What a sorry state of affairs

[bd]

Originally Posted by nickb

The government has no business being in health care. They can't run their own affairs, why do you want them to have more control????



.

Didn't say the gov't needed to be involved in health care. I just said it was a shame that the mother of this child couldn't get the $80 to get his teeth fixed.

bd

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by bd

....children, should not ever be denied medical care. (snip to get to the point)

They aren't supposed to be denied medical care. The government HAS already taken care of this for you.

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (42 U.S.C. § 1395dd, EMTALA) is a United States Act of Congress passed in 1986 as part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. It requires hospitals and ambulance services to provide care to anyone needing emergency treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay. There are no reimbursement provisions; as a result of the act, patients needing emergency treatment can be discharged only under their own informed consent or when their condition requires transfer to a hospital better equipped to administer the treatment. The statute applies on to hospitals that accept payment from Medicare and operate an emergency department.[1]

www.wikipedia.org

In 1986, Congress enacted the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA) to ensure public access to emergency services regardless of ability to pay. Section 1867 of the Social Security Act imposes specific obligations on Medicare-participating hospitals that offer emergency services to provide a medical screening examination (MSE) when a request is made for examination or treatment for an emergency medical condition (EMC), including active labor, regardless of an individual's ability to pay. Hospitals are then required to provide stabilizing treatment for patients with EMCs. If a hospital is unable to stabilize a patient within its capability, or if the patient requests, an appropriate transfer should be implemented.

http://www.cms.hhs.gov/EMTALA/

Sorry, bd. It pays to do research. Could someone quote this for him? Posting facts like this caused me to end up on his ignore list.

Frank

[bd]

Originally Posted by NMCB3

I`m with bd as far as the outrage of it all is concerned, but we part ways in the solution. I say chop the federal government off at the knees, let the free market work, and everyone will be better off for it.

Any decent human being should agree on the outrage, although it seems there are fewer decent human beings around here than I thought.

Chopping the federal gov't off at the knees is an optimistic position and I'd like to see it happen. But I think you and I both know it won't.

So I try to look at these things realistically and deal with the system we have now instead of crying about how a little bit of money coming from my check each payday is ruining my life - when it could save the life of someone else.

I agree let the free market work, cut the fed gov't back, I'll take that. But until it happens we have to go with the hand we are dealt.

bd

[nickb]

Originally Posted by bd

Didn't say the gov't needed to be involved in health care.

Let's see....where could I have gotten that idea?????

Originally Posted by bd

should not ever be denied medical care.
edit

And you would begrudge a government handout of 80 friggin' dollars...
edit

You don't want anyone to get a government handout.
edit


All for a government handout of 80 friggin dollars.

bd

[Krackels]

I agree BD, we should spend a lot more on Education.

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by ActionAl

Frank - you da man. Couldn't said it better myself.

FWIW - Dollars spent in the PRIVATE sector are far more productive in getting results than those spent by the PUBLIC (governmental) agencies.

Thanks and I agree with your opinion about the public vs. private sector. If you do some research or a past forum member named "eleanor" you still see that she actually thought that the public section was more efficient. She even admitted to thinking that once.

Originally Posted by PeteTschantz

excellent Post Frank.

Thanks.

Frank

[Rollerman]

Originally Posted by XDinNC

What about the dentist, dental assistant, church or local charity who could have provided a cheap $80 treatment for this kid?

Why must everything become a federal case?

Exactly right! Why is this the responsibility of Gov't. Where was the community, the rest of his family?

150 years ago there was no health insurance. Where does it say that we should be taxed to provide insurance for everyone who can't afford to buy it on their own? Where does it say that you have a RIGHT to insurance and it's the Gov't's responsibilty to provide it? 150 years ago if you lacked medical care you died, that's just the way it was. This will become an endless spiral of increasing debt that will crush this country's finances. Wars come and go but this trend to supply free healthcare will bankrupt us.

We circumvent nature by saving infants who are born with terrible genetic defects and government pays for it. Later, these children have their own children and pass the genetic defects on, further obligating government to higher and higher medical costs. Really sad for these children and their parents, who anguish over their medical problems. I'm certainly not suggesting that these children not be saved, only pointing out that what seemed like a simple thing, medical insurance for everyone, is turning into a giant with an insatiable appetite.