Health Care for Everyone

[Danoff]

Heavens, no! Those have those awful death panels.

oh wait

So... yes death panels then?

 

[Joey D]

Heavens, no! Those have those awful death panels.

oh wait

That has nothing to do with single payer vs. insurance paid healthcare though. It has everything to do with people not taking the pandemic seriously and there being finite space in a given area's healthcare systems. I believe Italy had the same thing at its peak.

Typically these doomsday plans consist of some sort of algorithm that scores a patient and then hospital staff makes determinations for finite resources. I've never seen one that factors in the propensity to pay. They mostly calculate the survivability of a patient and then compares it to their age. A 70-year-old with cancer is going to have a lower score than a 25-year-old without any existing conditions.

No health system ever wants to break out this plan because it's awful. Providers are saddled with making a choice of who lives and who dies, surviving patients are sometimes riddled with guilt, and patients who die are, well, dead.

 

[Sander 001]

That has nothing to do with single payer vs. insurance paid healthcare though. It has everything to do with people not taking the pandemic seriously and there being finite space in a given area's healthcare systems. I believe Italy had the same thing at its peak.

Typically these doomsday plans consist of some sort of algorithm that scores a patient and then hospital staff makes determinations for finite resources. I've never seen one that factors in the propensity to pay. They mostly calculate the survivability of a patient and then compares it to their age. A 70-year-old with cancer is going to have a lower score than a 25-year-old without any existing conditions.

No health system ever wants to break out this plan because it's awful. Providers are saddled with making a choice of who lives and who dies, surviving patients are sometimes riddled with guilt, and patients who die are, well, dead.

Just had to dispel any illusions that the profiteering style of healthcare is immune from the realities of triage. They are in fact worse.

 

[Joey D]

Just had to dispel any illusions that the profiteering style of healthcare is immune from the realities of triage. They are in fact worse.

How is it worse? Also, most healthcare in the US isn't for profit. But it doesn't matter where you are in the world, if the health system is overrun, someone is going to have to make a decision on who lives and who dies. The same exact thing happened in Italy.

 

[Sander 001]

How is it worse? Also, most healthcare in the US isn't for profit. But it doesn't matter where you are in the world, if the health system is overrun, someone is going to have to make a decision on who lives and who dies. The same exact thing happened in Italy.

Because you may be facing an effective death panel whenever you can't pay, even when there's no pandemic.

 

[Danoff]

Because you may be facing an effective death panel whenever you can't pay, even when there's no pandemic.

Citation needed.

 

[Joey D]

Because you may be facing an effective death panel whenever you can't pay, even when there's no pandemic.

That doesn't happen. The only health systems that are going to refuse to give you care if you can't pay are for-profit ones, and even then EMTALA dictates that they can't refuse you if you present with an emergency or are in labour. If a doctor violated EMTALA, they're liable for fines in excess of $50,000 and the hospital itself can be on the hook for much more. The patient, or patient's family, can also file a lawsuit.

Public and state hospitals, can't deny care at all. Nonprofit and not-for-profit also can only deny care in pretty rare circumstances. If a patient can't pay, they'll typically just write off the loss. It's not uncommon for a health system to write off millions every single month.

 

[Sander 001]

That doesn't happen. The only health systems that are going to refuse to give you care if you can't pay are for-profit ones, and even then EMTALA dictates that they can't refuse you if you present with an emergency or are in labour. If a doctor violated EMTALA, they're liable for fines in excess of $50,000 and the hospital itself can be on the hook for much more. The patient, or patient's family, can also file a lawsuit.

Public and state hospitals, can't deny care at all. Nonprofit and not-for-profit also can only deny care in pretty rare circumstances. If a patient can't pay, they'll typically just write off the loss. It's not uncommon for a health system to write off millions every single month.

"We kept getting lots of bills for surgeries, chemotherapy, all these treatments, all these bills kept coming in.”
Markle decided to stop receiving medical treatment due to the rising costs and debt, and died in September 2018 at the age of 52."

"Millions of Americans – as many as 25% of the population – are delaying getting medical help because of skyrocketing costs"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/07/americans-healthcare-medical-costs

 

[Joey D]

"We kept getting lots of bills for surgeries, chemotherapy, all these treatments, all these bills kept coming in.”
Markle decided to stop receiving medical treatment due to the rising costs and debt, and died in September 2018 at the age of 52."

"Millions of Americans – as many as 25% of the population – are delaying getting medical help because of skyrocketing costs"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/07/americans-healthcare-medical-costs

What does that have to do with health systems deny anyone care? That's people willingly delaying their care because they haven't looked into options for help.

 

[Sander 001]

What does that have to do with health systems deny anyone care? That's people willingly delaying their care because they haven't looked into options for help.

"due to the rising costs and debt," not willingly at all. Leaving your family impoverished, stricken with insurmountable debt.

 

[ryzno]

"due to the rising costs and debt," not willingly at all. Leaving your family impoverished, stricken with insurmountable debt.

You know you can simply not pay it right? Debt doesn't last forever.

 

[Rallywagon]

You know you can simply not pay it right? Debt doesn't last forever.

More importantly (and slightly more ethical) there are quite a few organizations and options out there that help people pay off these bills. As Joey said, there are options out there, these people apparently don't know or want to look for them.

 

[Danoff]

Leaving your family impoverished, stricken with insurmountable debt.

This is an interesting one. Children cannot be "stricken" with the debt of their parents. Couples can even isolate each other from debt and protect additional assets for their children's benefit through trusts.

I'm not a big fan of the US healthcare system. I think it is deeply broken, and stupid, and has some glaringly obvious things we could do to improve it. But I don't advocate for universal healthcare either. It is not the only alternative, and it has its own problems.

The image that you posted could easily have been written by my parents. Their "20 years of savings", which I could see them referring to as a "nice chunk" would be easily wiped out by medical bills. Because they didn't actually save much. In fact, they were expecting that to happen just this year, but insurance covered their procedures. They'd describe themselves as having minded their own business, and if they had avoided credit card debt (which they didn't) it would be easy to tack on to the list of things they did "right". And they love this "I did this - I deserve that" kind of reasoning that is present in that message.

But the reality is that my parents are deadbeats. They refused to plan for the future, they saved very little, not nearly enough, and are not remotely as responsible as they think they are. They're also terrible with things like planning for the future, and making sure that their health insurance covers the scenarios they want it to. They think they deserve the world, even though they've done nothing but gratify themselves gratuitously throughout their lives at the expense of the future. This is why they're Trump supporters. Because he promises them what they think they've earned by demonstrating the right behavior.

If you're responsible and pay your bills, that does not entitle you to avoid death or get someone to pay for whatever you want.

 

[Sander 001]

More importantly (and slightly more ethical) there are quite a few organizations and options out there that help people pay off these bills. As Joey said, there are options out there, these people apparently don't know or want to look for them.

Yeah go begging for help while you're getting destroyed by cancer, great solution.

If you're responsible and pay your bills, that does not entitle you to avoid death or get someone to pay for whatever you want.

You are entitled to healthcare if you have successfully fought for that right. The lobbyists, CEO's, shareholders[ie the death panelists] have defeated that right in the US

 

[Danoff]

You are entitled to healthcare if you have successfully fought for that right. The lobbyists, CEO's, shareholders have defeated that right in the US

It's like you think "right" means "not a right".

 

[Joey D]

"due to the rising costs and debt," not willingly at all. Leaving your family impoverished, stricken with insurmountable debt.

Care is still not being denied.

Yeah go begging for help while you're getting destroyed by cancer, great solution.

It's not begging, there are legitimate organizations that are there to help people. You call and say "I need help". If you get in touch with a financial counselor or a patient advocate, who are both employed by the hospital, they're going to help you as well. If you're from an underserved population, there are typically outreach programs to help you as well. In a previous job, I helped get al the electronic medical record tools setup for a program that helped the Spanish speaking community with diabetes prevention and treatment, it was all free of charge too.

You are entitled to healthcare if you have successfully fought for that right. The lobbyists, CEO's, shareholders[ie the death panelists] have defeated that right in the US

You're entitled to healthcare by law, it's what EMTALA is. You're not, however, entitled to something for free.

Honestly, I don't really understand where you're getting your information. If it's through a series of memes and twitter posts, it's no wonder what you're saying is completely wrong. I've actively worked in healthcare for 10 years and I've been working on the front end aspect of it (scheduling, billing, etc.) for almost 4 years now. I deal with this kind of stuff all the time and what you're implying doesn't happen at most hospitals. At for-profit hospitals, yes, this sort of stuff does happen, but almost every major health system in the US is either publicly-funded, non-profit, or not-for-profit.

Also, you do know that many illnesses that put people in the hospital are caused by lifestyle choices right? Poor diet, no exercise, smoking, drinking, drug use, etc all can lead to being hospitalized with some sort of condition, or at the very least can lead to you needing a significant amount of care. This is not to say that everyone is in poor health because of the choices they make, but there are a decent number of people who are. If you're worried about the cost of healthcare, there are steps you can take to reduce your risk that you'll need it.

 

[Sander 001]

"researchers reported that American life expectancy is declining for the first time in half a century,"




Your prize for beating cancer is crippling debt and prison time.

 

[Danoff]

Your prize for beating cancer is crippling debt and prison time.

To get to the source of that person's tweet I had to follow the NYT article to the article it linked. Imagine my shock (not really) when I discover that his tweet is a misrepresentation of that article, which was discussing abuses of other powers (such as contempt) to arrest people who owed money. In other cases, warrants were issued for missing court hearings in medical debt lawsuits. These were not arrests for being in debt, they were arrests for other actions (like not appearing in court, or being held in contempt). But of course the tweet doesn't include that. And then your own filter twists the tweet, and suddenly the US is arresting people for being in debt.

I'd go further into this topic, but you consistently refuse to engage critical thinking when presented with something that fits your echo chamber.

 

[Sander 001]

To get to the source of that person's tweet I had to follow the NYT article to the article it linked. Imagine my shock (not really) when I discover that his tweet is a misrepresentation of that article, which was discussing abuses of other powers (such as contempt) to arrest people who owed money. In other cases, warrants were issued for missing court hearings in medical debt lawsuits. These were not arrests for being in debt, they were arrests for other actions (like not appearing in court, or being held in contempt). But of course the tweet doesn't include that. And then your own filter twists the tweet, and suddenly the US is arresting people for being in debt.

I'd go further into this topic, but you consistently refuse to engage critical thinking when presented with something that fits your echo chamber.

So your critical thinking informs you that a person is not permitted to draw off their own experiences when commenting on an article? Or that a tweet is supposed to represent something defined by your own arbitrary parameters?

Keep making yourself like a clown as the Dunning Kruger effect remains beyond your reach, laughably continue to judge others' critical thinking.

https://features.propublica.org/med...-decide-who-gets-arrested-coffeyville-kansas/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coffey...s-is-jailing-people-over-unpaid-medical-debt/

 

[Danoff]

So your critical thinking informs you that a person is not permitted to draw off their own experiences when commenting on an article? Or that a tweet is supposed to represent something defined by your own arbitrary parameters?

Keep making yourself like a clown as the Dunning Kruger effect remains beyond your reach, laughably continue to judge others' critical thinking.

https://features.propublica.org/med...-decide-who-gets-arrested-coffeyville-kansas/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coffey...s-is-jailing-people-over-unpaid-medical-debt/

You literally just posted articles saying exactly what I just said (but you must have read the headlines and stopped). No, my critical thinking does not inform me that people are not permitted to draw off of their own experiences. I have no idea where you went to get there.

 

[Sander 001]

You literally just posted articles saying exactly what I just said (but you must have read the headlines and stopped). No, my critical thinking does not inform me that people are not permitted to draw off of their own experiences. I have no idea where you went to get there.

Thankfully we can bypass your "critical thinking" and just rely on direct quotes.

"What's happening here is a jailhouse shake-down for cash that is the criminalization of private debt,"

"His court dates had begun after his son developed leukemia, and they’d picked up when his wife started having seizures. He, too, had been arrested because of medical debt. It had happened more than once."

 

[Danoff]

Thankfully we can bypass your "critical thinking" and just rely on direct quotes.

Quote-mining. Everyone's favorite obfuscation technique.

"What's happening here is a jailhouse shake-down for cash that is the criminalization of private debt,"

This is a quote within the article (quote of a quote here) of someone at the ACLU delivering a soundbite. It looks like (the article doesn't make it super clear) it's in relation to contempt of court. Which is exactly what I said.

"His court dates had begun after his son developed leukemia, and they’d picked up when his wife started having seizures. He, too, had been arrested because of medical debt. It had happened more than once."

Check this out, referring to the same "he":

Biggs, who is 41, had to take a day off from work to be there. He knew from experience that if he didn’t show up, he could be put in jail.

Jailed for refusing to appear in court due to a lawsuit. That's what is meant here by "arrested because of medical debt". What it means is "arrested because of failure to appear in court".

Nice try. Want to play again?

 

[Tornado]

Keep making yourself like a clown as the Dunning Kruger effect remains beyond your reach, laughably continue to judge others' critical thinking.

lol you were the one telling a person who works in a hospital how hospitals work because of stuff you saw on Twitter just a few hours ago.

 

[Sander 001]

Quote-mining. Everyone's favorite obfuscation technique.



This is a quote within the article (quote of a quote here) of someone at the ACLU delivering a soundbite. It looks like (the article doesn't make it super clear) it's in relation to contempt of court. Which is exactly what I said.



Check this out, referring to the same "he":



Jailed for refusing to appear in court due to a lawsuit. That's what is meant here by "arrested because of medical debt". What it means is "arrested because of failure to appear in court".

Nice try. Want to play again?

Nope, you don't have the basic thinking skills to understand that they were in court for medical debt to begin with then imprisoned following decisions and judgements from those proceedings.

Continue to be in denial of injustices of the judicial system, continue to be in denial of the inequities of the healthcare system and that's your stupidity, not mine.

 

[Sander 001]

lol you were the one telling a person who works in a hospital how hospitals work because of stuff you saw on Twitter just a few hours ago.

Those Twitter posts linked to articles which thoroughly demonstrate the brokenness of the healthcare system. Did you read any of them?

 

[Danoff]

Nope, you don't have the basic thinking skills to understand that they were in court for medical debt to begin with then imprisoned following decisions and judgements from those proceedings.

Yes, they were in court being sued over medical bills. It is not the reason for the arrest. Nice try, that's quite the stretch.

Continue to be in denial of injustices of the judicial system, continue to be in denial of the inequities of the healthcare system and that's your stupidity, not mine.

You don't seem to have the foggiest. The problem is, you're not interested in learning.

 

[Sander 001]

Yes, they were in court being sued over medical bills. It is not the reason for the arrest. Nice try, that's quite the stretch.



You don't seem to have the foggiest. The problem is, you're not interested in learning.

It's a technicality, a technicality which they are exploiting and that's why it's under constitutional challenge.

"Most states don’t allow contempt charges to be used for nonpayment, and some, like Indiana and Florida, have concluded that it is unconstitutional. Michael Crowell, a retired law professor at the University of North Carolina and an expert in judicial authority, reviewed Casement’s policy. “You can’t lock people up for contempt for failing to pay unless you have gone to the trouble to determine that they really have the ability to pay,"

Certainly I'm not interested in learning from somebody who just spews their opinions all day without anything to back it up. Especially without critical thinking, demonstrably.

 

[Danoff]

It's a technicality, a technicality which they are exploiting and that's why it's under constitutional challenge.

Totally honest question here... do you not see how you've changed your argument with this?

 

[Sander 001]

Totally honest question here... do you not see how you've changed your argument with this?

I hadn't realized I would need to connect so many dots for you.
My argument remains unchanged.

 

[Danoff]

I hadn't realized I would need to connect so many dots for you.
My argument remains unchanged.

So that's a no then.

Your argument shifted from:

"researchers reported that American life expectancy is declining for the first time in half a century,"
...
Your prize for beating cancer is crippling debt and prison time.

To some judges are corrupt. That's a hell of a shift.

Also, you quote-mined again, took that statement (your quote from the article about contempt for non-payment) completely out of context, and presented it as something else:

IN SOME COURTHOUSES, like Coffeyville’s, collection attorneys are not only invited to decide when warrants are issued, but they can also shape how law is applied. Recently, Hassenplug came to believe that debtors were only attending every other hearing in a scheme to avoid jail, and he raised his concern with the judge. He suggested that the judge could fix this by charging extra legal fees; Casement wrote a new policy explaining that anyone who missed two debtor’s exam hearings without a good reason would be ordered to pay an extra $50 to cover the plaintiff’s attorney fees. If they didn’t pay, they would be given a two-day jail sentence; for each additional hearing that they missed, they would be charged a higher attorney fee and get a longer sentence.

Most states don’t allow contempt charges to be used for nonpayment, and some, like Indiana and Florida, have concluded that it is unconstitutional. Michael Crowell, a retired law professor at the University of North Carolina and an expert in judicial authority, reviewed Casement’s policy. “You can’t lock people up for contempt for failing to pay unless you have gone to the trouble to determine that they really have the ability to pay,” he said. Casement told me he hadn’t made findings on ability to pay before ordering defendants to foot attorney’s fees, “but I know that’s something the court should consider,” he said. He also made plain why he wrote the policy: “Mr. Hassenplug and Brehm’s outfit have asked me to.” (Brehm denied she requested this.)

So if you fail to show up for court you get charged attorney's fees, and if you refuse to pay those you can be held in contempt... in some cases.... by some judges... and it's questionable.

And this supports your initial thesis that the US healthcare system puts you in jail for being in debt from cancer treatment. Wild.