5 ms·

Back when I worked at $HEALTHCARE_INUSRANCE_CO we were trying to solve this (more general problem) from the other side. We regularly saw routine calls for what

by cepp 5y ago

Back when I worked at $HEALTHCARE_INUSRANCE_CO we were trying to solve this (more general problem) from the other side. We regularly saw routine calls for what could only be described as "loneliness". Our research lead us to find that a high percentage of elderly folks (50+) identified as lonely regardless of their living situation. [1] Looking deeper into claims data, we found a high percentage of these calls were in rural communities. These inessential emergency calls often lead to resources being expended without need. For example: the singular community ambulance being dispatched to the caller's home only because they wanted to chat. Even when considering the dispatcher filtering out these callers, and the emergency personnel doing their best to leave as quickly as possible, it still places a strain on the system. Tying up emergency personnel with mundane tasks creates a far greater risk for the community if & when they're needed. We unfortunately found no solution to this problem. It ran deeper than just alleviating non-emergency emergency-response claims: it was due to the loneliness epidemic, and the company was uncomfortable shouldering the financial and legal cost of trying to create a solution. 1. https://www.aarp.org/personal-growth/transitions/info-09-2010/all_the_lonely_people.html https://www.aarp.org/personal-growth/transitions/info-09-201...

MattGaiser 5y ago
> and the company was uncomfortable shouldering the financial and legal cost of trying to create a solution. Did they find a solution before determining that?
LurkingPenguin 5y ago
> Our research lead us to find that a high percentage of elderly folks (50+)... People in their 50s are now considered elderly?
- R0b0t1 5y ago
  50%+, assuming.
elliekelly 5y ago
I used to volunteer with an organization that pairs people with lonely “elders”... kind of like a Big Brother/Big Sister program. The woman I was paired with was in her early 60s and went to the doctor constantly but there really wasn’t anything wrong with her. It took me a long time to realize she would go to all these appointments to give her something to do, some people to talk to, and sometimes as an excuse to get her (out of state) kids to talk to her on the phone a bit. I’ll never forget when I was visiting her and realized she was looking forward to an entire day of medical testing appointments. At fist I thought maybe she had Munchausen’s (and maybe, in a way she did) but mostly I think she was just lonely.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  One's early 60s aren't even that old.
cratermoon 5y ago
An individual living in an isolated rural community wanting a chat is almost entirely unlike a for-profit corporation running a group home calling a paramedic to change someone's bandages because they are cutting costs by not hiring sufficient staff.
- fighterpilot 5y ago
  "because they are cutting costs by not hiring sufficient staff." Or because the fire department has failed to implement something as basic as a call-out fee for frivolous calls. Of course a service is going to get over-subscribed and abused if the price for it is way too low. Both individuals and corporations will do that because it follows from the incentives provided to them. Lonely old people are going to sit on a public tram for 8 hours a day, taking up the space of legitimate travellers, because it's free to do so and the value they get from that is greater than $0. The same over-subscription is happening here with care homes. If this is an ongoing problem and such a simple fix hasn't been implemented yet, the blame is solely with the incompetence of the fire authority for not having corrected the incentives with a call-out fee.
  - cratermoon 5y ago
    > call-out fee for frivolous calls Sounds like a typical neoliberal "free market" non-solution.
    - fighterpilot 5y ago
      This snarky reply isn't a rebuttal of any substance. A frivolous call-out fee is a clear and simple solution. If you fix the price then the problem goes away because the incentive for the frivolous call-out no longer exists. It's cheaper for them to hire another staff member than rely on the fire department.
      - lmm 5y ago
        It's not a solution. The problem is that emergency services aren't always available to those who need them; if you attach the possibility of a fee to the service then you have ensured that problem exists forever.

by cepp 5y ago

MattGaiser 5y ago

> and the company was uncomfortable shouldering the financial and legal cost of trying to create a solution. Did they find a solution before determining that?

LurkingPenguin 5y ago

> Our research lead us to find that a high percentage of elderly folks (50+)... People in their 50s are now considered elderly?

R0b0t1 5y ago
50%+, assuming.

elliekelly 5y ago

I used to volunteer with an organization that pairs people with lonely “elders”... kind of like a Big Brother/Big Sister program. The woman I was paired with was in her early 60s and went to the doctor constantly but there really wasn’t anything wrong with her. It took me a long time to realize she would go to all these appointments to give her something to do, some people to talk to, and sometimes as an excuse to get her (out of state) kids to talk to her on the phone a bit. I’ll never forget when I was visiting her and realized she was looking forward to an entire day of medical testing appointments. At fist I thought maybe she had Munchausen’s (and maybe, in a way she did) but mostly I think she was just lonely.

whatshisface 5y ago
One's early 60s aren't even that old.

cratermoon 5y ago

An individual living in an isolated rural community wanting a chat is almost entirely unlike a for-profit corporation running a group home calling a paramedic to change someone's bandages because they are cutting costs by not hiring sufficient staff.

fighterpilot 5y ago
"because they are cutting costs by not hiring sufficient staff." Or because the fire department has failed to implement something as basic as a call-out fee for frivolous calls. Of course a service is going to get over-subscribed and abused if the price for it is way too low. Both individuals and corporations will do that because it follows from the incentives provided to them. Lonely old people are going to sit on a public tram for 8 hours a day, taking up the space of legitimate travellers, because it's free to do so and the value they get from that is greater than $0. The same over-subscription is happening here with care homes. If this is an ongoing problem and such a simple fix hasn't been implemented yet, the blame is solely with the incompetence of the fire authority for not having corrected the incentives with a call-out fee.
- cratermoon 5y ago
  > call-out fee for frivolous calls Sounds like a typical neoliberal "free market" non-solution.
  - fighterpilot 5y ago
    This snarky reply isn't a rebuttal of any substance. A frivolous call-out fee is a clear and simple solution. If you fix the price then the problem goes away because the incentive for the frivolous call-out no longer exists. It's cheaper for them to hire another staff member than rely on the fire department.
    - lmm 5y ago
      It's not a solution. The problem is that emergency services aren't always available to those who need them; if you attach the possibility of a fee to the service then you have ensured that problem exists forever.