• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Patients Pay Before Seeing Doctor as Deductibles Spread

Uhm you need to check this doctor out. Seems fraudulent. What if the costs to see this doctor are less than the full deductible? I mean if one's going into a hospital and they require full deductible (been there) that makes sense because the surgery or whatever is likely going to be way more than most any deductible. But a doc's visit shouldn't be over a $200 or so, so what's your mom's deductible and tell me you don't think that deductible is payable over and over rather than accumulative.

All the docs she has looked into so far want upfront money to sign her on to make up for the gap in Medicare payments. Could be because she is 80 and has preexisting conditions.
 
Again, though there are people who visit emergency rooms who are penniless, unless they can demonstrate the ability to pay to admitting personnel their treatment is limited to emergency and life saving care only. You simply do not know what you're talking about.

You're wrong, unless you think treatment for an ear infection or strep throat, getting a sliver of metal out of the white of the eye, skin rash are emergencies...sorry, but emergency rooms see who arrives and they treat them as well as they can. You can go to a ER and be seen for a cold. Once they see you, they don't say, "oh, you're not sick enough, go find a doctor," they give you meds and or prescriptions.
 
All the docs she has looked into so far want upfront money to sign her on to make up for the gap in Medicare payments. Could be because she is 80 and has preexisting conditions.
Oh, I'm not saying they don't want money up front, but they can't want "the whole deductible" as that is against all costs, not each cost. Some could require you to put up the co-pay for each appt, I get that, by it a set amount or percentage. For example when I had my hysterectomy, the doc and hospital required we pay our estimated 20% up front. That's an inconvenience but makes sense.
 
If you're required to pay your deductable up front at the doctor and you don't have that money, you have no other choice, do you?
Are you meaning to say copay? It just that one doesn't pay one's deductible to doctors. Now if one's deductible isn't used up, then the doctor can require you to pay upfront for full appt, but they can't take your entire deductible unless your immediate care from him/her is going to be at least as much as the deductibles. Since most insurance has deductibles $1000-5000, I find it hard to believe one doc appt could be that expensive. Sounds like what you have are fraudulent docs trying to take advantage of stupid, scared people.
 
Right now you could walk into any emergency room in the country and find people waiting to see doctors who haven't got a penny to their name. Sorry, that's just not the case. The modern ER has been turned into a fast-service doctor's office for the poor.
I agree entirely, and this is part of what ACA is trying to resolve. It won't resolve all of them, some will still not have insurance, some will have insurance but not the copay to go the doc instead of the ER, but it should help lots and lots that are a bit better off than that, but not well enough off to afford insurance and copays as they stood till this month.
 
Why would anyone with health insurance go through the hell of an emergency room visit?
1. Time of day. Emergency rooms see many things that could be handled during the day at a reg doc, but surprisingly things hurt and bother much worse in the evening and night when we are not so busy and we just notice it more. So often the final straw of willingness to suffer is reached at night.

2. You have a doc, but he's booked for two weeks or more. Problem isn't an emergency but it would be if it was left for 2-3 weeks.

3. You don't have a doc, and can't find one to take you in the next two months.

4. It turns out only to be an ear infection, but the baby hasn't stopped screaming since 8pm and it's now 2am.

I'm sure there's more, shall I go on.
 
Please pick up the quote from the article that says that. How would your doctor know if you had or hadn't paid your deductible? In addition! Your insurance company has negotiated rates from healthcare providers. Blue Cross pays a different amount than Nationwide, IOW. Just because the doctor bills $100 for a blood test in no WAY means that your insurance company is allowing that amount.

The way you guys are figuring it, it's going to cost you $5,000 to go to the doctor. :rofl

I agree, and have reinterated even EXCEPT for one point. The doc knows if your deductible is paid in full or in part or not yet at all when his assistants call the insurance company. That information is shared with the doc.
 
Are you entirely ignorant about how costs for most product and services are not controlled at all by the consumer? Seriously, supply and demand aren't even real in the world much anymore with stock market style pricing, not consumer supply and demand, being the manner for pricing.
Additionally since health isn't something someone can hang around and wait for, consumers don't have the time and luxury to wait for any potential supply and demand to set in.

Are you entirely ignorant about the relationship between suppliers and consumers? Health care costs are spiraling out of control because most of the consumers of health care don't have any idea what they're actually being charged and, further, don't particulary care. See Maggie's $15,000 colonoscopy, for example. Between the regulations that suppress competition in health care and the pooled payer system, consumers don't have the means nor the motivation to control costs.
 
Are you entirely ignorant about the relationship between suppliers and consumers? Health care costs are spiraling out of control because most of the consumers of health care don't have any idea what they're actually being charged and, further, don't particulary care. See Maggie's $15,000 colonoscopy, for example. Between the regulations that suppress competition in health care and the pooled payer system, consumers don't have the means nor the motivation to control costs.
So then tell me how the lack of regulation for the past..... forever! has helped. The number one thing ACA does to help this is by acting as a representative of the general public which individually has no ability to tell docs to charge less or insurance to pay doctors less, or insurance to pay the docs and not so much to themselves.... So ACA has a provision for the insurance companies that 80 or 85% of all insurance payments must go to medical care. That should help because the insurance companies will begin to put pressure on these costs that to date only Medicare has done since things like refusing treatment to pre-existing conditions won't be the way they pad there bottom lines.
 
Last edited:
You're wrong, unless you think treatment for an ear infection or strep throat, getting a sliver of metal out of the white of the eye, skin rash are emergencies...sorry, but emergency rooms see who arrives and they treat them as well as they can. You can go to a ER and be seen for a cold. Once they see you, they don't say, "oh, you're not sick enough, go find a doctor," they give you meds and or prescriptions.

Please stop, you're really shovelling false info and it isn't helping. Unless you're bleeding out the first person you see BEFORE you receive care at an ER are admitting personnel. They determine your ability to pay. If you cannot demonstrate that, the only care you will receive is emergency and/or life saving care. With exception of skin rash (depending upon the severity), what you describe is considered emergency care. If you go to the ER for a simple cold you will be treated ONLY if you convince admitting personnel that you have insurance or the ability to pay. Otherwise you'll be advised to see your family doctor or visit a free care clinic.
 
So then tell me how the lack of regulation for the past..... forever! has helped. The number one thing ACA does to help this is by acting as a representative of the general public which individually has no ability to tell docs to charge less or insurance to pay doctors less, or insurance to pay the docs and not so much to themselves.... So ACA has a provision for the insurance companies that 80 or 85% of all insurance payments must go to medical care. That should help because the insurance companies will begin to put pressure on these costs that to date only Medicare has done since things like refusing treatment to pre-existing conditions won't be the way they pad there bottom lines.

Lack of regulation? Is that a serious question? I don't think I can help you if it is.
 
Simply not true. Sorry, but you are not well informed. Yes, you see the admitting nurse, and yes they may suggest that you take it to a clinic, but they do not force you to leave. They do not refuse to see you. In some very slick ERs they now have two tiers of ER, one is like a free clinic and is usually just "through that door" for the more minor things. Otherwise you will be seen if you don't leave. Perhaps before you think you know it all, you should visit an ER in the afternoon, or late evening and learn for yourself. Everyone that chooses to remain will be seen.
 
Lack of regulation? Is that a serious question? I don't think I can help you if it is.
Except for Medicare/Medicaid refusing to pay over a certain amount for procedures. Please don't just talk out of your ass, tell me where medical price regulations through the gov't exist. I await.
 
Except for Medicare/Medicaid refusing to pay over a certain amount for procedures. Please don't just talk out of your ass, tell me where medical price regulations through the gov't exist. I await.

We've been regulating the price upwards (indirectly) by inserting layers between the producer and the consumer in health care for years. Now you want to have direct price controls to counteract the upward trend that regulations are responsbile for, and you expect that it will be entirely free of negative consequences (i.e. shortages). Typical utopian fantasy.
 
We've been regulating the price upwards (indirectly) by inserting layers between the producer and the consumer in health care for years. Now you want to have direct price controls to counteract the upward trend that regulations are responsbile for, and you expect that it will be entirely free of negative consequences (i.e. shortages). Typical utopian fantasy.
Who exactly "regulated" that insurance companies have to be between the producers and the consumers? What layers are you speaking of otherwise. Please be specific and give links as it appears you're talking out your ass.
 
Simply not true. Sorry, but you are not well informed. Yes, you see the admitting nurse, and yes they may suggest that you take it to a clinic, but they do not force you to leave. They do not refuse to see you. In some very slick ERs they now have two tiers of ER, one is like a free clinic and is usually just "through that door" for the more minor things. Otherwise you will be seen if you don't leave. Perhaps before you think you know it all, you should visit an ER in the afternoon, or late evening and learn for yourself. Everyone that chooses to remain will be seen.

One of us has actually worked in admitting at an ER, and it's not you. Please don't spread your uneducated crap.

Read this

And this

And from this:

Non-covered medical conditions[edit]
Not all medical problems are covered by EMTALA, meaning that a person cannot assume that if they are ill, they will be treated. Specifically, EMTALA does not cover non-emergency situations. The hospital is allowed to determine that there is no emergency, using their normal screening procedure, and then refuse EMTALA treatment [1].
 
Last edited:
One of us has actually worked in admitting at an ER, and it's not you. Please don't spread your uneducated crap.

Read this

And this

And from this:
Just because they can doesn't mean they do. I've never seen a patient turned away, my kids were never turned away, my dad was a doc a Southwest Med Center in San Antonio, where the county ER was, maybe still is. I'm not ignorant. But I was always insured, perhaps they'll take non-emergency insured patients, is that what you're saying?
Please give me some examples where people were truly turned away because they both had no money and the ailment wasn't an emergency, such as an ear infection, or a cold, or the flu.

Never mind, I think I get what you're trying to say... Because my dad was at SWMC and because everywhere else I lived there were only two hospitals, ... perhaps what you're saying is that say in Dallas area or large metro, where there may be a nearby private hospital that one might try... they would send you to the community/county hospital, still ER but not a private hospital. Is that what you're saying?
 
Last edited:
Who exactly "regulated" that insurance companies have to be between the producers and the consumers? What layers are you speaking of otherwise. Please be specific and give links as it appears you're talking out your ass.

Regulations--Tax incentives for employer-based insurance, insurance coverage requirements, free treatment requirements at the ER, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare

Layers--Medical malpractice, insurance companies, medical billing companies, lawyers, the secretary of health & human services, IPAB, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare.

All of these are fairly obvious. Yeah, you can still go to a doctor and pay cash, but the damage has been done. The few who still do that aren't enough to control costs.
 
Regulations--Tax incentives for employer-based insurance, insurance coverage requirements, free treatment requirements at the ER, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare

Layers--Medical malpractice, insurance companies, medical billing companies, lawyers, the secretary of health & human services, IPAB, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare.

All of these are fairly obvious. Yeah, you can still go to a doctor and pay cash, but the damage has been done. The few who still do that aren't enough to control costs.

So employers shouldn't be able to expense employee insurance? WTF.
Until ACA Insurance coverage had no requirements.
What shall we let people die in the streets? Walk around with infections and illnesses to infect the rest of us?

The only medical malpractice regs have been in favor of lower pricing in that the only regs are to limit the ability of patients to sue and those are at the state level not federal.
Doctors want medical billing companies, not the gov't, not regulated or required.
Doctors and patients want lawyers, not a regulation
A person in a position is not a regulation

Medicare and medicaid actually keep prices down a bit, but I gather you're ignorant about that.
Obamacare is yet to be determined but should help cut costs.

As I said, talking out your ass. Everything you mention is either something wanted by docs, or simply makes sense (employer expensing expenses, there's not extra tax consideration, and not having poor people sick and dying in the streets)
 
Just because they can doesn't mean they do. I've never seen a patient turned away, my kids were never turned away, my dad was a doc a Southwest Med Center in San Antonio, where the county ER was, maybe still is. I'm not ignorant. But I was always insured, perhaps they'll take non-emergency insured patients, is that what you're saying?

Yeah, I was pretty clear about what I was saying. If you can demonstrate the ability to pay they'll see you for whatever is bothering you at the time, emergency or not.

Please give me some examples where people were truly turned away because they both had no money and the ailment wasn't an emergency, such as an ear infection, or a cold, or the flu.

Never mind, I think I get what you're trying to say... Because my dad was at SWMC and because everywhere else I lived there were only two hospitals, ... perhaps what you're saying is that say in Dallas area or large metro, where there may be a nearby private hospital that one might try... they would send you to the community/county hospital, still ER but not a private hospital. Is that what you're saying?

No. Read the links. The ER as part of their normal triage determines whether your care is critical and if you have the ability to pay. If the answer is no to both those, as determined by the ER personnel, you are not admitted and you do not receive care. The admitting personnel then advise you on your options - see your personal physician if you have one or go to a free clinic. They might also have a list of free clinics in the area for you.
 
Yeah, I was pretty clear about what I was saying. If you can demonstrate the ability to pay they'll see you for whatever is bothering you at the time, emergency or not.



No. Read the links. The ER as part of their normal triage determines whether your care is critical and if you have the ability to pay. If the answer is no to both those, as determined by the ER personnel, you are not admitted and you do not receive care. The admitting personnel then advise you on your options - see your personal physician if you have one or go to a free clinic. They might also have a list of free clinics in the area for you.

Like I said then, that explains it. With only two hospitals, there were no free clinics. I guess they had no choice but to assume it, though at least one even put in, like I said, a lesser emergency room for just such cases.
 
Since Obamacare doesn't start till Jan 2014 it can't be the fault of the ACA or Obama.


LOL. Paying taxes on something doesn't count as a "start"? LOL.

People have already been paying for this disaster. And not as much as a band aid has anyone received in return.
 
Mine is Kaiser and that's the problem. If I want to see *MY* doctor, I wait for months. My wife, who sees her doctor once a year, has to set up her appointment 5-6 months ahead of time.

That's what I have, Kaiser. I never have a problem getting appointments quickly.
 
LOL. Paying taxes on something doesn't count as a "start"? LOL.

People have already been paying for this disaster. And not as much as a band aid has anyone received in return.
Bless your heart.
 
Back
Top Bottom