A case study: http://tinyurl.com/687bpnn
The whole story is interesting, but I want to emphasize this excerpt:
ON Aug. 17, after one year, seven months and 13 days, Mr. Fok returned to his apartment in Bensonhurst, carrying 21 filled prescriptions and his hemi walker. For the $1.4 million in services that Downtown had provided, total reimbursement to the hospital from Medicaid was $114,000, Mr. Menkes said.
Mr. Fok’s immigration status never kept him from receiving treatment, but it helped make sure that his care would be delivered in the most expensive setting possible and in a place no one wants to spend more time than necessary. He was cut off from his family. On several occasions he showed signs of depression or expressed suicidal thoughts.
If he had been insured or immediately eligible for Medicaid or Medicare, he might have gone to a nursing home after a week or two, where the average daily cost in New York is about $350 — and where he might have had steady companionship. Or he might have received a home health aide in his apartment, which could have cost even less, depending on the required hours.
For hospitals like Downtown that treat many illegal immigrants, the health care plan enacted last year does nothing to solve this liability, Mr. Menkes said. During debates about reform, lawmakers insisted that the plan’s benefits not extend to the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants.
Lawmakers now are proposing cuts to Medicare and Medicaid to reduce the deficit, which may put even more pressure on hospitals like Downtown. Nor is this likely to change. Few politicians who want to be re-elected will advocate broadening public services to illegal immigrants or increasing the taxpayer cost of health care.
(For perspective, the author explains earlier in the article that the cost of Fok's medical care average several thousand dollars per day in the Downtown hospital.)
Nobody should be happy about the outcome of this story, but the real question is: how should lawmakers respond to this situation so as to prevent it from happening again? Do we cheer enthusiastically for the government to kick the similarly uninsured to the curb, or do we broaden coverage benefits so as to continue caring for the similarly uninsured without the unnecessary costs?
Originally posted by wittywonkaMr. Fok’s immigration status never kept him from receiving treatment, but it helped make sure that his care would be delivered in the most expensive setting possible...
A case study: http://tinyurl.com/687bpnn
The whole story is interesting, but I want to emphasize this excerpt:
ON Aug. 17, after one year, seven months and 13 days, Mr. Fok returned to his apartment in Bensonhurst, carrying 21 filled prescriptions and his hemi walker. For the $1.4 million in services that Downtown had provided, total reimbursemen ...[text shortened]... benefits so as to continue caring for the similarly uninsured without the unnecessary costs?
When third parties are involved, there is no effective check on the impulse to make everything as expensive as possible. Health care has a maximum of third parties involved -- most of us don't even know what procedures cost -- and so health care costs continue through the roof.
The solution often proposed -- government regulation of prices -- is a poor, clumsy, and often totally ineffective susbstitute for the highly efficent operation of market forces. It is ironic to propose that health care costs that are rising as a direct result of too much government regulation should then be cured by heaping on MORE regulation. The net effect, usually, is a slight check in price increases (instead of the decrease that should occur) and rationing of healthcare (instead of the increased supply that should occur.)
But such is the faith of some people in governments...they are betrayed and don't even know it. They are even happy about it!
Originally posted by spruce112358The net effect, usually, is a slight check in price increases (instead of the decrease that should occur) and rationing of healthcare (instead of the increased supply that should occur.)
[b]Mr. Fok’s immigration status never kept him from receiving treatment, but it helped make sure that his care would be delivered in the most expensive setting possible...
When third parties are involved, there is no effective check on the impulse to make everything as expensive as possible. Health care has a maximum of third parties involved -- ...[text shortened]... eople in governments...they are betrayed and don't even know it. They are even happy about it![/b]
Perhaps you can cite some research backing up this claim?
Originally posted by spruce112358I'm not sure we're looking at the same problem. I'm trying to ask: wouldn't giving illegal immigrants some basic health care coverage improve the system in the long run? You don't have to turn to anecdotes like the one presented in the NY Times article--across the country, why would we encourage a health care system where illegal immigrants (not to mention anyone else who is uninsured or underinsured) flood emergency rooms with non-acute medical concerns and consequently drive up prices for everyone?
[b]Mr. Fok’s immigration status never kept him from receiving treatment, but it helped make sure that his care would be delivered in the most expensive setting possible...
When third parties are involved, there is no effective check on the impulse to make everything as expensive as possible. Health care has a maximum of third parties involved -- ...[text shortened]... eople in governments...they are betrayed and don't even know it. They are even happy about it![/b]
Originally posted by EladarYou'd still be kicking the person to the curb, it's just that now it'd more likely than not be the curb of a third-world country with a third-rate health care system.
Simple solution: don't allow people like this to immigrate. Once the person ends up in the hospital, don't kick the person to the curb, kick the person back to his or her country of origin. This goes for both legal and illegal immigrants.
Originally posted by EladarSo you oppose the Hippocratic Oath?
Simple solution: don't allow people like this to immigrate. Once the person ends up in the hospital, don't kick the person to the curb, kick the person back to his or her country of origin. This goes for both legal and illegal immigrants.
And if I were to work as a postdoc in the US at some point you would have me put on a plane to Holland if I were to break a leg?
Originally posted by wittywonkaNo, I'm not kicking the person to the curb. I'm kicking the person back to his or her country of origin.
You'd still be kicking the person to the curb, it's just that now it'd more likely than not be the curb of a third-world country with a third-rate health care system.
Once we can balance our budget and pay off our national debt, then we should help the rest of the world. It looks like Germany is coming to a similar position if it finally says no more to funding Greece.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraDo doctors oppose the Hippocratic Oath when they charge their patients more than the patient can afford to pay?
So you oppose the Hippocratic Oath?
And if I were to work as a postdoc in the US at some point you would have me put on a plane to Holland if I were to break a leg?
Governments do not take Hippocratic Oaths, doctors do. If the doctors wish to cure patients and charge rates that patients can afford to pay, then that would be great.
If you worked in the US, I'd expect your employer to have health insurance that you could buy and you'd have to pay up like the rest of us.
Originally posted by EladarDo you have ancesters who were legal immigrants?
Simple solution: don't allow people like this to immigrate. Once the person ends up in the hospital, don't kick the person to the curb, kick the person back to his or her country of origin. This goes for both legal and illegal immigrants.
Originally posted by badmoonI have a lot of ancestors and I know that some were legal immigrants. Others I don't know about and might have been illegal. Some of my ancestors were native Americans.
Do you have ancesters who were legal immigrants?
The ones that came over legally didn't come over here and suck off the government's nipples. If the immigrant is willing to pay for his or her own medical expenses they the immigrant should stay. If the immigrant plans on milking the system, then kick the immigrant out.
Originally posted by EladarLooking back at the NY Times article, if you're considering this man who is diabetic, post-stroke, unemployed, uninsured, and almost entirely unable to provide for himself, how would flying this guy back to China not be kicking him to the curb?
No, I'm not kicking the person to the curb. I'm kicking the person back to his or her country of origin.
Originally posted by wittywonkaThe Chinese government can take care of him. We can't take care of the world.
Looking back at the NY Times article, if you're considering this man who is diabetic, post-stroke, unemployed, uninsured, and almost entirely unable to provide for himself, how would flying this guy back to China [b]not be kicking him to the curb?[/b]
When I said kick him to the curb, I meant literally kicking him to a curb in the US. He may end up on a curb, but it won't be one of our curbs. Let each country take care of its own problems.
Originally posted by EladarThat's quite an impressive array of unambiguous criteria you've presented for us.
If the immigrant is willing to pay for his or her own medical expenses they the immigrant should stay. If the immigrant plans on milking the system, then kick the immigrant out.
Where in the NY Times article did you get the impression that Fok wanted to have a stroke, wanted to develop diabetes, and wanted to be a burden on his family? Where did you get the impression that he enjoyed living a life of solitude?
Originally posted by wittywonkaIt doesn't matter if he wanted to or not. It is the fact that we can't allow a system that can be milked that way. We can't afford it.
That's quite an impressive array of unambiguous criteria you've presented for us.
Where in the NY Times article did you get the impression that Fok wanted to have a stroke, wanted to develop diabetes, and wanted to be a burden on his family? Where did you get the impression that he enjoyed living a life of solitude?
We can't afford to put immigrants (legal or illegal) on our social coverage. We need to send them home.