Baby got regular inspections of the heart, lungs and eyes (too much oxygen in the blood can lead to problems with the cornea or something), including after checkout.
They got billed exactly zero.
Both parents even got full pay during the hospital stay, so didn't have to worry about the economy.
Ok, so I pay a fair bit of taxes here in Norway, and some of it is used on stupid stuff. But overall I like knowing my life won't be ruined because of some random event forced me into insolvency.
You can be fine for years, but a single, major medical event can zero out those salary gains and lead directly to bankruptcy. It's a systemic flaw that isn't obvious until it's your turn to deal with it.
Then all of a sudden fall ill, lose everything and return back to India.
People keep forgetting the US society is a giant stack/pyramid ranking system, the structure keeps getting narrow as you move upwards. You get pushed off the sides, in the ever narrowing funnel, and you need increasing levels of luck at every level to survive.
BTW, this is not just with regards to health care. You could lose your job, suffer from ageism. Lose your home, run out of money. A million different things can happen, that can cause the above said phenomenon.
Its shortsighted and plain stupid and properly selfish move. It works rather well short term if one simply doesn't give a fuck about suffering of others, but even thats shortsighted and stupid long term - we live in hyper-interconnected society and not some prepper wet dream, what goes around always comes around.
Another similar is public education, literally defining future of society. How dumb is to not have it in stellar shape, shitting on one's own kids and mankind future.
But hell will freeze sooner than majority of americans will realize and accept that. Till then, if its important enough for you, you can vote with your feet, its easier than ever.
More importantly, it doesn't solve the real problem. You're still subject to the same system. Fighting for prior authorizations, staying in-network, and navigating all the other administrative friction.
More than likely they'd find a way to make you go bankrupt rather than pay up. That or deny till you die.
So high deductible it is! Only met the out of pocket max once and it was glorious.
Before Obama, the zero deductible plans were only slightly more expensive than the high deductible plans. (Just an observation)
Seems crazy I was able to make an appointment directly with a specialist and only pay the copay back then…
I’m on the cheapest plan my company negotiated and my premiums are basically zero, because I’m young enough that most years I don’t spend more than a thousand bucks on health care (for me and my kids). Couple years ago I did hit the out of pocket max, though, and they did indeed cover everything from that point at 100%. I would never have gone bankrupt.
You can pay a lot of money in premiums, have a $0 deductible, and now OoP maximum, and still end up having claims denied.
I realize some people are stuck with UHC. I’d turn down a job unless it was perfect in every other way and paid extremely well if they only had UHC plans.
Should everyone (anyone?) receive monoclonal antibodies, gene therapies, biologic medications? What criteria should be used to make these determinations?
We're not the customers of healthcare, insurance, mortgages, etc. The planet's wealthiest pensioners are. No difference in comp is going to make that work out best for you.
Also, the existence of Cadillac plans implies that someone in our government doesn't believe the population at large should be receiving world-class care. It's like when Senator Biden had two cranial aneurysms, had top surgeons flown in on taxpayer dime, then fought against universal healthcare.
We're all already paying for the best healthcare in the world, just not for us.
We can say whether those maximums are still too high (some really are), but the mechanism is there.
The real issue is that most people don't have a rainy day fund to deal with such emergencies. And that they are too expensive anyway.
There are 2 concepts you should always keep in mind.
1. Always avoid the hospital unless you are literally dying. Surgery centers are owned by doctors who will negotiate a fixed fee, because there's someone to negotiate with (unlike Hospitals which run on the CYA principle). Also, most doctors can do procedures in office, if they have the right one.
2. Medical debt will never lead to collections. Hospitals may sue you, depending on the state, but that carriers reputational risk. A good PR push and a decent lawyer to threaten discovery will be enough to fend off even the most aggressive hospitals - this allow you to setle at a very reasonable price vs what insurance would normally pay.
"Always avoid the hospital" isn't a choice either. You don't "negotiate" with a surgery center for a heart attack, a stroke, or a major car accident, which are some of the common events that cause this. And the claim that "medical debt will never lead to collections" is factually incorrect.
It is the number one cause of collections in the United States. The idea that every citizen can just "hire a decent lawyer" or "run a good PR push" to settle debt isn't a functional or scalable mechanism, nor is it reality.
I'm sorry but if I need a hospital, my first thought isnt, "well how is their reputation".
I don't understand why people defend the insurance system in the US when you're already paying taxes. If it's not the responsibility of the government who you pay to take care of their people in an emergency then what are taxes for. It's like people just accept it because that's how it's always been.
What we have is all-you-can-eat ferrari care
Insurance is what i have when i drive my car , or get water damage insurance for my house.
The monster we have today is not insurance. Instead, it is the frankenstein born out of the womb of bureaucrats and politicians influenced by money. Decades of tinkering politicians without a clue, messing around with the relationship between the doctor and patient, responding to voting patterns of the electorate, led us to today.
Unless you blow it up, (and it will blow up, just like it happened in sweden) there's no solution, except paying more for ferrari all-you-can eat.
I asked one of their counsellors once if they ever have any ultra wealthy people who don’t have insurance and also don’t qualify for any assistance. (This was at a children’s hospital with a Level IV NICU.) She said she was unaware of that ever happening, other than very wealthy foreigners who would prepare in advance, arrange payment in advance, fly in, and have a special procedure done.
Overall, in many states, it is logistically impossible to have an unaffordable bill and also not qualify for assistance. The worst situation actually is the person who has insurance but has high deductibles and copays.
If you do not have insurance, you tell them you don’t. They’ll give you a bill lower than what you’d pay as deductible if you had insurance. Or you just don’t pay…
This raises insurance premiums and reduces the quality of healthcare in a dystopian AF feedback loop.
Norway has only 50k births a year. The US has 3.6 Million, and >40% of those are 100% free to Medicaid recipients. So 1.4 million each year, meaning a story like this is about 28 times more likely to be told from someone in the US than Norway.
When those parents die, any potential generational wealth for their children will be taken by the state to pay back the benefits they received from Medicaid.
That would be up to their job if they had one of course, but Medicaid does have some cash benefits and if you have a baby on Medicaid you typically get auto-qualified for TANF so that covers a lot of bills.
>When those parents die, any potential generational wealth for their children will be taken by the state to pay back the benefits they received from Medicaid.
This would only be true if the parents received long-term care or something. And this happens to TONS of people who have otherwise been financially well off, they have to exhaust their assets before Medicaid starts paying for a nursing home. It's got nothing to do with pregnancy benefits.
You are likely thinking of ROP (retinopathy of prematurity, where retina starts detaching due to prolonged stay in the incubator).
