5 ms·
> Why would hospitals admit someone who isn't actually in need of care? In places without socialized medical coverage and low levels of ethical integrity (unfo
by junon 5y ago
> Why would hospitals admit someone who isn't actually in need of care?
In places without socialized medical coverage and low levels of ethical integrity (unfortunately, too many places in the world - especially impoverished states), the answer is "money".
- alkonaut 5y agoYes perhaps the question was unclearly posed, I mean - how do people allow themselves to be admitted to expensive care without being in need of it? Are doctors "persuading" patients that they need care, and the problem is lack of information about what rights you have to actually refuse, or information about what the symptoms would be etc?
- junon 5y agoYep that's usually what happens. Not everyone has the same access to basic medical information and rely solely on the doctor's word. That is how many people fall into cult-like or religious "medicine" or end up spending way too much on otherwise farsical treatment.
- refurb 5y agoWhy would socialized medicine exclude this behavior? Medicare fraud in the US is in the billions.
- krageon 5y agoThe US does not have socialised medicine.
- rm_-rf_slash 5y agoI believe parent referred to Medicare as a subset in American health care that is socialized, to some degree.
- krageon 5y agoI guess I am mostly alone in thinking that for a system to be socialised, it has to apply to everyone or almost everyone in a country equally. From the comments and the voting, I understand that having it apply to "almost" half the population is already socialised to this time slot :)
- refurb 5y agoSo by your definition much of Europe (which has a robust private healthcare system) isn’t socialized?
- krageon 5y agoEurope isn't a country and doesn't have uniform policies in this way. It also doesn't have things as an entity (except for a selection of laws that it's members implement differently in most cases). Because of those facts, I have trouble even formulating a response to your question - it doesn't make sense to me.
- refurb 5y agoMuch of Europe has a mix of public and private healthcare, hence by your argument, none of those countries have socialized medicine.
- notch656a 5y agoWe do, just for certain groups, such as elderly and the poor. Hell like 40% of births here are paid for by medicaid. But we have system here where only up to upper middle class (~$142k) of income is paid to social security tax, so middle class pays for both poor and themselves, while poor pays for no one and rich disproportionately only pay for themselves.
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoThere is no income limit on Medicare payroll taxes, just social security.
- notch656a 5y agoAgreed, although that doesn't negate the presence of socialized health care.
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoYes, but at least there is more equity between poor and rich in this regard.
- notch656a 5y agoMore like equity between middle class and rich. The poor are getting free stuff at expense of both.
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoThe rich have more because they have more money, giving poor people free stuff actually increases equity, it doesn’t decrease it. SS isn’t very equitable because of the income limits, payroll taxes in general are less equitable because they aren’t (very) progressive.
- notch656a 5y ago
- merpnderp 5y agoA large subset of the US does have socialized medicine. Medicare (65 million people), Medicaid (75 million people), and the military health system (10 million people). That’s nearly half the US population.
- burmanm 5y agoThat insurance isn't socialized medicine. In Europe for example, the hospital is owned by the government/state/etc, the doctors are hired directly by the hospital, the medicine costs are directly set by the state and so on. No private parties at all.
- triceratops 5y ago> In Europe for example, the hospital is owned by the government/state/etc, Europe is a big place with many different types of systems. What you're describing sounds like the UK. But places like NL[1] or DE[2] are more like Medicare/aid for all (basic coverage) + Obamacare (mandatory private insurance, sometimes supplementary). The providers may be private practitioners. NB: I'm not an expert in these systems so I may have gotten some details wrong. My main point is that "European healthcare" isn't a monolith and it's not all state-owned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Netherlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Netherlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Germany
- rm_-rf_slash 5y agoThe key word is fraud: getting something for nothing. Medicare itself bills at a lower rate than private insurance. For many doctors and hospitals, Medicare can be a margin-reducing annoyance. The private insurance patients are where the moneys at.
- refurb 5y agoFraud being changed for unneeded services? Not sure what your point is.
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoThat kind of fraud can occur because you have a socialized system interfacing with a non-socialized one. The government is paying the costs, but they don’t actually have much control over or oversight of the care. It is not like Australia where the government is all in by funding the hospitals and doctors directly.
- refurb 5y agohttps://www.counterfraud.gov.au/case-studies/clinic-owner-conceals-33-million-medicare-fraud https://www.counterfraud.gov.au/case-studies/clinic-owner-co... ”A medical clinic owner defrauded the Commonwealth of more than $3.3 million by claiming rebates for services not given to over 5,870 different patients.”
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoHe got caught very quickly, I’m not sure what this proves (that idiots exist in every country?).
- refurb 5y agoYou claimed it doesn’t happen in Australia and I proved it does. Why are you moving goal posts?
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoThis is like a Trump supporter claiming that the Democrats stole the election because a bunch of Trump voters got caught voting illegally, very easily because...the system actually works. Here, yes, you can still commit fraud in Australia, but your chances of getting caught quickly are almost 100%.
- refurb 5y agoYou provided no source to back that up. You’re saying a doctor who orders an extra unnecessary test will get caught 100% of the time? Clearly fantasy.