I'm betting if she doesn't pay the next one will be $553 to try and recover the original visit. People who scream socialism when discussing universal health care seem to forget that they are generally already paying for the uninsured.
Response from Sen. Saxby Chambliss~~~
- Thread starter Lynnie
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
I'm betting if she doesn't pay the next one will be $553 to try and recover the original visit. People who scream socialism when discussing universal health care seem to forget that they are generally already paying for the uninsured.
I saw a really good explanation of this on a PBS show about healthcare costs.
In the ER, you are paying for all of the equipment and all of the medical expertise that is just sitting there, in case it is needed. In this case, all that was needed was a pediatrician and a tongue depressor, but remember, at the hospital ER you would have had access to almost any diagnostic machine, trauma medicine specialists, cardiologists, neurologists, a full operating room and even a helicopter to take you to a different facility if needed. They are prepared to deal with anything.
That's what makes the ER different than the walk-in clinic, and that's why ER people will tell you to go to the walk-in clinic if you're not having a heart attack or have been shot.
I Appreciate all of the input on my personal experience. Let me say, too, that I'm not an over-reactive parent. If it had just been up to me, she would never have gone. My husband, on the other hand, goes into a panic when his children are sick. I should have looked into the walk-in clinics first. But dealing with a sick baby and a freaked-out husband doesn't leave much room for rationality. it's what i did at the time and while i have no regrets, the billing to me seems outrageous for the service that was provided. Being charged for equipment that's available is BS IMO. And let me assure you, if i had flashed them a blue cross card, there would have been oooodles of unnecessary tests, xrays, equipment used to run up the bill .... That's the way i see it.
As far as the hospital helping with the bill, they give you a form to fill out for financial assistance. However, you have to apply for Medicaid first, and be turned down for the hospital to lower your rate. As of right now, waiting to see if we qualify for medicaid. Swell.
As far as the hospital helping with the bill, they give you a form to fill out for financial assistance. However, you have to apply for Medicaid first, and be turned down for the hospital to lower your rate. As of right now, waiting to see if we qualify for medicaid. Swell.
Hey Andy! I agree that tort reform should be where we start. We do have portability with the inception of HIPAA, even for individual plans. When you leave one carrier, you recieve a certificate of continuous coverage. Pre-ex is one to work on, but is presently covered for all group plans, even if your group is only two people. If a carrier is licensed with a particular state, they can write business in that state. Agents have to be duly licensed in each state, however. Catastrophic coverage was the original insurance plan and we still have those plans; they are incredibly affordable.
Tort reform, punitive ramifications for frivolous lawsuits, allowing the doctors decide the care for the patient, pharma reform and efforts to keep competition healthy. I don't know the exact numbers, but I suspect capping lawsuits and pharma reform will save billions each year.
If each state proposed changes and their legislature could pass those changes, there would be a great deal more people covered, but we still have to educate on their responsibility and keeping the coverage. Again, many people choose to self-insure. Some buy drugs, maintain some luxuries instead of insurance and that is their choice.
I remain hopeful that proper reform will be passed! ;-)
and paying out the wazzooo for our own, disease-based health care.