This will mean that the ERs will continue to be overcrowded with folks who can’t get or afford care and have to go from crisis to crisis, which is happening to a degree now. The ERs lose money on patients who can’t pay but can’t turn away patients.
I had missed seeing that article. Thanks for the link. Interesting to read a little about what the Insurance Industry wants.
“For many people, there may be no realistic way to self pay if they get some expensive medical condition in the next decade or few.”
So they should do nothing? What are they going to do when there is no more individual insurance sold?
Even relatively minor conditions can be expensive. I have a condition that is easily treatable with a pill that costs about $10 for a 90 day supply, but over the two months it took to diagnose me it cost $15k and I had no hospitalizations (only one ER visit.) They likely cannot save enough for catastrophic medical expenses, but most medical treatment isn’t catastrophic, nor can it be treated by going to an ER. At the very least, they need to begin saving for non catastrophic medical care.
Going to Stanford Medical, having some testing and seeing two docs outpatient only over two days resulted in a bill from them of $19,000! Fortunately because I had insurance, my share was ONLY $1,900, but even that’s a steep bill! This is for ongoing care of a mostly stable chronic condition I have had for 16 years and will have the rest of my life! How can a person or family absorb these huge bills without insurance? Where will they get money to save?
I count my blessings that we have good group medical coverage from H’s former employer, where he worked for 45 years.
They go without. They forego that $150 visit. Or the multiples to trace a problem. For many, there isn’t an extra 150, much less 5k. They go without. That’s the national shame. Even Tating, looking at catastrophic only, would need the cash on hand.
They simply don’t get the tests and treatments, HImom. Many millions of Americans will be in that position soon, and as @romanigypsyeyes often points out, lots of them will die as a result. We’re the only developed country where that happens, death by uninsurance. We can do better than this.
The sad thing is that so many of these things are easily and inexpensively treatable, which allow patients to continue to work and be productive instead of prematurely disabled and worse!
I almost died from gallstones when I was uninsured as an undergrad. Both of my parents are permanently disabled so I can’t be on their insurance (Medicare) and I had aged off of medicaid. No medicaid to the poor in my state at that time.
My university offered insurance but it was outrageously expensive and I couldn’t afford it. I was a full pell student and already working full time and was on food stamps. Literally nothing else I could cut for insurance.
I started having gallstones around the age of 18. They were bad but there was nothing I could do by the time I realized what they were. I would literally sleep in a bath tub in my college apartment because that was the only thing that would take away the pain in the middle of the night.
I bought an exchange plan (BCBS) and went to the ER as soon as I had my first attack. I was rushed to surgery and my gallbladder went kaput during the surgery. What should have been a 45 minute easy procedure to someone with insurance turned into a 4 hour surgery and a multiday hospital stay. My bill ran over 30k. I’m sure BCBS was thrilled with that.
My life would’ve been over or excruciatingly difficult had the ACA not been implemented when it did. I would’ve either died or I’d start life in bankruptcy (on top of student loan debt).
Now, I have multiple autoimmune diseases that are fatal without treatment. And going to the ER isn’t treatment. I use a pill regimen each day of 19 pills (just counted- 11 different prescriptions) and I get monthly infusions of an immune suppressor. I will likely start getting red blood cell infusion treatments for severe anemia triggered by the other diseases. I perpetually have needle marks in my hands and arms from the constant blood draws and IVs.
I will die without insurance. So will scores and scores of other people. It’s really that simple.
The sad part about repeatedly telling my story is that A- the people who care already support the ACA and B- the people who don’t care have already told me that I should just go die (not in so many words) because my life is an expensive inconvenience.
Yep, HImom. It makes no sense at all from a financial perspective to keep healthcare away from low-income people. And don’t even get me started on the humaneness perspective.
Romani, I can’t bring myself to “like” your post, but thank you for posting it. It’s important that those who oppose universal coverage understand what it really means, on the ground, for people like you.
LF, If my easily controlled condition went untreated, I would be unable to hold down a job. If you go without most likely you lose your job, too.
“Going to Stanford Medical, having some testing and seeing two docs outpatient only over two days resulted in a bill from them of $19,000! Fortunately because I had insurance, my share was ONLY $1,900, but even that’s a steep bill! This is for ongoing care of a mostly stable chronic condition I have had for 16 years and will have the rest of my life! How can a person or family absorb these huge bills without insurance? Where will they get money to save?”
This is just the scenario I am talking about irt saving for. They are going to have to find a way and so should start saving for these kinds of things immediately. They have an idea what is likely going to happen and so should start planning for it now. It does no one any good to make excuses why they can’t do it. Save as much as humanly possible.
Save from what, Emily? We aren’t taking about people with the discretionary income. Of course, if one has it, they can put it aside. But ACA was created for those already stretching. This isn’t about the well employed family that cuts a little back on a vacation to set aside a “health contingency” fund. There could be some who lose employer plans and earn enough to do that. But we’re talking about a more extreme position.
If HiMom didn’t have insurance (and the $ to cover the OOP,) she wouldn’t be flying to Stanford. If she weren’t in a secure financial position, how would she save 19k (for one visit?) Take it from the food budget?
I should add on to that that I now own a home, have multiple degrees and am working on my PhD, run a huge project that involves multiple universities, have a rescue dog and often foster other pups waiting on their furever home, etc. Absolutely none of these things would be possible if I wasn’t on the strict regimen that I’m on. As it is, it is extremely difficult but I am fortunate beyond words to have incredible insurance, an incredible hospital system with some of the world’s best doctors, a family and friend network that make it so I literally only have to focus on my work, and an advisor and a department that have gone above and beyond to accommodate me.
If any one of these things was pulled out from under me, the rest would also fall apart. The most vulnerable by far is my insurance.
Personally, I think I’m probably of better use to society as a working, homeowning, taxes paying individual than someone who is permanently disabled or dead. But that’s probably just my bias 
ETA: I don’t mean that last sentence to sound ableist but I’m not sure how else to put it. I’m sure if society could press a magical button for me of either able to work or not, they’d pick the former. That is not to say that permanently disabled people are useless or a leech on society. Two of the people I love more than anything fit into that category and do contribute in other ways.
While people generally should save for emergencies, retirement, kids’ college, etc., it may not be a realistic expectation that the many people who have not been saving can start now and save enough for possible medical expenses that happen in the next few years.
$15,000 would be seen as a catastrophic cost for many middle income households, particularly those who have not been saving for years before.
Median income in this country is a little over $50K, last I heard. It’s hard to imagine how a family living on $50K could possibly set aside enough to cover a bill in the teen-thousands. And of course, some courses of treatment go into the hundreds of thousands or higher, meaning financial ruin for families far far above the median.
We are all vulnerable unless we are extremely wealthy, or have good health insurance that we can afford.
The trouble is the ACA did nothing to bring down health costs. Nothing. There has to be some incentive for Americans to live healthier. (It seems good health alone is not enough reward).
So why not have the health equivalent of a good driver’s discount? If you do not smoke and do not abuse drugs or alcohol, exercise regularly, get routine vaccinations and checkups, etc. your health insurance premium should be lowered.
Tatin, so you want the government monitoring peoples’ private behavior?
If you’re sincerely interested in the answer to your question about rising health costs, here are some reasons. Spoiler alert: None of them is Obamacare.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddhixon/2012/03/01/why-are-u-s-health-care-costs-so-high/#7b55e9664f67
All my life my Mom would preach to her children “find a job with good benefits”. She worked her entire life for an insurance company. My Mom felt a job with health was the most important benefit.
For the last 27 years my H and I have purchased a plan for our family from Anthem Blue Cross on the individual market. Our family business does not have enough employees to buy a group plan. With the passage of the ACA in our area individual plans are still Covered California plans even purchased off the exchange. Our network is narrow and premium is high. 6600 per person. If the insurance companies pull out of the individual market in a case or repeal and later replace we will have no options for insurance. I guess my D could leave her job working with her Dad and take a corporate job. It would be a big loss for both of them. We have an excellent income and could cover routine medical stuff (which we basically do anyway with such a high deductible) but a diagnosis of a serious illness would not be affordable.
If a byproduct of a new government approach is to promote job growth and small businesses it misses the mark if small business owners can’t buy health insurance on a individual market.
My youngest is seriously considering going on her long term bf group health insurance. He works for a University that offers health insurance for domestic partners. They appear to meet all the qualifications necessary for her to qualify. It will save us a lot of money and she will have much better health insurance.
It brought down net health costs to the individual, depending on how you selected your plan, depending on your income level, needs, etc. Did it make that MRI or surgery cheaper? No. In some states, there is a smoking premium, no? But even if you say, be good and “your health insurance premium should be lowered,” it doesn’t change how health delivery costs grow. Sometimes, with good reason, sometimes simply not.
@lookingforward, you are right that the medical bills did NOT include travel (which of course adds to the cost), but for some folks, Stanford is their neighborhood med center, or a place with h similarly high bills. The bills are way too high for folks to contemplate being uninsured. Medical bills were high before ACA and are still high with ACA.
I would likely have been disabled and needed an imminent lung transplant if I hadn’t received the excellent care I’ve received over the past 16 years. Lung transplants are about $1mm apiece, plus you have to have frequent follow up care and take literally dozens of Rx daily for the rest of your life. My being able to work and contribute to society and NOT need a lung transplant and all the extra meds and NEVER being hospitalized have been a huge net savings for society.