6 ms·

It is a basic visit. I attended a first-aid training for new parents here in my home country and the general advice was to seek help if in doubt, at night times

It is a basic visit. I attended a first-aid training for new parents here in my home country and the general advice was to seek help if in doubt, at night times by calling an ambulance or visiting, well, the emergency room. In two years we were there with our baby two times. Not charged a penny. During this time, I went once, my wife went once. In all instances we were reassured that it was appropriate to visit the hospital instead of visiting the GP the next day.

AlexTWithBeard 8y ago
Interestingly, in the UK they had a large "this is not an emergency" campaign trying to make people to choose GPs over emergency services.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- swish_bob 8y ago
  And provide us with a dedicated phone number staffed by people trained to identify whether it is, in fact, an emergency, who will tell you to call an ambulance if necessary.
lhorie 8y ago
Yeah, taking a kid with a high fever to the ER in Toronto is a total no-brainer since it's 100% covered by OHIP. Now living in SF, and I've found myself mentally doing risk probability calculations, and concluding I'd be better off skipping the ER and instead following the instructions from off-the-shelf motrin because the ER visit is likely not worth the cost. My wife firmly believes the US healthcare system is a giant scam where insurance companies leech off people without actually providing any value.
- toast0 8y ago
  > My wife firmly believes the US healthcare system is a giant scam where insurance companies leech off people without actually providing any value. Health insurance in the US is built around providing value to employers. Most employers are concerned about which network is going to upset the fewest key employees and cost the least amount of money for the employer, while fulfilling all legal obligations, without making the employees spend too much time dealing with the insurance company when they could be working. Nicer employers may want to cover more of the cost, or want to upset fewer employees, or have specific things they want covered that aren't legally obligated. There's also the problem that different groups of people want totally different things from the system. I like integrated care, because it provides me with a single place to go, that handles everything, even though it may not always be the best care. Other people are more focused on getting the best care, and are ok with (or prefer) to pick the individuals who provide each service, even though it means visiting multiple locations. Nicer employers offer you a choice of providers, but it would probably be less expensive for them if everyone was on one plan, at the cost of upsetting more employees.
- Simon_says 8y ago
  It wasn't worth the cost in Toronto, either, but you didn't care because it wasn't you who paid the cost.
  - lhorie 8y ago
    Technically I did, since my taxes pay for it. What I didn't pay for is the overhead of clerical work from two different corporations for mailing me letters informing me of how arbitrarily priced my doctor visit was.
    - Simon_says 8y ago
      While technically true, that's disingenuous. You paid no additional marginal cost. The incentive structures matter.
      - blindwatchmaker 8y ago
        GP is not the one being disingenuous.
        Simon_says 8y ago
        Who do you think is being disingenuous?
      - lhorie 8y ago
        I agree incentive structure matters, and it's why I consider the OHIP model superior: "I need care and it's already paid for, so I get it", vs the US model "I pay more upfront to do the triage nurse's job myself so I can then pay again if I do decide to see the doctor after all and geez I hope I can afford the bill when it comes"
    - wolco 8y ago
      You did pay for it. Half of the Ontario budget goes towards it. The fact that you would go without thought of the cost but in a similiar situation would avoid because of the direct costs shows why the Ontario system is a poor model. The costs are hidden so more services are used. If costs were direct paid for out of your Ontario fund (a yearly budget that if not used would be carried forwarded or removed from your taxes) than a better balance could be found.

AlexTWithBeard 8y ago

Interestingly, in the UK they had a large "this is not an emergency" campaign trying to make people to choose GPs over emergency services.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
swish_bob 8y ago
And provide us with a dedicated phone number staffed by people trained to identify whether it is, in fact, an emergency, who will tell you to call an ambulance if necessary.

lhorie 8y ago

Yeah, taking a kid with a high fever to the ER in Toronto is a total no-brainer since it's 100% covered by OHIP. Now living in SF, and I've found myself mentally doing risk probability calculations, and concluding I'd be better off skipping the ER and instead following the instructions from off-the-shelf motrin because the ER visit is likely not worth the cost. My wife firmly believes the US healthcare system is a giant scam where insurance companies leech off people without actually providing any value.

toast0 8y ago
> My wife firmly believes the US healthcare system is a giant scam where insurance companies leech off people without actually providing any value. Health insurance in the US is built around providing value to employers. Most employers are concerned about which network is going to upset the fewest key employees and cost the least amount of money for the employer, while fulfilling all legal obligations, without making the employees spend too much time dealing with the insurance company when they could be working. Nicer employers may want to cover more of the cost, or want to upset fewer employees, or have specific things they want covered that aren't legally obligated. There's also the problem that different groups of people want totally different things from the system. I like integrated care, because it provides me with a single place to go, that handles everything, even though it may not always be the best care. Other people are more focused on getting the best care, and are ok with (or prefer) to pick the individuals who provide each service, even though it means visiting multiple locations. Nicer employers offer you a choice of providers, but it would probably be less expensive for them if everyone was on one plan, at the cost of upsetting more employees.
Simon_says 8y ago
It wasn't worth the cost in Toronto, either, but you didn't care because it wasn't you who paid the cost.
- lhorie 8y ago
  Technically I did, since my taxes pay for it. What I didn't pay for is the overhead of clerical work from two different corporations for mailing me letters informing me of how arbitrarily priced my doctor visit was.
  - Simon_says 8y ago
    While technically true, that's disingenuous. You paid no additional marginal cost. The incentive structures matter.
    - blindwatchmaker 8y ago
      GP is not the one being disingenuous.
      - Simon_says 8y ago
        Who do you think is being disingenuous?
    - lhorie 8y ago
      I agree incentive structure matters, and it's why I consider the OHIP model superior: "I need care and it's already paid for, so I get it", vs the US model "I pay more upfront to do the triage nurse's job myself so I can then pay again if I do decide to see the doctor after all and geez I hope I can afford the bill when it comes"
  - wolco 8y ago
    You did pay for it. Half of the Ontario budget goes towards it. The fact that you would go without thought of the cost but in a similiar situation would avoid because of the direct costs shows why the Ontario system is a poor model. The costs are hidden so more services are used. If costs were direct paid for out of your Ontario fund (a yearly budget that if not used would be carried forwarded or removed from your taxes) than a better balance could be found.