How could healthcare be this inflated?

[angela in ohio]

Most of the damage was done by the governement many, many decades ago. When you add lawsuits and advances in care, you end up with a mess. I don't even know how you would fix it. :confused:

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I don't know, but it is frustrating. :( My son saw his pediatrician for something a couple of months ago. She told us that due to his symptoms he needed to be seen in the emergency room right away. We went there and they did lots of tests including an MRI. They found nothing wrong. The bill was $25,000. They knocked off a lot before our insurance paid, but now we are fighting with our insurance company about $2000 of it. They believe that we went to the ER for a non-ER problem and want us to pay co-insurance. Our insurance covers ER visits completely except for a $50 copay. I'm mind-boggled.

 

You can and should appeal it. I did in a similar scenario and won the appeal. Your doctor should be able to write a letter documenting the necessity for the ER visit.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Yes. Yes, she would. Children, adults and the elderly die every day because they cannot afford treatment. Some women on this board are facing this. It sickens me.

 

so sorry your family is walking this path. :grouphug::grouphug:

 

astrid

 

:iagree: My mom was told she could not have her chemotherapy or radiation if she could not pay her bill. Chemo and radiation are not seen as emergency treatments as well as a multitude of other procedures and meds:(

 

So if you cannot afford the treatment or the meds in many cases you could very well die:(

 

Reason one million and one for medicare for everyone regardless of age.

[LMA]

:iagree: My mom was told she could not have her chemotherapy or radiation if she could not pay her bill. Chemo and radiation are not seen as emergency treatments as well as a multitude of other procedures and meds:(

 

So if you cannot afford the treatment or the meds in many cases you could very well die:(

 

Reason one million and one for medicare for everyone regardless of age.

 

Medicare is limited. Most seniors have to pay monthly for a Medicare gap plan and for a prescription drug plan which has a "donut hole" after you hit a certain amount. I know from dealing with a relative's medical bills, cancer treatments and drugs and many other things are limited under Medicare. If the relative was sick, the doctor refused to see her and told us we had to go to the ER. At the ER, all tests were based on what Medicare would pay for. The relative was told she needed a seat on the toilet and a handheld shower after an operation. However, the only seat that Medicare pays for is the free-standing toilet seat which she was not capable of emptying or cleaning. Medicare would not pay for the higher seat that sits on the toilet and the cost of the handheld shower to Medicare was 4 times the cost of one at Home Depot. The cost of Medicare is extremely high even with all workers paying into it. There is a huge amount of lawsuits in the medical industry and that is what is driving the costs up. There is a shortage of obstetricians in several states because of the lawsuits. Any time someone is hurt/killed in a medical procedure, there is at least an insurance payout if not a lawsuit. I could go on and on but there are many factors into why we have high costs.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Malpractice suits are a factor in healthcare costs, but are not quite the bugbear they are made out to be by some. The last numbers I reviewed (granted, this was 6-7 years ago) showed that malpractice insurance and claim costs accounted for 2% of healthcare costs in the United States. Off the cuff, I would suspect insurance company profits and administrative costs make up a much larger share.

[creekland]

The bolded is the key phrase. It is not insurance. They have no real obligation to pay for you. They have experienced shortfalls. Patients do not have their entire bill paid. This is a complete gamble with your money. At least insurance companies are regulated.

 

There can be shortfalls where the whole bill is not covered, but I've never seen a shortfall of less than 80% - the same amount (80%) that was COVERED by our insurance when we had it. With insurance, we were automatically responsible for 20% of the total - after a $1000 deductible. And with Samaritan's, when there are shortfalls, many members opt to cover the difference, but it's not mandatory (and shouldn't be counted on). Never once did our insurance company offer to cover any part of the 20% we had to pay.

 

It is good to know the pros and cons. The definite con to insurance (for us) was the exhorbitant cost.

[MyLittleBears]

Most of the damage was done by the governement many, many decades ago. When you add lawsuits and advances in care, you end up with a mess. I don't even know how you would fix it. :confused:

 

This is true. It is also on a very large part due to non-payers, mostly undocumented workers that cannot get medicaid. Prices are raised for the payers with insurance, due to a lot of free care that is given by the hospitals to people who come in without insurance. Mainly this happens through the ER since it is a government madate not turn anyone away, even if it is a non-life threating illness or someone coming in with a common cold. Many states also madate that everyone who calls an ambulance must go to the hospital, whether it is what the call a "nonesense call", or not. A LOT of people call the ambulance for the tiniest things thinking that it will get them faster care or free care. And I mean, not wanting to wait to go to the doctor on Monday if they have the sniffels. No exaggeration! That's were the $25 asprin and so forth comes from. It is also causing some hospitals to go bankrupt and has forced many,many city hospitals to close down. Ask me how I know.:tongue_smilie: Our current way of doing things is unfortunately unsustainable and we are now only begining to see the results.

 

Really and truly, no disrespect intended nor an intent to malign a group of individuals, especially since I am a naturalized citizen and I do happen to have compassion for them as individuals. The fact is that it is really a government created problem and one that has no easy answer.

Edited January 3, 2012 by MyLittleBears

[Moxie]

One of the problems is how interwoven health insurance and employers have become. I have friends who really think their family coverage costs $200/month. Sorry, no, that is how much you pay. Your employer is picking up the other $1000/month. These people also think it costs $20 to go to the doctor. Again, sorry but that is just your co-pay. Because they don't pay for it, they are terrible consumers. They get test after test that they don't need "just in case", they go to the doctor for every sniffle and they have no idea how much it all costs.

 

Another problem is that doctors have no idea how much these things cost. We spent a year on a high deductible plan. I had 3 HCG tests and each one cost $350! When my doctor ordered a forth test, I told him I'd rather not because of the cost. He had no clue and was floored when I told him.

 

Yet another issues I see is the cost of end-of-life care. My sister is in charge of a large Hospice. I can't tell you how many times she has called me really frustrated because people want to do whatever it takes to keep their 90-year-old grandmother alive. Grandma probably didn't want to be on a ventilator for weeks but they can't bear to let her go. It is really sad but death is a part of life. It wasn't that long ago that Grandma died peacefully at home, her daughters washed and prepared the body and she would lie in the parlor for viewing. Medicine can't always work miracles; we need to get back to a place where we are comfortable with death.

 

Health care is a huge, complex issue and I don't think there is going to be an easy solution anytime soon.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Moxie

[farouk]

:iagree: My mom was told she could not have her chemotherapy or radiation if she could not pay her bill. Chemo and radiation are not seen as emergency treatments as well as a multitude of other procedures and meds:(

 

So if you cannot afford the treatment or the meds in many cases you could very well die:(

 

Reason one million and one for medicare for everyone regardless of age.

 

priscilla:

 

It's a sad re-definition of what 'emergency' means. And then some folk go to the Emergency Room if they have a cold.

[Chelli]

I had a good friend who was an RN while dh was in seminary.

She said that the hospital she worked at told her the first thing to do when she walked in a patient's room was to look at their chart. If they had insurance, then she was to charge for every. little. thing. She told me that bandaids would wind up costing $20 a piece. She said that the hospitals did this to the insurance companies because they knew that they would pay it. This helped the hospital stay afloat and offset the cost of people who don't pay. If the people didn't have insurance, than charge the bare minimum.

 

Another little story that backs up my friend's:

When we gave birth to our 2nd child back in '07, we did not have insurance, Medicare, anything. We had a payment plan with the OB/GYN, so he was paid off before dd was ever delivered. The hospital would not give us straight answers on how much it would cost (not even a ballpark), so we weren't sure what it would cost. The first bill we got from the hospital for dd's delivery was $25,000. We were in there for 24 hours, vaginal delivery, but I did have an epidural.

 

My husband went to the hospital and basically told them that there was no way we could pay that much. He explained to them that we didn't have insurance or anything. The billing office took our bill and whittled it down to $6,000 right in front of dh's eyes. He asked them how they could get rid of so much of the bill and the lady told him that the hospital would rather get some money from us, than have us not pay anything because we couldn't afford it. Plus she said that the first charge was the "if you have insurance charge" not the "i'm going to have to pay out of my own pocket charge."

 

After both of these experiences, I firmly believe that healthcare in the US is just one big racket. Hospitals charge insurance companies more to cover those that don't pay, insurance compaines raise premiums to cover the extra charges come from hospitals, more people can't pay the premiums so they don't buy insurance, then those people come to the hospital for their health care and can't pay their bill, and the cycle continues.

 

I don't know the answers at all. But I do know that it's a mess that will not be fixed anytime soon.

[farouk]

I had a good friend who was an RN while dh was in seminary.

She said that the hospital she worked at told her the first thing to do when she walked in a patient's room was to look at their chart. If they had insurance, then she was to charge for every. little. thing. She told me that bandaids would wind up costing $20 a piece. She said that the hospitals did this to the insurance companies because they knew that they would pay it. This helped the hospital stay afloat and offset the cost of people who don't pay. If the people didn't have insurance, than charge the bare minimum.

 

Another little story that backs up my friend's:

When we gave birth to our 2nd child back in '07, we did not have insurance, Medicare, anything. We had a payment plan with the OB/GYN, so he was paid off before dd was ever delivered. The hospital would not give us straight answers on how much it would cost (not even a ballpark), so we weren't sure what it would cost. The first bill we got from the hospital for dd's delivery was $25,000. We were in there for 24 hours, vaginal delivery, but I did have an epidural.

 

My husband went to the hospital and basically told them that there was no way we could pay that much. He explained to them that we didn't have insurance or anything. The billing office took our bill and whittled it down to $6,000 right in front of dh's eyes. He asked them how they could get rid of so much of the bill and the lady told him that the hospital would rather get some money from us, than have us not pay anything because we couldn't afford it. Plus she said that the first charge was the "if you have insurance charge" not the "i'm going to have to pay out of my own pocket charge."

 

After both of these experiences, I firmly believe that healthcare in the US is just one big racket. Hospitals charge insurance companies more to cover those that don't pay, insurance compaines raise premiums to cover the extra charges come from hospitals, more people can't pay the premiums so they don't buy insurance, then those people come to the hospital for their health care and can't pay their bill, and the cycle continues.

 

I don't know the answers at all. But I do know that it's a mess that will not be fixed anytime soon.

 

PW:Sad business. Maybe they could also re-define 'pre-existing'. This seems to be a word that is thrown at patients, too, mainly by insurance companies.

[Alice]

As a physician, I think the healthcare system is broken but that it's massively complicated as to why. How to fix it is even more complicated.

 

Insurance companies are part of it. The salaries that the CEOs of the companies make is astronomical. I'm a believer in capitalism and I guess if someone is willing to pay them as much as they make, in a way they deserve it. However, insurance companies are big businesses out to make money and are run as such. However, they are involved in a field that is business but also also has a very complex non-business side. Right now insurance companies are driving the way we do healthcare and I'm not sure how to change that. Many people have talked about how doctors/hospitals charge one fee for those who have insurance and one for those who do not as an example of how the medical system is a fraud. The problem is that the insurance companies will not pay what we charge. Their payments are based on negotiated contracts that are based on complex formulas based on what Medicare charges which is a small percentage of what we charge. So if a doctor thinks we should charge $100 for a procedure the insurance might pay $40. Over time the medical system has started charging $200 in order to get closer to the $100 that we really think the procedure is worth. But we can't by law charge some people one thing and some another based on what insurance you have. We can "forgive the debt" and write off some expenses but we can't say "oh, you don't have insurance we'll just charge you what we really wanted to charge in the first place".

 

Another issue is that the way the Medicare fee structure was set up (and every other insurance fee structure is based on Medicare) is that we are paid for doing and not thinking. I always hear "the doctor only spent 3 minutes and charged me x amount!" We aren't paid by time for the most part. We are paid by code. The codes are for diagnosis and procedure. I can take out a splinter in my office (coded as "removal of foreign body from skin") and charge $120 for what might take 10 minutes. I can spend 30 minutes counseling a new mom who has tons of normal baby questions and only charge $100 for the well baby visit. Procedures and doing are valued. Thinking is not. If you think about other professionals, they charge for time (lawyers, architects). We can't charge for time thinking about a diagnosis or calling a specialists to discuss with them or paperwork done. Some docs have started charging for phone calls and forms filled out but a lot don't.

 

Malpractice is a huge part of the problem. The cost of malpractice insurance is enormous, both for individuals and for the system as a whole as it gets passed on to patients. The litigious nature of our society also creates a lot of situations where doctors practice "cover your butt" medicine which is expensive. A great example of this is appendicitis. If you go into a hospital today with an absolutely classic case of appendicitis that everyone knows what it is, you will still get a CT scan to confirm the diagnosis. This is because no surgeon is willing to take the chance of operating and finding out the diagnosis was wrong. It used to be that most surgeons accepted a small percentage of the time when they would operate unnecessarily over the chance that they were missing cases. But they were very good at diagnosing based on exam and history. Now, no one will take that chance. And often you will get an ultrasound first, which are iffy at best for diagnosis and then a CT if it's not 100% on ultrasound. That is one small example of a largely unnecessary cost caused by "cover your butt" medicine.

 

The entire medical system has turned into a big flabby bureaucracy. I could go on and on about this but at every level that are rules and hoops and hurdles that create an enormous amount of paperwork and that create a lot of cost and expense but that don't improve patient care. One example, as a doctor I have to have a certain amount of continuing education. This is good. But our hospital now has a CME office with multiple specialists whose job is only to make sure that all the CME offerings abide by every small rule. The one area is a small expense but it is multiplied over a ton of areas. Another great example of this is the complexity of billing. People complain that doctors have no idea what things cost but part of that is because of insurance and the coding system. I can't memorize what every drug costs for every patient because it's different for each insurance. I might prescribe on that is on formulary for one patient and not for another and that means a huge difference in cost. I have no way of knowing and there are just too many drugs to have the information in my head. Similar with lab tests, different insurances pay different amounts. I think most doctors too are not people who like business and so we are ignorant of that side of medicine, often that is our own fault. The insurance and billing system also means we have to employ a large number of people whose only job it is is to do the billing for us...and hospitals have even larger numbers of billing and coding specialists. That's another added expense.

 

Finally, I think Americans (I haven't lived elsewhere so I can't speak to other countries) are somewhat to blame. We want the impossible. We want a health care system that provides excellent efficient care at a reasonable cost to everyone. That's difficult, but probably not impossible. What is impossible is that we also want to have it all. We want to be able to see any specialist, have any test, have any drug because we deserve it. That is not possible. Rationing happens everywhere, in every health system. Here it is by the insurance companies and what they cover or whether you have insurance. In other places it may be that you have to wait, or they make different decisions than we do about things like end of life care or some things just aren't available.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Alice
ETA: Sorry for all the typos. I was typing fast and now actually need to go teach my kids. :)

[farouk]

As a physician, I think the healthcare system is broken but that it's massively complicated as to why. How to fix it is even more complicated.

 

Insurance companies are part of it. The salaries that the CEOs of the companies make is astronomical. I'm a believer in capitalism and I guess if someone is willing to pay them as much as they make, in a way they deserve it. However, insurance companies are big businesses out to make money and are run as such. However, they are involved in a field that is business but also also has a very complex non-business side. Right now insurance companies are driving the way we do healthcare and I'm not sure how to change that. Many people have talked about how doctors/hospitals charge one fee for those who have insurance and one for those who do not as an example of how the medical system is a fraud. The problem is that the insurance companies will not pay what we charge. Their payments are based on negotiated contracts that are based on complex formulas based on what Medicare charges which is a small percentage of what we charge. So if a doctor thinks we should charge $100 for a procedure the insurance might pay $40. Over time the medical system has started charging $200 in order to get closer to the $100 that we really think the procedure is worth. But we can't by law charge some people one thing and some another based on what insurance you have. We can "forgive the debt" and write off some expenses but we can't say "oh, you don't have insurance we'll just charge you what we really wanted to charge in the first place".

 

Another issue is that the way the Medicare fee structure was set up (and every other insurance fee structure is based on Medicare) is that we are paid for doing and not thinking. I always hear "the doctor only spent 3 minutes and charged me x amount!" We aren't paid by time for the most part. We are paid by code. The codes are for diagnosis and procedure. I can take out a splinter in my office (coded as "removal of foreign body from skin") and charge $120 for what might take 10 minutes. I can spend 30 minutes counseling a new mom who has tons of normal baby questions and only charge $100 for the well baby visit. Procedures and doing are valued. Thinking is not. If you think about other professionals, they charge for time (lawyers, architects). We can't charge for time thinking about a diagnosis or calling a specialists to discuss with them or paperwork done. Some docs have started charging for phone calls and forms filled out but a lot don't.

 

Malpractice is a huge part of the problem. The cost of malpractice insurance is enormous, both for individuals and for the system as a whole as it gets passed on to patients. The litigious nature of our society also creates a lot of situations where doctors practice "cover your butt" medicine which is expensive. A great example of this is appendicitis. If you go into a hospital today with an absolutely classic case of appendicitis that everyone knows what it is, you will still get a CT scan to confirm the diagnosis. This is because no surgeon is willing to take the chance of operating and finding out the diagnosis was wrong. It used to be that most surgeons accepted a small percentage of the time when they would operate unnecessarily over the chance that they were missing cases. But they were very good at diagnosing based on exam and history. Now, no one will take that chance. And often you will get an ultrasound first, which are iffy at best for diagnosis and then a CT if it's not 100% on ultrasound. That is one small example of a largely unnecessary cost caused by "cover your butt" medicine.

 

The entire medical system has turned into a big flabby bureaucracy. I could go on and on about this but at every level that are rules and hoops and hurdles that create an enormous amount of paperwork and that create a lot of cost and expense but that don't improve patient care. One example, as a doctor I have to have a certain amount of continuing education. This is good. But our hospital now has a CME office with multiple specialists whose job is only to make sure that all the CME offerings abide by every small rule. The one area is a small expense but it is multiplied over a ton of areas. Another great example of this is the complexity of billing. People complain that doctors have no idea what things cost but part of that is because of insurance and the coding system. I can't memorize what every drug costs for every patient because it's different for each insurance. I might prescribe on that is on formulary for one patient and not for another and that means a huge difference in cost. I have no way of knowing and there are just too many drugs to have the information in my head. Similar with lab tests, different insurances pay different amounts. I think most doctors too are not people who like business and so we are ignorant of that side of medicine, often that is our own fault. The insurance and billing system also means we have to employ a large number of people whose only job it is is to do the billing for us...and hospitals have even larger numbers of billing and coding specialists. That's another added expense.

 

Finally, I think Americans (I haven't lived elsewhere so I can't speak to other countries) are somewhat to blame. We want the impossible. We want a health care system that provides excellent efficient care at a reasonable cost to everyone. That's difficult, but probably not impossible. What is impossible is that we also want to have it all. We want to be able to see any specialist, have any test, have any drug because we deserve it. That is not possible. Rationing happens everywhere, in every health system. Here it is by the insurance companies and what they cover or whether you have insurance. In other places it may be that you have to wait, or they make different decisions than we do about things like end of life care or some things just aren't available.

 

Dr Alice: This is an interesting perspective from someone who is a doctor. Good to read.

 

I guess, then, that some of the thing you say are illegal, are actually being done by people in the system. But where's the priority? prosecutors go after lots of people in case someone is doing something wrong? It all reminds me of the idea of eight honorable, upright people who are in a lifeboat which seats only six people: sooner or later someone may start behaving badly. In the end, don't blame the people; blame the design of the lifeboat and fix it for the future.

 

The impression I have is that no-one can expect the business class to stop acting in its own business interests; only when requirements are imposed, as in some countries (Canada, UK, etc.) will capitalists be brought into line. (Hope this makes sense.)

[Audrey]

I don't understand it either. Before I got my permanent residence here, I got pregnant. I was pre-approved so these cost were covered later (refunded), but I was charged $20 for pre-natal visits and I think it was less than $50 to get all the bloodwork done. When I had my son, the hospital sent a bill (also refunded later) for EVERYTHING. It included 7 full days in the hospital, an epidural, and an emergency c-section and it was a grand total of $6,000. and a few pennies.

 

This was back in 1999, but around the same time, my cousin had a planned c-section with a 2-day stay. After her insurance paid their part, she was still stuck with a bill for over $20K.

 

I do not understand at all how there can be such a huge disparity in costs.

[ElizaG]

Issues with wait times generally happen with elective surgeries like hip replacements but that can vary depending on what province you are in.

Shortage of specialists seems to be a major issue, and I'm not sure how it can be resolved. One of my parents recently had to wait almost five years for routine orthopedic surgery. By that point, what had started out as a minor problem was getting to the point where the doctors were talking about amputation. I have an unpleasant suspicion that these sorts of procedures were being bumped to the bottom of the list to make room for hip replacements -- which, as an "index procedure," would carry more weight in their performance statistics.

 

The funny thing is that when I was in college, the government was discouraging young people from becoming doctors, on the grounds that there was going to be an oversupply of them. :001_huh:

 

Honestly, I rarely recognize the mythical Canadian healthcare system that gets discussed on American forums.

By the same token, I rarely recognize the mythical American healthcare system that gets discussed by some Canadians. (When one of my children was born with multiple disabilities, an older acquaintance expressed surprise at the level of care she was receiving. "I would have thought that in the US, a baby like that would just be put down.")

 

Some people would rather point out and embellish their neighbor's flaws than do the hard work of getting their own house in order. This goes both ways. And maybe, in looking for solutions, both Canada and the US could take a closer look at the rest of the world. There are far more than two models. Surely someone out there is getting things right (or at least more right).

[8circles]

By the same token, I rarely recognize the mythical American healthcare system that gets discussed by some Canadians. (When one of my children was born with multiple disabilities, an older acquaintance expressed surprise at the level of care she was receiving. "I would have thought that in the US, a baby like that would just be put down.")

 

Some people would rather point out and embellish their neighbor's flaws than do the hard work of getting their own house in order. This goes both ways. And maybe, in looking for solutions, both Canada and the US could take a closer look at the rest of the world. There are far more than two models. Surely someone out there is getting things right (or at least more right).

 

Bolding mine, I agree except not rarely - never.

[Audrey]

By the same token, I rarely recognize the mythical American healthcare system that gets discussed by some Canadians. .

 

 

I've been on both sides of that border. I find Americans hyperbolize Canadian health care far more than Canadians do.

 

There are pro and cons to each side, but when it comes down to it, I am grateful I never had a child under US healthcare and I would never want to be a parent under that system. It makes me sad to see posts on here asking if an American parent should take their kid in to a doctor or even in to emergency for symptoms that would, to me, be immediately urgent. I could take my kid in with no concern for co-pays or any payments whatsoever. It saddens me to see a parent have to worry about the checkbook balance before taking a kid in for medical treatment.

[ElizaG]

It included 7 full days in the hospital, an epidural, and an emergency c-section and it was a grand total of $6,000. and a few pennies.

 

This was back in 1999, but around the same time, my cousin had a planned c-section with a 2-day stay. After her insurance paid their part, she was still stuck with a bill for over $20K.

 

I do not understand at all how there can be such a huge disparity in costs.

I found a link to the California study that I mentioned earlier. The authors don't know why it happens either, but at least they've thoroughly documented the randomness and organized it into nice neat columns. :tongue_smilie: ;)

Report Shows Hospital Costs and Charges Vary Widely Throughout the State

[ElizaG]

There are pro and cons to each side, but when it comes down to it, I am grateful I never had a child under US healthcare and I would never want to be a parent under that system.

I think it depends on the situation. For children who have injuries, illnesses, or other physical conditions that require doctors' visits or hospitalization, the Canadian system looks to me to be better. For those with developmental or mental health issues, or ongoing costs associated with disabilities (equipment, therapies, etc.), it seems as if the US might have an edge in providing care for more families. But the reality is that, if you have a child with long-term serious health care needs, you are probably going to need some sort of fallback plan in either country.

 

I'm told that there are countries in Europe in which everything -- vision, dental, drugs, durable medical goods, special formulas, etc., -- is covered 100% for everyone. I have no idea how they manage this. Maybe their populations are just healthier?

Edited January 4, 2012 by Eleanor

[Heather in Neverland]

 

Malpractice is a huge part of the problem. The cost of malpractice insurance is enormous, both for individuals and for the system as a whole as it gets passed on to patients. The litigious nature of our society also creates a lot of situations where doctors practice "cover your butt" medicine which is expensive. A great example of this is appendicitis. If you go into a hospital today with an absolutely classic case of appendicitis that everyone knows what it is, you will still get a CT scan to confirm the diagnosis. This is because no surgeon is willing to take the chance of operating and finding out the diagnosis was wrong. It used to be that most surgeons accepted a small percentage of the time when they would operate unnecessarily over the chance that they were missing cases. But they were very good at diagnosing based on exam and history. Now, no one will take that chance. And often you will get an ultrasound first, which are iffy at best for diagnosis and then a CT if it's not 100% on ultrasound. That is one small example of a largely unnecessary cost caused by "cover your butt" medicine.

.

 

This is the difference I see in Malaysia. People don't sue over every little thing and when you do file suit the awards are very small in comparison. The government actually has decided how much each of your body parts are worth. So if you lose an arm then you get X dollars, a leg is X dollars, etc. There are no pain and suffering or punitive damages in the millions like in the U.S. So for instance, the lawyer showed us that a broken neck (like my dh had) was worth $10,000 USD, then they reimbursed our hospital expenses and time off work and it ended up at $17,000. There is no extra money thrown in to compensate for loss of quality of life due to permanent damage.

 

To be fair, one category you left out are the doctors who scam the system for money. I worked for one. Someone would come in with, for example, a cold. He would order a chest X-ray and that is supposed to include a certain amount and type of views. BUT he would only have me do one view and he charged the insurance company for all the views. Saved time, saved X-ray film expense, made him money. Then he would do every procedure even remotely related even though they were totally unnecessary and charge for it. He made a mint for about 20 years until someone turned him in for insurance fraud. My mother is a medical biller and has worked for about 10 different doctors and they ALL did this kind of thing. They look at it as "getting back" at the insurance companies.

 

 

 

.

[goldberry]

Bolding mine, I agree except not rarely - never.

 

I'm surprised at that. Have you ever been uninsured with a serious healthcare issue? Maybe that's the difference.

 

I used to think our healthcare was great too, until I realized there was a whole population of people that were being treated differently.

[Amy1k]

I've witnessed something that seems like fraud...or at the very least unethical on the part of a doctor. My son had been seen by a doctor at our pediatrician office several times for ankle pain. He was then seen for a physical. After the exam, the doctor asked him if he had any issues that he wanted to talk about (or something like that). My son answered that his ankle still hurt. The doctor wrote a referral for physical therapy. When we got the statement from our insurance, I noticed that the doctor billed for an entire additional visit. I called the insurance company and they said it was perfectly acceptable. To me? Crazy. It took him just moments to write the referral and he could have done it at the prior visit. They told me that anything brought up at a physical can be billed as an additional visit, but that only some doctors bill that way. I talked to the billing person at the doctor's office and she said that he is the only one in the practice who does it.

[mommymilkies]

I'm surprised at that. Have you ever been uninsured with a serious healthcare issue? Maybe that's the difference.

 

I used to think our healthcare was great too, until I realized there was a whole population of people that were being treated differently.

 

Yup. I've worked in two hospitals. I've been uninsured and I've been insured. You have no idea how bad the system is here until you've been one of the millions of uninsured. No idea. You're treated like trash. My dh is a college professor and yet the insurance through dh's work (not including deductibles and copays and $5k oop up front) is over 60% of our income a month. We have the choice of living on the streets and being insured, or living and having medicaid. So obviously we have medicaid. You're treated like trash that can't support your family and don't deserve care by many people. Luckily there are still some people in medicine who are decent, but they are the minority. Dh has insurance because employees have free insurance (it's families and spouses that cost) and it's ridiculous the night and day difference when we need treatment.

[8circles]

I'm surprised at that. Have you ever been uninsured with a serious healthcare issue? Maybe that's the difference.

 

I used to think our healthcare was great too, until I realized there was a whole population of people that were being treated differently.

 

No I have not. I in no way deny that there are serious problems with the healthcare delivery system in the US. But if I were to only use my own personal experience with the system to formulate my opinion then I would be denying the existence of a problem.

 

I think there is quite a bit of head-burying about other healthcare systems because "that's not been my experience" when I think it's pretty clear that there are serious problems with them as well.

[kalanamak]

What is impossible is that we also want to have it all. We want to be able to see any specialist, have any test, have any drug because we deserve it. That is not possible. Rationing happens everywhere, in every health system.

 

Alice saved me the trouble of typing all that!

 

The short version is that we, as a people, have to pick two of these three, in regards healthcare:

 

fast

cheap

good

 

I do expect some form of rationing to happen in our lifetime. A society cannot afford to spend more and more (as technology advances) 1) trying to remove all doubt and error and 2) supporting end of life in a burgeoning elderly population. At some point we will be so weakened economically we will be vulnerable.

 

(And I say this as a person much closer to retirement than most of you. )

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Dr Alice: This is an interesting perspective from someone who is a doctor. Good to read.

 

I guess, then, that some of the thing you say are illegal, are actually being done by people in the system. But where's the priority? prosecutors go after lots of people in case someone is doing something wrong? It all reminds me of the idea of eight honorable, upright people who are in a lifeboat which seats only six people: sooner or later someone may start behaving badly. In the end, don't blame the people; blame the design of the lifeboat and fix it for the future.

 

The impression I have is that no-one can expect the business class to stop acting in its own business interests; only when requirements are imposed, as in some countries (Canada, UK, etc.) will capitalists be brought into line. (Hope this makes sense.)

 

I think that it is rare for any individual, group or entity to act outside of its interests. Thus you have hospitals that charge insured patients fully in order to balance out those who are not insured or will not pay. And at the same time, you have patients who insist on antibiotics for ailments that antibiotics won't help. Or you have patients headed to the ER for minor discomforts.

 

A friend who spent years associated with ER medicine sent out this link recently.

[farouk]

I've witnessed something that seems like fraud...or at the very least unethical on the part of a doctor. My son had been seen by a doctor at our pediatrician office several times for ankle pain. He was then seen for a physical. After the exam, the doctor asked him if he had any issues that he wanted to talk about (or something like that). My son answered that his ankle still hurt. The doctor wrote a referral for physical therapy. When we got the statement from our insurance, I noticed that the doctor billed for an entire additional visit. I called the insurance company and they said it was perfectly acceptable. To me? Crazy. It took him just moments to write the referral and he could have done it at the prior visit. They told me that anything brought up at a physical can be billed as an additional visit, but that only some doctors bill that way. I talked to the billing person at the doctor's office and she said that he is the only one in the practice who does it.

 

Amy:

 

We sometimes see notices in doctors' surgeries which say something to the effect of: If you want to talk about more than one issue, you should book a separate appointment.

I guess this gets them off the hook and so if they ask if you want anything else and you mention something, they can then say, Oh, they wanted to come on another occasion, but for their convenience I managed to fit them in.

Some doctors won't do this, others will, but in the end, with professionals working in very tight margins, I don't ultimately blame the doctors but rather the system which encourages this kind of double talk. If it were Homeland Security or a Grand Jury that were being talked to, it might result in deportation or perjury charges.

[farouk]

[/b][/b]

 

I think that it is rare for any individual, group or entity to act outside of its interests. Thus you have hospitals that charge insured patients fully in order to balance out those who are not insured or will not pay. And at the same time, you have patients who insist on antibiotics for ailments that antibiotics won't help. Or you have patients headed to the ER for minor discomforts.

 

A friend who spent years associated with ER medicine sent out this link recently.

 

S:

 

Exactly my point.

 

This is maybe why the government needs to design the fence in the hen coop, else the chickens will all go running round in their own interests only.

 

With all their imperfections, Canada, the United Kingdom and some other countries (where governments still have more clout than the big corporations) have systems which aim at some sort of comprehensive coverage.

[Alice]

To be fair, one category you left out are the doctors who scam the system for money. I worked for one. Someone would come in with, for example, a cold. He would order a chest X-ray and that is supposed to include a certain amount and type of views. BUT he would only have me do one view and he charged the insurance company for all the views. Saved time, saved X-ray film expense, made him money. Then he would do every procedure even remotely related even though they were totally unnecessary and charge for it. He made a mint for about 20 years until someone turned him in for insurance fraud. My mother is a medical biller and has worked for about 10 different doctors and they ALL did this kind of thing. They look at it as "getting back" at the insurance companies.

 

 

 

.

 

I didn't mean to leave out my own profession, but I have not personally known any doctors who are intentionally getting rich off the system or engaging in fraudulent practices. I'm sure they exist, but everything else I wrote about were things I've experienced personally.

 

I've witnessed something that seems like fraud...or at the very least unethical on the part of a doctor. My son had been seen by a doctor at our pediatrician office several times for ankle pain. He was then seen for a physical. After the exam, the doctor asked him if he had any issues that he wanted to talk about (or something like that). My son answered that his ankle still hurt. The doctor wrote a referral for physical therapy. When we got the statement from our insurance, I noticed that the doctor billed for an entire additional visit. I called the insurance company and they said it was perfectly acceptable. To me? Crazy. It took him just moments to write the referral and he could have done it at the prior visit. They told me that anything brought up at a physical can be billed as an additional visit, but that only some doctors bill that way. I talked to the billing person at the doctor's office and she said that he is the only one in the practice who does it.

 

Amy:

 

We sometimes see notices in doctors' surgeries which say something to the effect of: If you want to talk about more than one issue, you should book a separate appointment.

I guess this gets them off the hook and so if they ask if you want anything else and you mention something, they can then say, Oh, they wanted to come on another occasion, but for their convenience I managed to fit them in.

Some doctors won't do this, others will, but in the end, with professionals working in very tight margins, I don't ultimately blame the doctors but rather the system which encourages this kind of double talk. If it were Homeland Security or a Grand Jury that were being talked to, it might result in deportation or perjury charges.

 

This isn't fraud. I do it sometimes. It has to do with the way we get paid being by codes and not by time. Let's say I see a patient for a well-child exam and they have an ear infection. The insurance company says that if I write up a separate note for the ear infection and document that I prescribed an antibiotic (or whatever the treatment was) then I can charge it as a separate code and visit. It's not that we're trying to say it's two visits or pulling the wool over the insurance companies eyes it's they way they have designed the system. They have no way for me to charge more for the extra time I spend but the way to get compensated for what is above and beyond the well check is to use that extra code.

 

In your case, if the doctor intentionally waited until the physical to give you the referral in order to charge more, I'd say that is unethical if not illegal. It also has to be very clearly documented in the chart. We all undergo random audits by insurance companies where they pull charts and look to see if we documented appropriately for what was billed. If you are not documenting, then you will get into a lot of trouble.

 

Personally, I only add on an extra visit code if it is really something that has taken a significant extra amount of time. I probably wouldn't have in your case, as I usually don't do it if I am just writing a referral for an issue that comes up in the visit.

 

And as I said in my earlier post...all this coding and billing stuff in itself adds expense. I am not very savvy about all the codes but it is a whole system and somewhat a game on to itself. Their are coding conferences and coding specialists and a whole industry built up just on this issue.

[Alice]

[/b][/b]

 

I think that it is rare for any individual, group or entity to act outside of its interests. Thus you have hospitals that charge insured patients fully in order to balance out those who are not insured or will not pay. And at the same time, you have patients who insist on antibiotics for ailments that antibiotics won't help. Or you have patients headed to the ER for minor discomforts.

 

A friend who spent years associated with ER medicine sent out this link recently.

 

I think I'm going to have to read that guy's book. Great article.

[Julie Smith]

For tho curious about how the hive mind feels about Canadian vs. American health care here is a poll I did last time this debate was kicking around.

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=278613&highlight=Health

[farouk]

I didn't mean to leave out my own profession, but I have not personally known any doctors who are intentionally getting rich off the system or engaging in fraudulent practices. I'm sure they exist, but everything else I wrote about were things I've experienced personally.

 

 

 

 

 

This isn't fraud. I do it sometimes. It has to do with the way we get paid being by codes and not by time. Let's say I see a patient for a well-child exam and they have an ear infection. The insurance company says that if I write up a separate note for the ear infection and document that I prescribed an antibiotic (or whatever the treatment was) then I can charge it as a separate code and visit. It's not that we're trying to say it's two visits or pulling the wool over the insurance companies eyes it's they way they have designed the system. They have no way for me to charge more for the extra time I spend but the way to get compensated for what is above and beyond the well check is to use that extra code.

 

In your case, if the doctor intentionally waited until the physical to give you the referral in order to charge more, I'd say that is unethical if not illegal. It also has to be very clearly documented in the chart. We all undergo random audits by insurance companies where they pull charts and look to see if we documented appropriately for what was billed. If you are not documenting, then you will get into a lot of trouble.

 

Personally, I only add on an extra visit code if it is really something that has taken a significant extra amount of time. I probably wouldn't have in your case, as I usually don't do it if I am just writing a referral for an issue that comes up in the visit.

 

And as I said in my earlier post...all this coding and billing stuff in itself adds expense. I am not very savvy about all the codes but it is a whole system and somewhat a game on to itself. Their are coding conferences and coding specialists and a whole industry built up just on this issue.

 

Ms Alice:

 

I guess this is my point. I don't blame the individual physicians but the way the system is set up. Of course, it could be portrayed very badly, if a politician or prosecutor wanted to enhance his or her reputation by portraying the practice in a bad light. Just imagine: I guess this accounting practice might, if not stop, then be curtailed drastically, if they knew there was a CNN and Beltway campaign for Patrick Fitzgerald to be assigned to investigate.

 

There was a time when Enron's accounting procedures were not regarded as fraudulent. I don't blame Kenny Lay, but Taft-Hartley and similar measures.

[fraidycat]

That is absolutely not true. The chances are NOT that you will die waiting. I've had several people in my life require surgery and treatment for ife threatening conditions/diseases in the last few years and al were treated to excellent careand are still olquite alive.

 

Issues with wait times generally happen with elective surgeries like hip replacements but that can vary depending on what province you are in.

 

I'll be having surgery in a month for a none-urgent matter relatedto the birth of my son. The only delay iinvolved was in waiting for things to heal up enough for me to have the surgery. Honestly, I rarely recognize the mythical Canadian healthcare system that gets discussed on American forums.

 

This 'mythical Canadian healthcare system' is the one that had my Dad on a waiting list for over a year for heart bypass surgery. Luckily he did not have a heart attack before he had his surgery and is still alive. I am not speaking as an American, but as a Canadian now living in the U.S. I've experienced both systems. And hip replacement is not elective if you can't walk. My grandma has been waiting over three years and is now basically completely housebound and will require a LOT more PT to get back to moving than if she'd had the surgery 3 years ago, simply because she has spent so much time "sitting around" waiting for her surgery. She's that much older now to recover from surgery, and she is still waiting. If she doesn't get it soon, will the hip kill her...probably not. But the depression from the constant pain, and lack of independence and ability to get out and socialize, shop, etc. just might.

[farouk]

This 'mythical Canadian healthcare system' is the one that had my Dad on a waiting list for over a year for heart bypass surgery. Luckily he did not have a heart attack before he had his surgery and is still alive. I am not speaking as an American, but as a Canadian now living in the U.S. I've experienced both systems. And hip replacement is not elective if you can't walk. My grandma has been waiting over three years and is now basically completely housebound and will require a LOT more PT to get back to moving than if she'd had the surgery 3 years ago, simply because she has spent so much time "sitting around" waiting for her surgery. She's that much older now to recover from surgery, and she is still waiting. If she doesn't get it soon, will the hip kill her...probably not. But the depression from the constant pain, and lack of independence and ability to get out and socialize, shop, etc. just might.

 

fraidycat:

 

Sorry about these experiences that your family has been having.

 

You know the widely held narrative in Canada about this sort of situation? the reason why the waiting lists are so long is partly because Canadian health service professionals are earning more money south of the Border (I know this is a generalization). I do wonder what the system would be like if it was less excessively capitalistic.

[fraidycat]

Yes, a lot of the doctors get experience in Canada, then head south of the border. Sad, really.

 

It is so rare now that you can find a doctor anywhere who is actually doing it because they CARE about the patients. It's more about the almighty dollar, unfortunately.

[farouk]

Yes, a lot of the doctors get experience in Canada, then head south of the border. Sad, really.

 

It is so rare now that you can find a doctor anywhere who is actually doing it because they CARE about the patients. It's more about the almighty dollar, unfortunately.

 

fraidycat:

 

I'm not sure things would be much better if Mulroney had fixed things differently; there will always be people looking to make a fast buck, manual laborer or professional.

 

With all its faults, shortcomings and inefficiencies, the Canadian system does seem to aim at some sort of comprehensive coverage (for people exercising a lot of patience, that is); in this sense it is more caring, I think (maybe I'm biased).

[Melissa in Australia]

This 'mythical Canadian healthcare system' is the one that had my Dad on a waiting list for over a year for heart bypass surgery. Luckily he did not have a heart attack before he had his surgery and is still alive. I am not speaking as an American, but as a Canadian now living in the U.S. I've experienced both systems. And hip replacement is not elective if you can't walk. My grandma has been waiting over three years and is now basically completely housebound and will require a LOT more PT to get back to moving than if she'd had the surgery 3 years ago, simply because she has spent so much time "sitting around" waiting for her surgery. She's that much older now to recover from surgery, and she is still waiting. If she doesn't get it soon, will the hip kill her...probably not. But the depression from the constant pain, and lack of independence and ability to get out and socialize, shop, etc. just might.

 

Must depend where abouts in Canada you are.

My in-laws have no problem with the doctors, my FIL is nearly 90, he has had both a hip and knee replacement at different times in the last 5 years. He only waited a few months and it wasn't really waiting, more of seeing different specialists and having tests. His gripe with the doctors is they keep telling him that he is old, and they cannot give him the body of a 20 year old :D

[Trish]

I think part of the reason is the expense of the free emergency room visits for those who cannot afford to pay. Not being judgmental about that, it's just a fact of life that must be accounted for (literally).

[kalanamak]

I think I'm going to have to read that guy's book. Great article.

 

It is very funny. It will bring back memories to anyone whose worked an ER.

[Mommy22alyns]

I have no health insurance right now not by choice and I absolutely panic when I read things like this so I won't read this thread. I get scared every time someone on facebook mentions going to a hospital, the er or a doctor. I am terrified because I know how much things cost. Private options are really exensive and have high deductables and right now we can't afford a private plan. I am literally depressed over not having health insurance and can't sleep at night.

 

 

:grouphug: I'm in the same boat and know exactly how you feel.

[farouk]

It is very funny. It will bring back memories to anyone whose worked an ER.

 

k:

 

Well, at any rate, it's great that ppl can laugh at it. Because in so many ways everything around the ER and health care financing is a huge headache for so many people, while ambulance chasing lawyers and corporations are profiting from people staying sick.

[creekland]

This 'mythical Canadian healthcare system' is the one that had my Dad on a waiting list for over a year for heart bypass surgery. Luckily he did not have a heart attack before he had his surgery and is still alive. I am not speaking as an American, but as a Canadian now living in the U.S. I've experienced both systems. And hip replacement is not elective if you can't walk. My grandma has been waiting over three years and is now basically completely housebound and will require a LOT more PT to get back to moving than if she'd had the surgery 3 years ago, simply because she has spent so much time "sitting around" waiting for her surgery. She's that much older now to recover from surgery, and she is still waiting. If she doesn't get it soon, will the hip kill her...probably not. But the depression from the constant pain, and lack of independence and ability to get out and socialize, shop, etc. just might.

 

My step-mom came to the US twice for care, once for a hernia and once for a skin issue. Fortunately, she was covered in the US by my dad's insurance. Not only was her hernia surgery quicker here (more or less immediate compared to a 6 - 12 month wait), they also used a more up-to-date method that was less invasive with quicker healing. Regarding the skin issue, she was told if she had waited for care it would have become far more serious.

 

BUT, the general thought among my Canadian friends and relatives is that for "basic" care (colds/flu/broken bones/pregnancy or similar) they enjoy the Canadian system and "lack" of costs ("lack" is in quotes because they are paying for it in their taxes, of course, but they pay for it regardless of whether they use it or not - sort of like insurance payments, albeit less costly than most premiums). For "nagging" problems or ongoing "severe" problems (hernias, joint replacements, some forms of cancer, etc) they tend to come to the US for treatment if they can. Some friends of friends have started to go to Mexico, India, or Thailand though. It depends on what they can afford.

 

There are pros and cons to both systems.

[J-rap]

As long as we're sharing stories...

 

Most hospital rooms are between $5,000-$15,000/night, not including physicians or treatments! (My husband was in the hospital for three months.) And once I went into our clinic for a little check-up to have a wart removed (like OP) -- it took 10 minutes, and they decided to code it as surgery and charged me an arm and a leg (several hundred dollars). If they had simply coded it as a doctor's visit, it would have only been $50.

[Stratford]

I wonder if there are any stats on people who use the ER as their own personal recreational drug pharmacy. People come in "allergic" to ibuprofen, tylenol, etc, in search of dilaudid. And, of course, the physicians give it to them just to get them out of the ER. The time and money wasted on these 'patients' is unbelievable.

 

A few years ago there was a mass exodus of OB-GYNs from NY(?) because liability insurance was so high. There should be some recourse for people who are under the care of negligent physicians, but we do need some tort reform, imo.

 

I read an article recently that followed an ER in Texas somewhere. Some ridiculous percentage of the ER visits were made by the same dozen or so people, some of them coming in daily.

 

I work in a ER and see things like this constantly. People coming for non-emergent complaints. I was in triage on Christmas Eve and we saw maybe 20% of the normal volume....most everyone was indeed ill that came that night, just made me think that maybe the other 80% should stay home more often.

 

[/b][/b]

 

I think that it is rare for any individual, group or entity to act outside of its interests. Thus you have hospitals that charge insured patients fully in order to balance out those who are not insured or will not pay. And at the same time, you have patients who insist on antibiotics for ailments that antibiotics won't help. Or you have patients headed to the ER for minor discomforts.

 

A friend who spent years associated with ER medicine sent out this link recently.

 

Good article.

 

Healthcare is a huge tangled mess of a problem. I don't know how to fix it, but the current plan is unsustainable.

[usetoschool]

Don't have an opinion about this documentary regarding the medical systemin the US one way or the other, so not posting it to press an agenda, just to bring up some interesting ideas relative to this discussion.

 

http://www.indiegogo.com/escapefire

 

I do like Dr. Weil who has a role in it.

[jplain]

A great book for anyone interested in the problem and possible solutions:

 

Overtreated: Why Too Much Medicine Is Making Us Sicker and Poorer

 

From Publishers Weekly's review:

Starred Review. Contrary to Americans' common belief that in health care more is more—that more spending, drugs and technology means better care—this lucid report posits that less is actually better. Medical journalist Brownlee acknowledges that state-of-the-art medicine can improve care and save lives. But technology and drugs are misused and overused, she argues, citing a 2003 study of one million Medicare recipients, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, which showed that patients in hospitals that spent the most were 2% to 6% more likely to die than patients in hospitals that spent the least. Additionally, she says, billions per year are spent on unnecessary tests and drugs and on specialists who are rewarded more for some procedures than for more appropriate ones. The solution, Brownlee writes, already exists: the Veterans Health Administration outperforms the rest of the American health care system on multiple measures of quality. The main obstacle to replicating this model nationwide, according to the author, is a powerful cartel of organizations, from hospitals to drug companies, that stand to lose in such a system. Many of Brownlee's points have been much covered, but her incisiveness and proposed solution can add to the health care debate heated up by the release of Michael Moore's Sicko. (Sept.)

Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

[Impish]

Oh, I absolutely agree 100% that there needs to be an overhaul here. I am just saying that Canada's could use an overhaul, too. At least you can GET medical care here, in a timely manner. This is not so in Canada. An "urgent" surgery means you are on a waiting list from one to five YEARS. So, you may not go in to huge debt to get medical care, but chances are you may die waiting for it.

I live in Canada, have worked in health care in two different provinces, and have *never* witnessed this.

That is absolutely not true. The chances are NOT that you will die waiting. I've had several people in my life require surgery and treatment for ife threatening conditions/diseases in the last few years and al were treated to excellent careand are still olquite alive.

 

Issues with wait times generally happen with elective surgeries like hip replacements but that can vary depending on what province you are in.

 

I'll be having surgery in a month for a none-urgent matter relatedto the birth of my son. The only delay iinvolved was in waiting for things to heal up enough for me to have the surgery. Honestly, I rarely recognize the mythical Canadian healthcare system that gets discussed on American forums.

:iagree:

I've been on both sides of that border. I find Americans hyperbolize Canadian health care far more than Canadians do.

 

There are pro and cons to each side, but when it comes down to it, I am grateful I never had a child under US healthcare and I would never want to be a parent under that system. It makes me sad to see posts on here asking if an American parent should take their kid in to a doctor or even in to emergency for symptoms that would, to me, be immediately urgent. I could take my kid in with no concern for co-pays or any payments whatsoever. It saddens me to see a parent have to worry about the checkbook balance before taking a kid in for medical treatment.

:iagree:

As far as wait times go, I'm willing to bet that the fact that *everyone* that needs tests/surgery gets it, as opposed to either not being able to pay out of pocket, or not being approved by insurance is a factor.

 

Nobody gets eliminated from the list b/c of $.

 

I'm fine w/waiting a month, 6 wks (my longest wait ever) to see a specialist, vs getting to the head of the line b/c someone else can't afford the medical care they need.

[*********]

It is very funny. It will bring back memories to anyone whose worked an ER.

 

My bil is an ER tech. He doesn't share detailed stories, but the generalities he has shared are SHOCKING. I had no idea people go to the ER for the things they do.

[farouk]

As long as we're sharing stories...

 

Most hospital rooms are between $5,000-$15,000/night, not including physicians or treatments! (My husband was in the hospital for three months.) And once I went into our clinic for a little check-up to have a wart removed (like OP) -- it took 10 minutes, and they decided to code it as surgery and charged me an arm and a leg (several hundred dollars). If they had simply coded it as a doctor's visit, it would have only been $50.

 

jjhat:

 

Some of this excessive pricing seems predatory, if it's simply a matter of administrators redefining things to charge a huge amount for a small procedure.

[Lara in Colo]

Because of the cost of medicine and the amount of unnecessary procedures AND the fact that we have no insurance; watching House makes me ill.

 

Lara