wrote: post #128
OnMyPhone wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate it all, and would rather pay much more taxes if we had universal healthcare. That aside, I had a few different people give me the following reason why this is acceptable to them. "Why should we pay any of our hard earned money to the government so some drug addict can get their fix?" "Why should I pay for single mothers who made bad decisions?" It is almost always other people making poor decisions or getting…

> They are however selfish as shit and don't care about anyone outside of their initial friends and family. evidently people in Canada, the UK, Japan, Sweden, Singapore and other places where there is a comprehensive, well-managed health care system are not "selfish as shit." so, we should probably ask: "why? why are people selfish as shit in America?"

It seems pretty selfish to expect others to pay for your costs.

Re: Emergency room patients can face steep bills even when treatment is declined

#179

Post by ceejayoz »

refurb wrote: post #174
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A simple retort to that would be "Why should we pay any of our hard earned money to the government so it can send our children off to some fucking desert to fight in an unwinnable war that was started before they were even born?" 60% of the US budget is spent on the military. Reduce that to just 50 or 40% and suddenly, hundreds of billions would become available to spend on health care, education, infrastructure, etc…

60% of the US budget is spent on the military. No, it's 16%.[1] [1] https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-bud...

53% of discretionary spending, though.

Re: Emergency room patients can face steep bills even when treatment is declined

#180

Post by assblaster »

sandworm101 wrote: post #100

I cannot get over how odd "in network" is for everyone outside the united states. For emergencies we all just go to the nearest hospital. They see us. They treat us. Or they stabilize us and discuss whether we should transfer to another hospital for better/faster treatment. There is no discussion of in or out of networks. Stories like this make me very happy that I no longer live in the US. The constant fear of a sur…

Insurers offer guaranteed patients to hospitals and doctors in exchange for reduced payment rates. In other words, they hospitals make their money off of volume. This is why there are networks of providers.

If you prefer, you can visit any hospital you want in the United States, as long as you pay for the medical care. Why should hospitals accept low insurance payment from insurers who do not give them a benefit of increased patient volume?

Post reply on HN