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

Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 202 posts

Re: Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

#11

Post by hotpotamus »

taeric wrote: post #7

That has included me, in the past. It is stupid easy to accidentally have a debt to a hospital. For families, sensible privacy rules at clinics can mean that it is very hard to choke point bills to a single person. To the point that I asked every time if I owed money when I did checkups to be told that we did not. Only to later find that my family did, in fact, have a bill due. For a while. Recently I'm getting it wi…

It all feels quite postmodern to me; like it's all made up as you go along. Try to ask how much something is going to cost in a medical context and they'll usually look at you like you're stupid (and I mean like a shoulder x-ray, not something that involves a team of people and maybe some unknowns when they cut you open). Well fine, but if you can't tell me how much something is going to cost, then I can't tell you if I'm able to pay it, so I guess we'll find out together.

Re: Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

#12

Post by taeric »

retrac wrote: post #10
taeric wrote: post #7

That has included me, in the past. It is stupid easy to accidentally have a debt to a hospital. For families, sensible privacy rules at clinics can mean that it is very hard to choke point bills to a single person. To the point that I asked every time if I owed money when I did checkups to be told that we did not. Only to later find that my family did, in fact, have a bill due. For a while. Recently I'm getting it wi…

I would point out that the attending surgeon, the anaesthesiologist, and the hospital all bill the patient separately here for a surgery, in Ontario, Canada. (Most people will never see these bills and it's covered by the public insurance.) The reason is that the service - the contract - is organized in that way. Between the patient and the anaesthesiologist, between the patient and the surgeon, and between the patie…

This doesn't endear me to the situation. :(

Re: Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

#13

Post by tptacek »

This is the only debt I have, because hospital payment systems are fucking impossible to navigate. Thankfully, the Biden administration is drafting plans to make it unlawful to report that debt to credit reporting agencies, so I anticipate soon giving even less of a shit about it than I do now. Figure it out with my insurer, or bill me at the time of service. I'm sure as shit not responding to an invoice.

Re: Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

#14

Post by Kon-Peki »

zepton wrote: post #4
Kon-Peki wrote: post #3

It's probably impossible to know the full extent of this, but some percentage of hospital debt comes from people that can fully afford their healthcare but are using the payment plans as no-interest loans while their money is invested elsewhere. The HSA accounts you get with the high-deductible plans allow you to park the money in self-directed IRA accounts for your entire life . In fact, tax law encourages you to do…

I don't think amounts that are on a payment plan would qualify as "bad debt" though - if someone is paying as agreed on a payment plan the debt isn't uncollectible.

Yes, very good point. However...

The linked report states:

> And as sudden operational cost pressures (including nursing shortages and higher wages) frustrate hospital financial leaders, an inability to collect all expected revenue further challenges razor-thin operating margins.

> This increase creates new challenges for providers to collect higher balances that are more difficult for patients to pay either prior to services or during the typical 120-day collection window after the insurance balance has been resolved.

I think they are being intentionally vague here. Are they saying they're having trouble collecting the money within the 120-day window (so their quarterly reports aren't screwed), or ever? I feel like they want you to believe that it is the latter, when in fact it is the former.

Re: Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

#15

Post by AlecSchueler »

retrac wrote: post #10
taeric wrote: post #7

That has included me, in the past. It is stupid easy to accidentally have a debt to a hospital. For families, sensible privacy rules at clinics can mean that it is very hard to choke point bills to a single person. To the point that I asked every time if I owed money when I did checkups to be told that we did not. Only to later find that my family did, in fact, have a bill due. For a while. Recently I'm getting it wi…

I would point out that the attending surgeon, the anaesthesiologist, and the hospital all bill the patient separately here for a surgery, in Ontario, Canada. (Most people will never see these bills and it's covered by the public insurance.) The reason is that the service - the contract - is organized in that way. Between the patient and the anaesthesiologist, between the patient and the surgeon, and between the patie…

But why is done that way? Lots of freelance chefs move between restaurants but the bill is always between the restaurant and the people who dine there.

Re: Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

#17

Post by plagiarist »

retrac wrote: post #10
taeric wrote: post #7

That has included me, in the past. It is stupid easy to accidentally have a debt to a hospital. For families, sensible privacy rules at clinics can mean that it is very hard to choke point bills to a single person. To the point that I asked every time if I owed money when I did checkups to be told that we did not. Only to later find that my family did, in fact, have a bill due. For a while. Recently I'm getting it wi…

I would point out that the attending surgeon, the anaesthesiologist, and the hospital all bill the patient separately here for a surgery, in Ontario, Canada. (Most people will never see these bills and it's covered by the public insurance.) The reason is that the service - the contract - is organized in that way. Between the patient and the anaesthesiologist, between the patient and the surgeon, and between the patie…

Not seeing these bills would be incredible. Having them all covered in the same way would be fantastic. Instead, for us, states need to enact surprise billing laws since each provider can mysteriously be out-of-network despite working within a hospital that is in-network. The in-network concept is complete bullshit to start with, but then you have to have complete documentation of every person involved in whatever care you are getting.

Re: Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

#18

Post by jimmygrapes »

retrac wrote: post #10
taeric wrote: post #7

That has included me, in the past. It is stupid easy to accidentally have a debt to a hospital. For families, sensible privacy rules at clinics can mean that it is very hard to choke point bills to a single person. To the point that I asked every time if I owed money when I did checkups to be told that we did not. Only to later find that my family did, in fact, have a bill due. For a while. Recently I'm getting it wi…

I would point out that the attending surgeon, the anaesthesiologist, and the hospital all bill the patient separately here for a surgery, in Ontario, Canada. (Most people will never see these bills and it's covered by the public insurance.) The reason is that the service - the contract - is organized in that way. Between the patient and the anaesthesiologist, between the patient and the surgeon, and between the patie…

Sounds like the way hair salons and strip clubs are run in the U.S.

Re: Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

#19

Post by beaeglebeached »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #15
retrac wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would point out that the attending surgeon, the anaesthesiologist, and the hospital all bill the patient separately here for a surgery, in Ontario, Canada. (Most people will never see these bills and it's covered by the public insurance.) The reason is that the service - the contract - is organized in that way. Between the patient and the anaesthesiologist, between the patient and the surgeon, and between the patie…

But why is done that way? Lots of freelance chefs move between restaurants but the bill is always between the restaurant and the people who dine there.

Server is better analogy. The wage you pay/owe the waiter is direct and (mostly) separate from meal, albeit informal with only shame as a deterrent for default.

Re: Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

#20

Post by John23832 »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #15
retrac wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would point out that the attending surgeon, the anaesthesiologist, and the hospital all bill the patient separately here for a surgery, in Ontario, Canada. (Most people will never see these bills and it's covered by the public insurance.) The reason is that the service - the contract - is organized in that way. Between the patient and the anaesthesiologist, between the patient and the surgeon, and between the patie…

But why is done that way? Lots of freelance chefs move between restaurants but the bill is always between the restaurant and the people who dine there.

Because the legalities of chef/restaurant malpractice are orders of magnitude less important than those of doctor/anesthesiologist/hospital.
Post reply on HN