This is really the only logical answer. When else is someone allowed to force you to agree to unknown terms at the consequence of your health? That matches every definition of extortion I can find…
When else is someone allowed to force you to agree to unknown terms at the consequence of your health?
You’re not even “agreeing” to the unknown terms a lot of the time. Your “agreement” is just assumed. How the hell can you “agree” to anything if you’re unconscious and being brought to the hospital in an ambulance after a car accident? Or when you’re literally in the middle of a heart attack?
99.99% of people who are going to hospitals aren’t exactly in any condition to shop around, make informed choices, or “agree” to anything at all, and most of the services they’re being billed for were most likely for services rendered while the patient was still incapacitated or otherwise unable to agree to anything. And what if you disagree? You die? And if you don’t like the prices your hospital is going to charge, what are you going to do if it’s the only hospital in your area?
If you were to enter literally any other “agreement” in this country when there are no competing hospitals in your area to shop around for, the terms of the agreement are unknown until weeks or months after services are rendered, and you are in no way capable of giving informed consent at the time the agreement is made, it would be thrown out of court for being made under duress and for being too one-sided.
Exactly. I do agree with you, except possibly on your comments about only doing what insurance pays for. I feel that would go the opposite of the way I imagine you are picturing.
As you said, if someone is dying, unconscious, etc, nobody will be able to tell what, if any, insurance you have. Also, with some of the crappier plans out there, especially the barebones “Anti-Obamacare” plans red states are pushing, you might be having a very unpleasant visit if no one from insurance can confirm in a timely manner what they will cover, or if you can only get an Ibuprofen after your surgery instead of a narcotic, etc.
I assume your plan would be more like, the medical team does the same job they’d do on you as anyone else, and then insurance is stuck with that bill. But as we all have some form of tiered insurance as it is, if we have any at all, that’s about as moot as discussing single payer. And that is why single payer is the only reasonable way to go forward. Any games going on are between the hospital and the fed, where they belong. We’re all mostly out of the equation then. Except for medical procedures still deemed political, in which the list for that seems to be growing and ever changing as well. But that’s a story for another time…and not from me, that’s too heated for me!
This is really the only logical answer. When else is someone allowed to force you to agree to unknown terms at the consequence of your health? That matches every definition of extortion I can find…
You’re not even “agreeing” to the unknown terms a lot of the time. Your “agreement” is just assumed. How the hell can you “agree” to anything if you’re unconscious and being brought to the hospital in an ambulance after a car accident? Or when you’re literally in the middle of a heart attack?
99.99% of people who are going to hospitals aren’t exactly in any condition to shop around, make informed choices, or “agree” to anything at all, and most of the services they’re being billed for were most likely for services rendered while the patient was still incapacitated or otherwise unable to agree to anything. And what if you disagree? You die? And if you don’t like the prices your hospital is going to charge, what are you going to do if it’s the only hospital in your area?
If you were to enter literally any other “agreement” in this country when there are no competing hospitals in your area to shop around for, the terms of the agreement are unknown until weeks or months after services are rendered, and you are in no way capable of giving informed consent at the time the agreement is made, it would be thrown out of court for being made under duress and for being too one-sided.
Exactly. I do agree with you, except possibly on your comments about only doing what insurance pays for. I feel that would go the opposite of the way I imagine you are picturing.
As you said, if someone is dying, unconscious, etc, nobody will be able to tell what, if any, insurance you have. Also, with some of the crappier plans out there, especially the barebones “Anti-Obamacare” plans red states are pushing, you might be having a very unpleasant visit if no one from insurance can confirm in a timely manner what they will cover, or if you can only get an Ibuprofen after your surgery instead of a narcotic, etc.
I assume your plan would be more like, the medical team does the same job they’d do on you as anyone else, and then insurance is stuck with that bill. But as we all have some form of tiered insurance as it is, if we have any at all, that’s about as moot as discussing single payer. And that is why single payer is the only reasonable way to go forward. Any games going on are between the hospital and the fed, where they belong. We’re all mostly out of the equation then. Except for medical procedures still deemed political, in which the list for that seems to be growing and ever changing as well. But that’s a story for another time…and not from me, that’s too heated for me!