ip_law-hokie wrote:in this particular case they did a go fund me thing and have the cash, I was addressing Kong's the gov. should not be in the decision but as we all know who is paying matters and we deal with it daily on what insurance will or won't pay for, 99% of us don't have the funds to self fund tho. I agree it is an argument against single payer as the gov is then the payer (as it is now with vet care and medicare/medicaid) but was just pointing some issues this discussion brings up.
As i said, there is nothing easy or simple in health care
Ability to pay isn't considered by a hospital before doing a necessary procedure. The distinction is meaningless.
The family might have to choose whether they want to be indebted for the next 30yrs paying for grandpa to live two more months, but it is their choice. In the UK, there is no choice. When the cost to fix you exceeds your worth to the government (not your family) you're written off.[/quote]
Thats not true either, yes they have to provide emergency treatment but no they do not have to provide a surgery or specific procedure if there is no way to pay for it. It happens all the time though, this is nothing new. A person can sign a piece of paper to promise to pay and be driven into bankruptcy eventually though.[/quote]
The "driven to bankruptcy" is a great talking point for the left, but is seldom an actual occurrence. It is such a small, small fraction of a percentage of the populace. It should not be a dominant factor in making healthcare/insurance law in the US. We can't deconstruct an entire industry for the many just to help a few.[/quote]
I beleive medical bills are the leading factor in personal bankruptcy filings, that is what I have read in the past. A hospital or medical practice is the same as anyone else, they will pursue payment as far as they can, I don't blame them, they have bills to pay also[/quote]
Medical expenses are definitely the leading cause of personal bankruptcy. And I'm pretty sure that number is at least 500k or more per year.
It's also true that most of those people have medical insurance, so it comes from people who have severe conditions and/or surgeries that aren't covered by insurance. As you said, the insurance companies don't cover these extreme circumstances, so it's up to the family to decide how they want to handle it. In the Gard case, they have decided to try to save him, and the gov. won't let him. That's pretty appalling IMO.[/quote]
Not quite correct. Medical "issues", not expenses, are a major cause of bankruptcy fillings, but estimated by most to be less than half the total. And within medical issues, inability to pay because you just don't have the money is only about half. Another half is the inability to work and make money because of the medical issue. Most major medical bills are for significant events where coverage is exceeded. Hospitals/doctors don't want you to declare bankruptcy and will negotiate significant reductions and/or payment plans to get something vs. nothing if bankruptcy is declared.
I stand by my position that it is a minor factor and shouldn't drive the healthcare debate. It makes for great talking points, tugging at peoples heart strings, but it is minor.[/quote]
Minor until it is you.[/quote]
No, just minor. With 330 million people it cant be perfect for everyone. Such is life.