People do die for lack of health insurance
October 15, 2012 2 Comments
Like many a Republican, Mitt Romney frequently repeats the claim that people don’t really need health insurance because there’s always the ER. I’m not going to waste a lot of time going through just how dumb that statement is. That’s what this NPR story is for:
In a discussion of that plan with editors ofThe Columbus Dispatch, Romney said this:
“We don’t have people that become ill, who die in their apartment because they don’t have insurance. We don’t have a setting across this country where if you don’t have insurance, we just say to you, ‘Tough luck, you’re going to die when you have your heart attack.’ No, you go to the hospital, you get treated, you get care, and it’s paid for, either by charity, the government or by the hospital.”
…
But Romney was talking about something slightly different in Ohio: the idea that the U.S. doesn’t have people who become ill or die because they don’t have insurance. That, however, is belied by a large and growing body of academic studies, starting with a landmark study from the nonpartisan Institute of Medicine in 2002 that found 18,000 people died in the year 2000 because they lacked health insurance. [emphasis mine] Various updates of that study have come up with even larger numbers, mostly because of a growing number of uninsured people, combined with the increasing cost of medical care. In other words, there’s a growing gap between what you can get with insurance and without.
That’s okay, though, because I’m sure most of those people are just moochers and takers who are part of the 47%.
About Steve Greene
” Mitt Romney frequently repeats the claim that people don’t really need health insurance because there’s always the ER. I’m not going to waste a lot of time going through just how dumb that statement is. ”
I think it does need to be stated. Paul Krugman did a great OpEd on this at the New York Times today. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/15/opinion/krugman-death-by-ideology.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121015
A doctor then wrote Krugman with this reply:
“A physician writes:
It’s true that EMTALA [the 1986 law requiring that emergency rooms treat you regardless of insurance status] requires a medical screening exam and stabilization of any emergency medical conditions. It does not, however, mandate admission to the hospital for treatment of conditions that are not currently emergent (e.g. cancer, kidney disease, and other more chronic conditions except related to certain complications). For example, if someone were to present to one of our emergency departments with some mild bloating and be found to have an abdominal mass, they may very well be discharged home for outpatient follow-up and treatment. If that person doesn’t have insurance, they will likely have difficulty obtaining that care.
I agree with your example of someone delaying care because they are uninsured (it happens with regularity), but thought another avenue to describe how uninsured people could die despite emergency care being mandated by EMTALA would be informative.
”
A man who is either lying or is shockingly ignorant about American healthcare and how at least thousands, or tens of thousands of people die in the USA yearly for lack of healthcare is running for president. Or perhaps he just doesn’t care about the “poor”. Which means people who can’t afford to do whatever they want, whenever they want. That includes people who can’t afford hundreds of thousands of dollars out of pocket for emergency medical expenses. In the USA, that’s almost everyone who isn’t a millionaire and doesn’t have gold plated healthcare insurance.
I really find it difficult to understand why so many people are willing to vote for Romney after all the lies and back flips he has told and done. Is it willful blindness? Party participation before all else? Racism? Ignorance, or low information voters?
If this becomes a big enough issue I’m pretty sure Romney will just change his position. Or at least say he changed his position.