Can Any Medical Professionals Shed Light On This?

Printable View

02-15-2008, 12:24 PM
zeezil

Can Any Medical Professionals Shed Light On This?

Can Any Medical Professionals Shed Light On This?
Posted By Paul Nachman On 14 February 2008

The Bradenton (FL) Herald had a routine article the other day [Group to educate on immigration, by Maura Possley, February 12, 2008: http://www.bradenton.com/local/story/394237.html ] about a couple of local activists who are out to obfuscate the difference between immigrants and illegal aliens.

(You might want to complain to the reporter about her shoddy reporting in parroting the activists’ agenda. She, too, conflates legal and illegal immigration, even where she isn’t directly quoting the two bleaters. Her email address is given in the article.)

More interesting is one of the online comments associated with the article. It’s comment 6536.27, posted by “TC12″ at 9:38 p.m. on February 12. TC12 writes, in part:

Quote:

My son needed surgery. I called Manatee Memorial and it was going to cost $11,000 for a 45 minute surgery. I called Manatee Surgery Center & the same procedure cost $2500. You know why? Because the surgery center doesn’t have to take everyone that walks in the door, insurance or not (mostly not!)

This is interesting, because the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (the EMTALA law of 1986, 42 U.S.C. § 1395dd) is the unfunded mandate that is — via uncompensated care provided in their emergency rooms — beggaring hospitals nationwide, especially under the demands of illegal aliens. As Wikipedia describes it,

Quote:

EMTALA] requires hospitals and ambulance services to provide care to anyone needing emergency treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay. There are no reimbursement provisions. As a result of the act, patients needing emergency treatment can be discharged only under their own informed consent or when their condition requires transfer to a hospital better equipped to administer the treatment.

(Wikipedia also quotes a Kaiser Family Foundation study to the effect that illegal aliens are disproportionately low users of hospital emergency rooms. My skepticism over such claims is informed by reportage such as this by VDARE’s own Joe Guzzardi. Joe was actually writing about people here legally, but why would the dynamics be different for illegal aliens?)

Anyway, I urge any medically knowledgeable VDARE readers who can educate us on distinctions among types of medical facilites with respect to the EMTALA law — such as made by commenter TC12, quoted above — to do so.

The other comments associated with that Bradenton Herald article are overwhelmingly heartening, with a few of the usual mindless exceptions mixed in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article printed from VDARE.com: Blog Articles: http://blog.vdare.com

URL to article: http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2008/02/ ... t-on-this/
02-15-2008, 12:37 PM
cayla99

emergency rooms must take all patients. When I had surgery on my hand, my doctor said he would rather do it at the surgery center. when I asked why, he said it falls under clinics and not emergency care so there was little to no chance of delay or needing to reschedule. Maybe non-emergency clinics can turn away uninsured or non cash paying patients.
02-15-2008, 01:04 PM
sippy

Yes, hospitals by federal law cannot turn away anyone based on their citizenship, ability to pay, etc. However, I do believe privately owned clinics or outpatient clinics can because outpatient clinics don't provide primary care.
This is why illegals are using emergency rooms as their PCP because they know they cannot be turned away. And if they give them an alias, big whoop, they know if their bills get sent to a collection agency the agency has no chance of recovering these costs because they have no idea how to find the REAL person who gave them the false info.a

Somebody should email this person and ask them to google Parkland Hospital in TX, and see how many hospitals have gone bankrupt because of overwhelming un-reimbursed costs.
02-15-2008, 01:11 PM
PhredE

Another practical, but not as much legal factor that plays into this is..

The fee structure applied to those w/o insurance tends to be inflated as hospitals 'tweak the numbers' to a). recoup more on the ones that pay (vs. the ones that don't) and b). they can then write-off a greater amount when the patient does not pay. They are playing games with the accounting.

Hopefully more hospital accounting/administrators will be nailed doing this and with any luck some will find their way to a cozy cell in a state or Federal institution somewhere. They really are stretching the legal bounds in this practice as there are Federal regulations on what medical/dental organizations can charge.
02-15-2008, 01:12 PM
cayla99

Quote:

Originally Posted by sippy

Yes, hospitals by federal law cannot turn away anyone based on their citizenship, ability to pay, etc. However, I do believe privately owned clinics or outpatient clinics can because outpatient clinics don't provide primary care.
This is why illegals are using emergency rooms as their PCP because they know they cannot be turned away. And if they give them an alias, big whoop, they know if their bills get sent to a collection agency the agency has no chance of recovering these costs because they have no idea how to find the REAL person who gave them the false info.a

Somebody should email this person and ask them to google Parkland Hospital in TX, and see how many hospitals have gone bankrupt because of overwhelming un-reimbursed costs.

In California, UC Berkeley did a study in 2001. They concluded between 1995-2000 California had 23 hospitals close down because of this. I am not finding any national or updated numbers, but I do know, hospital closures were on the news in Cali right up until the day I left at the end of December 2007.