Medical Debt Collector to Settle Suit for $2.5 Million

[Mr Wizard]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Medical Debt Collector to Settle Suit for $2.5 Million

Naturally, NYT talks about the 2 cases where Accretive grossly overstepped their bounds. I actually applaud the hospitals that contract these bill collectors to actually place some moral hazard in our citizens who abuse EMTALA. Granted, a larger portion of these GOMERs don't get much flack from the debt collector since there is not any money to go chasing after.

The more than 5,000 community hospitals in the United States provided $39.3 billion in uncompensated care — made up of unpaid patient debts or charity care — in 2010, up 16 percent from 2007, the American Hospital Association, a trade group, said.

​

I see nothing wrong with sending a patient straight to one of these abrasive debt collectors immediately prior to getting discharged. EMTALA was put into place to allow everyone to walk into an ED to make sure they do not have a life-threatening emergency condition. It does not spell out everyone receiving treatment for their sore throat or migraine. Lawyers were nice enough to get hospitals to make that policy.

 

[jwk]

Medical Debt Collector to Settle Suit for $2.5 Million

Naturally, NYT talks about the 2 cases where Accretive grossly overstepped their bounds. I actually applaud the hospitals that contract these bill collectors to actually place some moral hazard in our citizens who abuse EMTALA. Granted, a larger portion of these GOMERs don't get much flack from the debt collector since there is not any money to go chasing after.

The more than 5,000 community hospitals in the United States provided $39.3 billion in uncompensated care — made up of unpaid patient debts or charity care — in 2010, up 16 percent from 2007, the American Hospital Association, a trade group, said.

​

I see nothing wrong with sending a patient straight to one of these abrasive debt collectors immediately prior to getting discharged. EMTALA was put into place to allow everyone to walk into an ED to make sure they do not have a life-threatening emergency condition. It does not spell out everyone receiving treatment for their sore throat or migraine. Lawyers were nice enough to get hospitals to make that policy.

ER abuse aside...

Debt collectors in general are scum of the earth. It's a tight race to see who is more greedy - them or plaintiff's lawyers.

 

[DrAwsome]

Medical Debt Collector to Settle Suit for $2.5 Million

Naturally, NYT talks about the 2 cases where Accretive grossly overstepped their bounds. I actually applaud the hospitals that contract these bill collectors to actually place some moral hazard in our citizens who abuse EMTALA. Granted, a larger portion of these GOMERs don't get much flack from the debt collector since there is not any money to go chasing after.

The more than 5,000 community hospitals in the United States provided $39.3 billion in uncompensated care — made up of unpaid patient debts or charity care — in 2010, up 16 percent from 2007, the American Hospital Association, a trade group, said.

​

I see nothing wrong with sending a patient straight to one of these abrasive debt collectors immediately prior to getting discharged. EMTALA was put into place to allow everyone to walk into an ED to make sure they do not have a life-threatening emergency condition. It does not spell out everyone receiving treatment for their sore throat or migraine. Lawyers were nice enough to get hospitals to make that policy.

This is what I was suggesting earlier.

 

[yappy]

I feel like if we're going to have laws like EMTALA we must pay for them. It's not fair to have a federal law that requires a business (hospital) to act in a destructive manner by taking on clients that cannot pay and expect them to just eat the cost.

If it's truly unaffordable for the fed government and we agree they should not force a private firm to act in a certain way we should scrap emtala - it's not ideal but that's the real world.

 

[DrAwsome]

I feel like if we're going to have laws like EMTALA we must pay for them. It's not fair to have a federal law that requires a business (hospital) to act in a destructive manner by taking on clients that cannot pay and expect them to just eat the cost.

Go figure. This whole system is completely ridiculous, and basically punishes doctors for being doctors. Don't over treat, but you get sued if you didn't get the test. How dare you not treat everyone woh comes in! But don't expect to get paid. Makes no sense.

 

[yappy]

Are there medical doctors that don't have to deal with getting stiffed by patients. I just read the article and in the two cases they cited where a patient was in an ER and approached by a medical debt collector the patients ended up paying. This suggests that they could pay but didn't want to for some reason... it confuses me how this is considered unethical given that the hospital needs to collect on services rendered and the patients were taking advantage of EMTALA... most likely spending money on other things than their debt obligations... 😕😕😕

Go figure. This whole system is completely ridiculous, and basically punishes doctors for being doctors. Don't over treat, but you get sued if you didn't get the test. How dare you not treat everyone woh comes in! But don't expect to get paid. Makes no sense.

 

[DrAwsome]

Are there medical doctors that don't have to deal with getting stiffed by patients. I just read the article and in the two cases they cited where a patient was in an ER and approached by a medical debt collector the patients ended up paying. This suggests that they could pay but didn't want to for some reason... it confuses me how this is considered unethical given that the hospital needs to collect on services rendered and the patients were taking advantage of EMTALA... most likely spending money on other things than their debt obligations... 😕😕😕

I don't see how it's unethical. Healthcare is the only system where you can get services and not pay. If you go to the spa you can't simply say oh I won't pay! You will be arrested. Same with any other place. If you get a service and don't pay you will be turned into collections, sued, etc.

Why is healthcare different? We need a completely different system.

 

[yappy]

I think we just need to get rid of laws that allow poor behavior to not go unpunished. This is a little controversial but I think a lot of protections that the federal government has mitigates irresponsible behavior. For example - if there was no EMTALA - I can assure you that patients would be going to an urgent care for the little stuff and buy a cheap major medical plan (or finding the room in their budget to do so) in order to get care when they needed it.

With their money was on the line and no "get out of jail free card" consumers act in their own best interests. I've expressed these views before to people not in health care and they look at me as if I'm the most evil person lol. They say I should not go into health care...

I don't see how it's unethical. Healthcare is the only system where you can get services and not pay. If you go to the spa you can't simply say oh I won't pay! You will be arrested. Same with any other place. If you get a service and don't pay you will be turned into collections, sued, etc.

Why is healthcare different? We need a completely different system.

 

[DrAwsome]

I think we just need to get rid of laws that allow poor behavior to not go unpunished. This is a little controversial but I think a lot of protections that the federal government has mitigates irresponsible behavior. For example - if there was no EMTALA - I can assure you that patients would be going to an urgent care for the little stuff and buying a cheap major medical plan (or finding the room in their budget to do so) in order to get care when they needed it.

Agreed! I think just like with everything they should be required to pay. EMTALA should be done away with. We need a more logical and fair system. People take advantage of the system because there are no repercussions.

 

[yappy]

My brother in law is an executive. He told me that there are certain ways they conduct business that lower their overhead and increase their profits. A lot of times consumers are slow to adapt to them or they do not see the befit. Therefore, he explained to me, he would create incentives or punishment to drive their consumers towards the more profitable behavior.

For example they started this new online feature. They provided incentives for people to visit their, shop their, and go to the FAQ's. This allowed him to close brick and mortar stores to become more profitable while keeping his consumer base.

Hospitals need the tools to do things like this... they would if patients were on the hook for the bill. It would really free them up to do things that were profitable.

EDIT: Heh, I sounded like a Firangi.

Agreed! I think just like with everything they should be required to pay. EMTALA should be done away with. We need a more logical and fair system. People take advantage of the system because there are no repercussions.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Agreed! I think just like with everything they should be required to pay. EMTALA should be done away with. We need a more logical and fair system. People take advantage of the system because there are no repercussions.

I provide care to many self insured patients. I receive no compensation the vast majority of time (98 percent). Yet, these patients still have the right to sue me for the care they did not pay for or care where I receive ten cents on the dollar (Medicaid). Plus, I can't deduct any of this unpaid, charity care from my taxes. This seems fair only If you are a Socialist or a malpractice lawyer.

 

[yappy]

Blade,

Seeing as both you and the surgeons involved are getting the shaft from poor payers why do it to begin with? I understand that charity is charity and if voluntary that's very commendable. But from the tone of your post you sounded like you did not want to do it. What is the motivation to provide anesthesia or surgery to people if you do not get paid and must assume risk? Can you not operate on the good payers then close up shop as you've made your money for the day?

In the dental industry if patients don't have finances for work the conversation ends there. No malice but no pay + risk is not a good way to spend productive working hours.

I provide care to many self insured patients. I receive no compensation the vast majority of time (98 percent). Yet, these patients still have the right to sue me for the care they did not pay for or care where I receive ten cents on the dollar (Medicaid). Plus, I can't deduct any of this unpaid, charity care from my taxes. This seems fair only If you are a Socialist or a malpractice lawyer.

 

[jwk]

Blade,

Seeing as both you and the surgeons involved are getting the shaft from poor payers why do it to begin with? I understand that charity is charity and if voluntary that's very commendable. But from the tone of your post you sounded like you did not want to do it. What is the motivation to provide anesthesia or surgery to people if you do not get paid and must assume risk? Can you not operate on the good payers then close up shop as you've made your money for the day?

In the dental industry if patients don't have finances for work the conversation ends there. No malice but no pay + risk is not a good way to spend productive working hours.

Dentists are under ZERO legal obligation to treat anyone and everyone who walks into their office. Not so with hospitals and physicians.

Hospitals, by law, are required to provide a certain amount of charity care, and physicians, usually as a condition of their medical staff privileges, are required to take ER call and take care of those patients when they present to the ER.

There are lots of physicians who don't have to deal with charity patients - think plastic surgeons or anyone who does strictly elective work (a lot of dermatology procedures are cash-up-front). Anesthesiologists associated with plastic surgery clinics frequently don't have to deal with charity patients since every patient that comes in the door is paying cash before anything is done, but there are relatively few of those types of practices compared to those working primarily in hospitals.

And, concierge practices are all the rage in some areas. You pay an annual up-front fee to your primary care physician, who limits his practice to a set number of patients. In return, the patient (in theory) can spend more time talking with the physician, gets guaranteed appointments within 24 hours, and frequently, gets the doctor's cell phone number for essentially 24/7 access. This arrangement obviously isn't available to anesthesiologists.

 

[yappy]

Interesting. It's too bad you could not stay isolated in the OR and just run for profit cases from insurances that you want.

I wonder why hospitals, physicians, etc. have not tried to eliminate these obligations via lobby? I figure a hospital would know what charity they could handle and how much they could not rather than having laws like EMTALA. Any chance of getting rid of it?

 

[DrAwsome]

I provide care to many self insured patients. I receive no compensation the vast majority of time (98 percent). Yet, these patients still have the right to sue me for the care they did not pay for or care where I receive ten cents on the dollar (Medicaid). Plus, I can't deduct any of this unpaid, charity care from my taxes. This seems fair only If you are a Socialist or a malpractice lawyer.

Agreed. Blade you seem sufficiently fiesty and upset about this. What do we do to make healthcare better for us as docs?

 

[vector2]

I feel like if we're going to have laws like EMTALA we must pay for them. It's not fair to have a federal law that requires a business (hospital) to act in a destructive manner by taking on clients that cannot pay and expect them to just eat the cost.

If it's truly unaffordable for the fed government and we agree they should not force a private firm to act in a certain way we should scrap emtala - it's not ideal but that's the real world.

Make sure you mention your ideas about health care repeatedly if/when you start attending med school interviews.