5 ms·

Lyft and Uber are used by patients to go to the hospital and other doctors very regularly. I think that your idea that this is illegal is pretty novel. Whether

by jsight 8y ago

Lyft and Uber are used by patients to go to the hospital and other doctors very regularly. I think that your idea that this is illegal is pretty novel. Whether that should have been used in the cases described in the attached article is a reasonable debate. I'm more confident in the people on the ground making this choice than the news reporter.

spamizbad 8y ago
"medical transportation" has a specific meaning. It's perfectly legal to take an Uber to see your doctor. However, there are anti-kickback regulations in place for medical transportation providers for people who need things like emergency care.
CydeWeys 8y ago
Private Joe Citizen can take a taxi wherever they want (like how I took a cab to an urgent care a couple years ago after breaking my ankle in a bike accident). Medical practitioners, however, cannot send someone in a cab. It's a huge liability issue for them. If someone is injured and needs medical transport, they need to use proper medical transport. This is what Tesla is accused of violating. Their on-site nurses are licensed medical professionals. It's worlds different from random person taking a cab to a hospital.
- jimmaswell 8y ago
  Really sounds like that needs to be changed then. As long as healthcare isn't socialized, you shouldn't have to be stuck with an ambulance bill for a broken foot because some outdated regulation says you can't be given an Uber instead.
  - notyourwork 8y ago
    You are missing the point. No ones forcing you to use the ambulance. The point is a medical professional is recommending a ride share instead of calling an ambulance. You can say no my crushes hand will be ok and I’ll take an Uber to avoid a bill but that’s not a medical persons choice it is yours.
  - untog 8y ago
    You are still free to take a taxi. If the medical practitioner says "we are getting you an ambulance" you can refuse and make your own way to the hospital. That is entirely legal. However, the medical practitioner themselves cannot tell you to take an Uber to the hospital. Which is sensible.
    - fhbdukfrh 8y ago
      In Canada, home of the often proposed single payer solution to the problems in the US, ambulance services are generally not covered and must be paid directly. You even pay id one gets called for you and you refuse assistance. I gp is rarely going to be in a situation where they need to call an ambulance for a patient; generally it's going to be the organization (like a nursing home) or management/administrator to avoid potential liability
  - Tyrek 8y ago
    I take issue with your seemingly glib dismissal of the transfer of risk to rideshare drivers - Ambulances exist for medical transport, and frankly should be used in most cases, especially in a medical transport setting. The core problem lies with the healthcare system and the pricing of ambulance services, and not necessarily with the decision to use an ambulance per se.
  - will_brown 8y ago
    The law doesn’t say if you have a broken foot you have to take an ambulance to get treated at the ER. State law regulates drivers, medical transport is a subsection and medical transport is further broken down into emergency transportation and non-emergency transportation. What the law says is you can’t just start offering medical transportation services to the public in exchange for money without complying with the law/regulations. Further, as you might imagine doctors are regulated, and if you are treating a patient who needs to be transported to an ER for emergency services, the doctor should understand a Lyft/Uber isn’t the appropriate standard of care and is per se illegal under those facts. The doctor may have had his/her heart in the right place be not calling an abmbulance to reserve that for a hypothetical life/death patient, but it’s hard to argue this isn’t an emergency when your a doctor sending your patient to the ER, at which point emergency medical transportation laws/regulations apply.
    - jcrben 8y ago
      If it is state law - and I suspect it is - then the answer is probably even more nuanced.
    - fhbdukfrh 8y ago
      I'm in Canada so not covered by the same laws as US states, but a few years back i went to my gp with what he quickly diagnosed as a life-threatening blood clot. He explicitly stated "i don't think we need to call an ambulance but you need to go to ER immediately". He gave me a note for the triage nurse to expedite admitting and i was into the ICU within the hour. My wife drive me by nothing stopped me from using a taxi or ride share. Doctors definitely have a duty of care that must consider emergency transport, but it's be surprised if laws explicitly stated you need to call an ambulance for stable patients that need emergency treatment.
will_brown 8y ago
>I think that your idea that this is illegal is pretty novel. Tell that to the California Department of Heath Care Services...and the 49 other states who have similar regulations and regulatory agencies in place. Lyft/Uber giving rides to people in no way means or suggests those rides are legal. And there is a differnce between non-emergency transportation and emergency transportation...but it is all highly regulated. Still doctors and drivers should both know these laws that affect them directly. If a doctor is dumb enough to put an employee with a workplace injury in a rideshare, the onus is on the driver to deny the ride and tell the rider they are licensed/insured to take a patient to the ER and they should call 911...that doesn’t happen because ride share drivers are not professional drivers who actually know the laws that regulate them.
- jsight 8y ago
  Cute, but no it is definitely far from illegal: https://www.lyftbusiness.com/healthcare/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=lfb&utm_content=lfb_health&creative=264349720981&keyword=lyft%20health%20rides&matchtype=b&network=g&device=c&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIgI_Yv47A3gIVklmGCh1v2gJqEAAYASAAEgKTNPD_BwE https://www.lyftbusiness.com/healthcare/?utm_source=google&u... They should not be used for emergency transport, and that is part of the argument. Again, that is worthy of debate, but blanket statements about Lyft not being usable for "medical transport" aren't really useful.
  - will_brown 8y ago
    You linked to a Lyft program for “Non emergency medical transportation”. Pretty sure my comment you replied to acknowledges there is a difference between emergency and non-emergency transportation. If you want to argue how a worker with a crushed hand/severed fingers going to the Emergency Room for emergency medical treatment isn’t an emergency...go nuts, and please feel free to be liberal with the case Law you cite.
    - jsight 8y ago
      Your original post said: "It is illegal for “ride shares” to provide medical transport." This is demonstrably false, but you still left it up there.
naikrovek 8y ago
choosing what avenue you use for transport yourself is fine. it's when you're told by an employer that you must use a ridesharing service that it becomes illegal.

by jsight 8y ago

spamizbad 8y ago

"medical transportation" has a specific meaning. It's perfectly legal to take an Uber to see your doctor. However, there are anti-kickback regulations in place for medical transportation providers for people who need things like emergency care.

CydeWeys 8y ago

Private Joe Citizen can take a taxi wherever they want (like how I took a cab to an urgent care a couple years ago after breaking my ankle in a bike accident). Medical practitioners, however, cannot send someone in a cab. It's a huge liability issue for them. If someone is injured and needs medical transport, they need to use proper medical transport. This is what Tesla is accused of violating. Their on-site nurses are licensed medical professionals. It's worlds different from random person taking a cab to a hospital.

jimmaswell 8y ago
Really sounds like that needs to be changed then. As long as healthcare isn't socialized, you shouldn't have to be stuck with an ambulance bill for a broken foot because some outdated regulation says you can't be given an Uber instead.
- notyourwork 8y ago
  You are missing the point. No ones forcing you to use the ambulance. The point is a medical professional is recommending a ride share instead of calling an ambulance. You can say no my crushes hand will be ok and I’ll take an Uber to avoid a bill but that’s not a medical persons choice it is yours.
- untog 8y ago
  You are still free to take a taxi. If the medical practitioner says "we are getting you an ambulance" you can refuse and make your own way to the hospital. That is entirely legal. However, the medical practitioner themselves cannot tell you to take an Uber to the hospital. Which is sensible.
  - fhbdukfrh 8y ago
    In Canada, home of the often proposed single payer solution to the problems in the US, ambulance services are generally not covered and must be paid directly. You even pay id one gets called for you and you refuse assistance. I gp is rarely going to be in a situation where they need to call an ambulance for a patient; generally it's going to be the organization (like a nursing home) or management/administrator to avoid potential liability
- Tyrek 8y ago
  I take issue with your seemingly glib dismissal of the transfer of risk to rideshare drivers - Ambulances exist for medical transport, and frankly should be used in most cases, especially in a medical transport setting. The core problem lies with the healthcare system and the pricing of ambulance services, and not necessarily with the decision to use an ambulance per se.
- will_brown 8y ago
  The law doesn’t say if you have a broken foot you have to take an ambulance to get treated at the ER. State law regulates drivers, medical transport is a subsection and medical transport is further broken down into emergency transportation and non-emergency transportation. What the law says is you can’t just start offering medical transportation services to the public in exchange for money without complying with the law/regulations. Further, as you might imagine doctors are regulated, and if you are treating a patient who needs to be transported to an ER for emergency services, the doctor should understand a Lyft/Uber isn’t the appropriate standard of care and is per se illegal under those facts. The doctor may have had his/her heart in the right place be not calling an abmbulance to reserve that for a hypothetical life/death patient, but it’s hard to argue this isn’t an emergency when your a doctor sending your patient to the ER, at which point emergency medical transportation laws/regulations apply.
  - jcrben 8y ago
    If it is state law - and I suspect it is - then the answer is probably even more nuanced.
  - fhbdukfrh 8y ago
    I'm in Canada so not covered by the same laws as US states, but a few years back i went to my gp with what he quickly diagnosed as a life-threatening blood clot. He explicitly stated "i don't think we need to call an ambulance but you need to go to ER immediately". He gave me a note for the triage nurse to expedite admitting and i was into the ICU within the hour. My wife drive me by nothing stopped me from using a taxi or ride share. Doctors definitely have a duty of care that must consider emergency transport, but it's be surprised if laws explicitly stated you need to call an ambulance for stable patients that need emergency treatment.

will_brown 8y ago

>I think that your idea that this is illegal is pretty novel. Tell that to the California Department of Heath Care Services...and the 49 other states who have similar regulations and regulatory agencies in place. Lyft/Uber giving rides to people in no way means or suggests those rides are legal. And there is a differnce between non-emergency transportation and emergency transportation...but it is all highly regulated. Still doctors and drivers should both know these laws that affect them directly. If a doctor is dumb enough to put an employee with a workplace injury in a rideshare, the onus is on the driver to deny the ride and tell the rider they are licensed/insured to take a patient to the ER and they should call 911...that doesn’t happen because ride share drivers are not professional drivers who actually know the laws that regulate them.

jsight 8y ago
Cute, but no it is definitely far from illegal: https://www.lyftbusiness.com/healthcare/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=lfb&utm_content=lfb_health&creative=264349720981&keyword=lyft%20health%20rides&matchtype=b&network=g&device=c&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIgI_Yv47A3gIVklmGCh1v2gJqEAAYASAAEgKTNPD_BwE https://www.lyftbusiness.com/healthcare/?utm_source=google&u... They should not be used for emergency transport, and that is part of the argument. Again, that is worthy of debate, but blanket statements about Lyft not being usable for "medical transport" aren't really useful.
- will_brown 8y ago
  You linked to a Lyft program for “Non emergency medical transportation”. Pretty sure my comment you replied to acknowledges there is a difference between emergency and non-emergency transportation. If you want to argue how a worker with a crushed hand/severed fingers going to the Emergency Room for emergency medical treatment isn’t an emergency...go nuts, and please feel free to be liberal with the case Law you cite.
  - jsight 8y ago
    Your original post said: "It is illegal for “ride shares” to provide medical transport." This is demonstrably false, but you still left it up there.

naikrovek 8y ago

choosing what avenue you use for transport yourself is fine. it's when you're told by an employer that you must use a ridesharing service that it becomes illegal.