The problem with healthcare
- Thread starter WATU2
- Start date
Maybe health costs are so high because of this:
Number of doctors in the USA - 691,400
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/physicians-and-surgeons-htm
Number of lawyers in the USA - 1,225,452
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorneys_in_the_United_States
This post was edited on 9/22 10:19 AM by rabidTU
Number of doctors in the USA - 691,400
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/physicians-and-surgeons-htm
Number of lawyers in the USA - 1,225,452
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorneys_in_the_United_States
This post was edited on 9/22 10:19 AM by rabidTU
Why are we now having all of these "network" issues with health insurance? A person can do all they can to verify that all the caregivers are "in network" only to discover that the actual doctor in the group who was called in for the procedure is out of network and not covered. Nevermind that everyone who could possibly be told of the insurance coverage was told including the group's administrator.
I don't recall ever having these issues five years ago. Why have we gone to this type of restrictive in network coverage? You can have one clinic be in network and the same name clinic 10 miles away be out of network. Doctors within a group can be in or out of network and you have no control over whose on call for a certain day or even time. Very frustrating.
I don't recall ever having these issues five years ago. Why have we gone to this type of restrictive in network coverage? You can have one clinic be in network and the same name clinic 10 miles away be out of network. Doctors within a group can be in or out of network and you have no control over whose on call for a certain day or even time. Very frustrating.
What happens if you are in a network and your doctor brings in an out of network doctor to assist and you say, "Too bad, stick your bill where the sun doesn't shine?" Or, "I'll pay him $10 a month till I get there." Don't get me wrong...I pay my bills...but this story is so outlandish.
My wife recently had a baby via C section at St Francis here is Tulsa. We talked to St. Francis before hand to verify all caregivers were in network. We met with the anesthiologist briefly at the pre-op appt and again verified that he was in-network. Well....turns out the anesthiologist on call for the their group that morning was not in network and now we have more than a thousand dollar bill for the delivery from that group. Mind you...we did everything right imo other than verifying that everyone in the operating room was in-network during the surgery.
Gotta be a better system.
Gotta be a better system.
Several years ago, I had an appendix removed on a Saturday afternoon. Though I had had a EKG in the system a couple of weeks before the anesthiologist wanted a new one. As he walks in the tech who did the test asked him if he wanted to look at it. "Did the computer show it was okay" says he "Yes" says the tech "Then I don't need to look at it." Of course, when his bill came in there was a line item for interpreting the EKG. I didn't so much mind the fresh test, but the charge for looking at it seemed odd since he waved that off. He never broke stride as he walk through.
When more govt beaurocracy is added to the healthcare system like Obamacare its another hurdle for the patient to jump and why costs rise in general. The original reason of keeping costs down is forgotten and ignored. The patient is no longer in full control since the doctor who lives down the block can't be confronted over cost, the cost control mechanism is now in DC. That system also promotes graft and corruption.
I remember when my mother broke her hip and we were visiting her in rehab. A doctor with a clipboard in his hand came to the door, stepped in and asked if everything was alright - took no more than a few seconds. He did this almost everytime we were there - no exam, not even a simple check of the patients pulse. But it was evidently a govt required/medicare doctors checkup. We discovered the charge was over $150. A close friend of my mother who helped take care of her sent a letter asking for an investigation. No reply. Sent two other letters and no reply. So it must have been a way "some" doctors game the system. Theres really no benefit to the patient and the doctor is off the hook since he can say he "observed" the patient. But the charge was still applied. We began referring to that as the "doctor duck".
I don't think this kind of thing would occur if patients were more in direct control of whats billed and if they had to pay for any unneeded costs. But those costs are hidden much of the time.
Another exmple was comical. A friend was going to have open heart surgery. So he asked for some of the costs before hand. The hospital gave him a "list" of probable costs. One of them was for a "backup" doctor who would observe the procedure. Well that sounds fine on face, but he asked why they had to have a backup? The reply was that a backup was required if something happened to the surgeon at the operating table such as a a heart attack or seizure of some kind. It was supposed to be a backup procedure to ensure that the patient survived.
So my friend thought about it and said "now do you expect me to believe that if my surgeon has a heart attack that you'll be treating me or will you be treating him?" TBH, thats a pretty good question isn't it?
These are both examples of medicare, not medicaide or Obamacare, but my guess is that they will be similar to whats in store for us in the future.
This post was edited on 9/23 10:47 AM by rabidTU
I remember when my mother broke her hip and we were visiting her in rehab. A doctor with a clipboard in his hand came to the door, stepped in and asked if everything was alright - took no more than a few seconds. He did this almost everytime we were there - no exam, not even a simple check of the patients pulse. But it was evidently a govt required/medicare doctors checkup. We discovered the charge was over $150. A close friend of my mother who helped take care of her sent a letter asking for an investigation. No reply. Sent two other letters and no reply. So it must have been a way "some" doctors game the system. Theres really no benefit to the patient and the doctor is off the hook since he can say he "observed" the patient. But the charge was still applied. We began referring to that as the "doctor duck".
I don't think this kind of thing would occur if patients were more in direct control of whats billed and if they had to pay for any unneeded costs. But those costs are hidden much of the time.
Another exmple was comical. A friend was going to have open heart surgery. So he asked for some of the costs before hand. The hospital gave him a "list" of probable costs. One of them was for a "backup" doctor who would observe the procedure. Well that sounds fine on face, but he asked why they had to have a backup? The reply was that a backup was required if something happened to the surgeon at the operating table such as a a heart attack or seizure of some kind. It was supposed to be a backup procedure to ensure that the patient survived.
So my friend thought about it and said "now do you expect me to believe that if my surgeon has a heart attack that you'll be treating me or will you be treating him?" TBH, thats a pretty good question isn't it?
These are both examples of medicare, not medicaide or Obamacare, but my guess is that they will be similar to whats in store for us in the future.
This post was edited on 9/23 10:47 AM by rabidTU
The role of the government is to set guidelines; not run things.
The fta regulates airlines; it's isnt one.
The fcc regulates tv and radio stations; it isnt one.
The fda regulates drugs; it doesnt manufacture any.
. . .
That what's wrong with social security, the veterans admin, welfare, ...
The fta regulates airlines; it's isnt one.
The fcc regulates tv and radio stations; it isnt one.
The fda regulates drugs; it doesnt manufacture any.
. . .
That what's wrong with social security, the veterans admin, welfare, ...
