Medical bills spark 46% of U.S. personal bankruptc

[KipWellsFan]

courtesy cbc.ca

 

BOSTON - Nearly half of all personal bankruptcies in the United States are triggered by big medical bills racked up because of serious illnesses or accidents, a Harvard University study suggests.

 

The study, published Wednesday in the online journal Health Affairs, looked at 1,771 people who had declared personal bankruptcy to seek court protection from creditors in five American states in 2001.

 

Researchers from Harvard's law and medical schools later talked to 931 of them. They determined that illness or medical bills were either the main cause or a contributing factor in 46.2 per cent of the bankruptcies.

 

"Even middle-class insured families often fall prey to financial catastrophe when sick," an abstract of the study noted.

 

More than 43 million people in the United States have no health insurance.

 

But even people who had health insurance through their employer were among those forced to declare bankruptcy in an effort to escape overwhelming debts that they could not pay, the study found.

 

About 75 per cent of those who said medical bills triggered their bankruptcy had insurance coverage at the beginning of their illness.

 

In 38 per cent of the cases studied, that insurance lapsed while they were still being treated, or covered only catastrophic illnesses and not more minor but ongoing conditions.

 

Among the people whose medical bills contributed to their bankruptcy, the study said, "out-of-pocket costs average[d] $11,854 [uS] since the start of illness."

 

The study's authors said that when the national numbers were crunched, and the dependents of the filers were included, between 1.9 million and 2.2 million Americans experienced "medical bankruptcy" in 2001. That figure includes 700,000 children.

 

[YASNY]

I am just so totally stunned by this.

 

So many people think oil is the big corporate thief. Look at this industry. Hell, they put you in the hospital when you get sick as an elderly person, give you all these treatments that don't really make a damn bit of difference, keep you alive long enough to use up your insurance and any estate you might have, then let you die.

[mreye]

Just another reason we need medical liability reform.

Edited February 3, 2005 by mreye

[FlaSoxxJim]

Just another reason we need medical liability reform.

 

More to the point, we need to socialize the catastrophic aspects of medical care coverage.

 

We missed the boat when we had a chance to socialize health care, and I don't want to ressurrect that debate. But, there are finally some people that are now saying there should at least be a universal safety net that catches the people who have done everything by the book - hard working, have health insurance, etc. - and still risk being wiped out when an unforeseen health issue appears.

 

According to the article and an NPR bit yesterday, medical expenses of

 

Scary to think that, given the mysteries of the organism, it can happen to anybody at any time.

[mreye]

More to the point, we need to socialize the catastrophic aspects of medical care coverage.

 

We missed the boat when we had a chance to socialize health care, and I don't want to ressurrect that debate.  But, there are finally some people that are now saying there should at least be a universal safety net that catches the people who have done everything by the book - hard working, have health insurance, etc. - and still risk being wiped out when an unforeseen health issue appears.

 

According to the article and an NPR bit yesterday, medical expenses of

 

Scary to think that, given the mysteries of the organism, it can happen to anybody at any time.

I won't ressurrect that debate either. I disagree.

[Rex Kickass]

Just another reason we need medical liability reform.

 

You're the only person I know that can look at a story about how out of control medical bills put someone in the poorhouse, look at a world where you can't swing a cat without it hitting an ad for prescription drugs, or you go to the emergency room and get charged 75 dollars for getting a cup of ice chips (not that I speak from personal experience or anything) and blame lawyers.

 

People don't sue unless their treatment is screwed up. You put your life in a doctor's hands whenever he treats your illness. If he's negligent, he oughta damn well be held responsible.

[mreye]

You're the only person I know that can look at a story about  how out of control medical bills put someone in the poorhouse, look at a world where you can't swing a cat without it hitting an ad for prescription drugs, or you go to the emergency room and get charged 75 dollars for getting a cup of ice chips (not that I speak from personal experience or anything) and blame lawyers.

 

People don't sue unless their treatment is screwed up. You put your life in a doctor's hands whenever he treats your illness. If he's negligent, he oughta damn well be held responsible.

There's a reason Doctor bills are so high and I believe it's directly related to malpractice insurance, which is directly related to out of control lawyers and lawsuits.

 

Also, I did that based on who the story came from (Canadian Bush hater) and I knew the direction this thread would take (Socialized healthcare) and headed it off at the pass. Is there a problem with that?

[FlaSoxxJim]

Also, I did that based on who the story came from (Canadian Bush hater)

 

As a guy who spent a good deal of time fishing up in Ontario as a teenager I can tell you there is nothing wrong with Canadian bush.

[JUGGERNAUT]

If you own or operate a business this is not a surprise. The hikes in premiums the past 5 yrs are un-F'g real. That 46% number is interesting.

That's about the growth in premiums over that time.

 

The insurance companies are quick to blame this on medical liability insurance. There is some truth to that. Just look at the rate increases in IL & the number of doctors leaving the state as a result. Obviously the system is F'd & it's getting worse.

 

There are FAR better alternatives than government contolled healthcare.

- Give the people more choice. It's institutions like the AMA that define the standards, limit the number of admissions at medical schools, & create other regulatory constraints to squeeze the industry.

 

Allow people to choose their health care based on what they can afford & the risk they are willing to bear. If that means being treated by doctors who have limited medical liability insurance than so be it. Competition tends to drive costs down.

 

- Increase applications to medical schools. The AMA for years has been capping these numbers on their belief that too many will dilute the quality of education & reduce overall healthcare service levels. That's old antiquated thinking that has no value in the modern age. Advances in technology allow for more healthcare workers. If you increase the labor supply you can drive down costs. The more 2nd & 3rd opinions you can afford to a patient the less likely a malpractice claim will be filed.

 

- Stop sending medical services overseas. This is not only a violation of privacy rights (which true conservatives uphold) but it's also weakening the quality of healthcare in the states. When the network goes down & the MRI can't be sent to Bombay delays are encurred. Is that really what we want?

 

I know I'm preaching to the choir. We are on the 1 way express train of global capitalism & you either hang on or get thrown out. Nothing can stand in the way of profits. It's the American way.

 

Carry on.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Nothing's ever simple any more. This is likewise a reflection of America's credit debt. Home ownership is up in America. Home mortgages are. Most Americans have simply exchanged a rent check for a mortgage payment because of low interest rates.

 

I read somewhere that the avg American has a debt cushion of about a few thousand dollars. If they exceed that they'll go bust. One solution of course is to regulate the medical industry to accept installment payments. In otherwords when you are slapped with a 12K medical bill that hospital has to accept the fact that you are going to pay it in installments.

 

If you think about this nationwide just this simple regulatory move could have a major impact on healthcare costs.

[FlaSoxxJim]

One solution of course is to regulate the medical industry to accept installment payments.  In otherwords when you are slapped with a 12K medical bill that hospital has to accept the fact that you are going to pay it in installments.

 

If you think about this nationwide just this simple regulatory move could have a major impact on healthcare costs.

 

A sound idea. I guess it is up to the individual providers because that is exactly how my family's provider network already operates. We put the birth of both of our children on the installment plan. A couple more payments and we own 'em both outright.

[Soxy]

A sound idea.  I guess it is up to the individual providers because that is exactly how my family's provider network already operates.  We put the birth of both of our children on the installment plan.  A couple more payments and we own 'em both outright.

And when they're bad you can always just say, Dammit, I'm not paying for your birth anymore. They can just repo you.

[Rex Kickass]

There's a reason Doctor bills are so high and I believe it's directly related to malpractice insurance, which is directly related to out of control lawyers and lawsuits.

 

Also, I did that based on who the story came from (Canadian Bush hater) and I knew the direction this thread would take (Socialized healthcare) and headed it off at the pass. Is there a problem with that?

 

You go right ahead and take medical accountability out of the picture, but when you have that surgery and the doctor accidentally takes something extra, or the wrong thing to begin with, I'm sure you'll be glad that you have no recourse for your damages.

[Mathew]

It's funny, cause whenever I talk to an American who is complaining about their insurance, I even mention Canada and all I get from liberals and republicans is this insane Cold War like "commie" argument. Without belabouring the facts of Canada's system in the end being infinitely cheaper and bearing in mind that it likely can't be changed in the U.S. I still don't understand why a better solution to this problem has to be labeled evil communism. Not to mention the only reason we have an auto industry is because the health costs here drive the price down so far compared to the U.S. That buisness subsidy known as universal health care is a nice economic generator for Canada thanks to that huge increase in premiums Juggernaut described.

[mreye]

You go right ahead and take medical accountability out of the picture, but when you have that  surgery and the doctor accidentally takes something extra, or the wrong thing to begin with, I'm sure you'll be glad that you have no recourse for your damages.

I don't want to take it completely out of the picture. It just needs to be a little more responsible.

[Rex Kickass]

You'd be surprised as to how difficult it actually is to sue an HMO when they disallow treatment for patients who need it.

[mreye]

You'd be surprised as to how difficult it actually is to sue an HMO when they disallow treatment for patients who need it.

I don't know much about the specifics of it all, but I do know that doctors are human. They are not flawless. Mistakes happen. Now, if it's a mistake caused by neglect or malice, the victim absolutely deserves compensation and the Dr deserves to lose his license. But, when it's the kind of mistake that every single human being can make, they shouldn't be raked through the coals. Yes, we should aim for perfection, but it's a mighty goal.

[Rex Kickass]

Well, there are ways to do that without the "tort reform" that's been proposed. A little common sense applied goes a long way.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Well, there are ways to do that without the "tort reform" that's been proposed. A little common sense applied goes a long way.

 

 

Common sense? If some of that would be applied in jury awards there would be no reason for this debate. The fact of the matter is that lawyers care nothing about the welfare of their clients, all they care about is getting the big awards and then taking half or more of it in fees.

[Rex Kickass]

That's the problem with this damn Democracy. People keep agreeing on things that you just can't agree with. Edited February 4, 2005 by winodj

[Texsox]

Common sense?  If some of that would be applied in jury awards there would be no reason for this debate.  The fact of the matter is that lawyers care nothing about the welfare of their clients,  all they care about is getting the big awards and then taking half or more of it in fees.

 

 

Nuke, your view of your fellow human is truly inspiring

 

 

Are lawyers the only profession that doesn't care about their clients? Kind of like soldiers that don't care about their country, they only care about collecting a paycheck.

[southsider2k5]

This story was so slanted. The version I read in the Trib also mentioned "illnesses" as being things such as drug addiction, gambling, and the like. In other words not things that would probably be covered by insurance in the first place.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

This story was so slanted.  The version I read in the Trib also mentioned "illnesses" as being things such as drug addiction, gambling, and the like.  In other words not things that would probably be covered by insurance in the first place.

 

 

My sympathies do not extend to those who bring their health problems on themselves ( drug addiction, gambling, alcoholism, etc etc. ).

Edited February 6, 2005 by NUKE_CLEVELAND