Quote:
Originally Posted by tigger
I'm not wrong if you go into the hospital they have to treat you that is the law!!!! It's the right to care law. it is posted in every ER in every hospital in the US. they can not refuse to treat you.
It is the EMTALA Law if you care to look it up. When I became a Paramedic i had to read and sign this law to get my license, if I refuse to treat some one or give them transport to the hospital I lose my license and pay a fine and could spend 25 yrs in jail. If the hospital has the means to treat you they must treat you , if they do not have the means they must transport you to a hospital that can.
|
You're right, of course. The problem then becomes an issue of whether you can/cannot pay afterward (sometimes you can haggle with the billing department, sometimes, sometimes they'll work on a sliding scale & sometimes you can't work things out and they send you to collections). EMTALA was passed in 1986 (signed into law by Reagan as part of COBRA) and applies to any hospital that accepts HHS, MediCare & MedicAid (exemptions for the VA, Shriners & Indian Health). It only applied to emergency services, of course, and if a hospital doesn't take MediCare, MedicAid, or HHS payments, they're exempted too. Before EMTALA it was, from what I understand, permissible for a hospital's administration or an ambulance company to deny even emergency treatment, so in a way Captnjack had a point, too. And because EMTALA was buried in the COBRA legislation it isn't well known. When & where a physician says a patient is stable though, EMTALA ends, even if the patient isn't released from the hospital.
The US has nothing like NHS or HealthCanada, Mart, let alone systems like they have in Germany, France, the Nederlands or Scandinavia. The closest we have is MedicAid which is really only for the poorest and that is hard to get, usually requiring a couple years pursuing coverage before winding up before an administrative law judge (same with Social Security disability insurance). Through our health care debacle last year, I was regularly corresponding with friends & family in London & Ottawa about their systems. My cousin in London, a Tory, is more inclined to see NHS expanded than reduced, and my friend in Ottawa (Labour) would prefer kinks worked out with the way HealthCanada operates, but she's happy to have it, especially since she gave birth just a few weeks ago to her second child.
As for the clinics, I know San Francisco has had free clinics since at least the 60s, I think LA likewise. I'm not sure about most of the rest of the country, but imagine Tigger's right, that they are out there. But I live in Reno and am unaware of any free clinics hereabouts. We do have a VA hospital though which I've heard good things about.
But back to the original point, Tigger's right they can't refuse to treat you, but even if you're poor, they're going to try and collect by hook or by crook afterward. Its funny, but I knew this person who treated veterans who went to Kazakhstan for a conference to discuss treating PTSD and her experience w/ Vietnam Vets and psych counselors in the USSR treating Afghani vets broke her ankle and was treated immediately, no charge.
Its a side note, but folks outside the US might find it interesting to note that maternity leave has only been guaranteed in the US since 1993, and that for 12 weeks unpaid, while in Canada women receive approx. 55% pay for up to 50 weeks; Mexico requires 100% pay for 12 weeks; the UK has a complicated system that lasts up to 52 weeks at 90% pay; Russia has a sliding scale system that lasts up to 18 months & 50% & up to 100% pay; Germany offers up to 14 weeks at something like 67-84% pay; Italy offers up to 22 weeks at 34% pay, if I understand things right (part of this came from a National Geographic table that simplified things a bit, so there may be some flux there I'm unaware of)
My own opinion on the whole thing I'll keep to myself rather turn this into a political, economic or moral debate. I'm just happy your ok, Laranger. Reast easy & welcome home!