Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I took my 4 year old to the ER because he had a 103 fever. Alone, a fever under 104°F that isn't for an extended duration isn't something you should take an otherwise healthy four-year-old to the ER for. If you go to an ER for a non-emergency, you are definitely going to overpay for what you get, by an even wider margin than you usually overpay because of the need for those customers that pay to subsidize the costs…
Your answer is insane and shocking.
A 103°F fever (again, on its own) in your kid as a parent is scary, yes—I’ve been through it with two kids under four in the past week. It's not an emergency, though, and the ER isn't the right place to deal with it. Not only isn't it cost effective, but because the ER mandate is emergency stabilization which a kid in that condition doesn't need it's not plain effective (not even in most of the cases with that degree of fever where medical attention is called for: not only do you pay far more than you will for a primary care visit, you don't get the diagnostic attention you'd get from a proxy care visit.)