HealthFear Only In America!

[domwilson]

Darin I'm glad your wife got good treatment and I wish you and your family the very best. I just would like to see all U.S. citizens get that same kind of dignified treatment. Maybe not thru government owned/operated hospitals, but by a good affordable, accessible system overall.

[rockwerks]

Darin I'm glad your wife got good treatment and I wish you and your family the very best. I just would like to see all U.S. citizens get that same kind of dignified treatment. Maybe not thru government owned/operated hospitals, but by a good affordable, accessible system overall.

What I dont get is how you can not see the ignorance of your statement, it is illegal in this country for any hospital to refuse treatment because of lack of insurance. PERIOD! That is why Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and California have such a problem with illegal immigration. I now of a family that works farms in AZ that has one legal and 15 illegal members, their family gets diagnosis of illness or pregnancy in mexico and then they come to this country for free treatment.

[rockwerks]

As someone who has had way too much experience with Government run Hospitals ( the VA), I do NOT want the Government running all of them... it was FILTHY, poorly run, and had horrible service.

By contrast, HarborView in Bellevue treated my wife and my daughter this past summer, my wife with a life threatening condition that scared the hell out of us, with nothing but first class care.

My Grandpa had to be in the VA for over a year, and it took their Government payed Staff FOUR TRIES at amputating his leg to finally get it right, AFTER performing a surgery WITHOUT doing the necessary testing that any other hospital would have done, knowing that the patient had Diabetes...

My Wife was in for 3-days... got follow-up calls and all the information and testing she needed...

Sorry, but there is NO, NONE, NADA, ZIP evidence that the Government can run ANYTHING better than the Private Sector. I want them as far away from my family and me as possible...

Well said Darin!

[domwilson]

What I dont get is how you can not see the ignorance of your statement, it is illegal in this country for any hospital to refuse treatment because of lack of insurance. PERIOD! That is why Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and California have such a problem with illegal immigration. I now of a family that works farms in AZ that has one legal and 15 illegal members, their family gets diagnosis of illness or pregnancy in mexico and then they come to this country for free treatment.

You are quite misinformed, my friend. Hospitals cannot deny entrance into ER based on the ability to pay. They are required to "stablize" a patient.

http://library.findlaw.com/2000/Aug/1/127864.html

http://www.emtala.com/faq.htm

So before you call anyone "ignorant" do a little research to back up your claims.
As I asked you before, please keep it civil and not make it personal. It really belittles the whole discussion.

[rockwerks]

My bad. must be a southwestern US thing

[domwilson]

My bad. must be a southwestern US thing

No problem. I'm here in So. Cal. We are all passionate about something. I agree with some of the points that you have brought up. The answer is not simple. The solution is not simple. Your asking questions makes me research things and gain even more knowledge. I believe that there are viable alternatives to what we have now and what is being presented. We have a moral/ethical obligation to take care of U.S. citizens as we've done in the past. And I don't mean by giving away free money like with so many welfare recipients. But by making americans healthy and strong so that they can be productive members of society. I feel anything less is Un-american at the least and criminal at the most. This is why I've posted info. on how other countries do it. So that we can make informed assessments of what is happening and what some of these "jokers" are proposing. We don't have to have a system like theirs. We should have a better system than everyone else.

[domwilson]

Provisions of the EMTALA:

2. What are the provisions of EMTALA?

The essential provisions of the statute are as follows:

Any patient who "comes to the emergency department" requesting "examination or treatment for a medical condition" must be provided with "an appropriate medical screening examination" to determine if he is suffering from an "emergency medical condition". If he is, then the hospital is obligated to either provide him with treatment until he is stable or to transfer him to another hospital in conformance with the statute's directives.


What constitutes "coming to the emergency department"? See our special note on the 250 yard rule and its discussion of presentations to locations other than the emergency room, as well as the further discussion below.
If the patient does not have an "emergency medical condition", the statute imposes no further obligation on the hospital.
A pregnant woman who presents in active labor must, for all practical purposes, be admitted and treated until delivery is completed, unless a transfer under the statute is appropriate. The statute explicitly provides that this must include delivery of the placenta.

In essence, then, the statute:


imposes an affirmative obligation on the part of the hospital to provide a medical screening examination to determine whether an "emergency medical condition" exists;

imposes restrictions on transfers of persons who exhibit an "emergency medical condition" or are in active labor, which restrictions may or may not be limited to transfers made for economic reasons;

imposes an affirmative duty to institute treatment if an "emergency medical condition" does exist.

Additional regulatory provisions

The regulation [42 CFR 489.24(a)] adds the following:

The person who does the examination must be specifically determined to be a "qualified medical person" by the hospital bylaws. The hospital must make the designation in its bylaws or rules and regulations. The regulation also provides that the person must "meet the requirements of 42 CFR 482.55", although that rule really has no substantive requirements.

Another section [42 CFR 489.20(q)(1)] requires that the hospital post a conspicuous sign which notifies patients and visitors of the right to be examined and to receive treatment. The sign must be in a form approved by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The 2003 regulations define a "dedicated emergency department" as a state-licensed ER or a place where medical services are provided on an urgent basis, without the need for an appointment, including (significantly) hospital-based ambulatory care centers. At a DED, any request for medical treatment triggers EMTALA obligations. See paragraph 14 below for a discussion of presentations elsewhere.

The 2003 regulations permit an abbreviated assessment by a qualified medical person for patients not presenting for examination or treatment, whose presentation is not likely to involve an emergency medical condition.

Under the 2003 regulations, a person presenting for the dispensation of medications at his physician's direction does trigger EMTALA obligations, because he may have a medical condition which needs evaluation. A person being brought in by law enforcement personnel for blood alcohol testing may or may not trigger the obligation, depending on the circumstances.

http://www.emtala.com/faq.htm

[Darin Jordan]

Here's your 'demonstration project,' Mr. President -- it's called Mississippi

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-59990137.html

[domwilson]

Just read this..
"A new report released by Business Roundtable concluded that per-employee health care costs would triple to $28,530 a year in 10 years if Congress fails to enact reform."

http://pittsburgh.bizjournals.com/pi...28/daily3.html

[rockwerks]

Just read this..
"A new report released by Business Roundtable concluded that per-employee health care costs would triple to $28,530 a year in 10 years if Congress fails to enact reform."

http://pittsburgh.bizjournals.com/pi...28/daily3.html

That is OBAMA roundtable LOL just more propaganda

[domwilson]

It didn't look like a partisan article to me. Both sides agree that we need reform. Not just Obama and the Dems. The article appeared to be from the business standpoint.

[domwilson]

At those rates, how many more jobs will be lost in the U.S. because operational costs are too high?

[RCprince]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...roundtheworld/


Video:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...1&continuous=1

[domwilson]

This one is classic... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-usmvYOPfco

Here's what he has to say on his website... http://grayson.house.gov/Health%20Ca...letterhead.pdf

http://majorityleader.gov/docUploads/BILLSUMMARY.pdf

At least he did apologize to the republicans... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoITVLWpKB8

[domwilson]

This just gets slimier every day... http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...one/index.html