News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by lacker on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:19PM (#17860703)
I was going to respond saying that most hospitals are nonprofits and aren't actually making a great profit margin off this sort of overcharging. But then I looked it up and St. David's, despite having a religious nonprofit-sounding name, is actually owned by HCA Healthcare, which is a for-profit that has almost 4x'd its stock price over the past five years while acquiring more hospitals to grow. So, yeah, this one is about corporations squeezing money out of people because they can.

sources:

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-transactions-...

https://www.google.com/search?q=NYSE:HCA

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by jhayward on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:37PM (#17860890)
> despite having a religious nonprofit-sounding name

They came by the name honestly, but it is indeed a shame the way it has gone since the St. David's Foundation partnered with HCA.

The hospital(s) were originally founded and run by St. David's Episcopal and were one of the first and foremost hospitals in Austin, with very high quality care and good service to the community.

After operating them for nearly 75 years, and growing to an enormous enterprise, it became clear that a church congregation simply couldn't and shouldn't be operating them any further and they were spun out. Some of the profits are still sent back to the foundation for community health care grants.

This particular wealth extraction strategy would never have occurred under church leadership.

(disclaimer: I was a member of the church during this period and hold it in very high regard)

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by diab0lic on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:47PM (#17861007)
My ex worked for HCA and she insisted that she could tell you the exact cost of a procedure before undergoing it.

Well at some point she needed surgery (at HCA), and about five months later after dealing with 10 < x < 20 bills including one we'd never heard about until collections came knocking she just looked at me and said "Nobody knows what this is going to cost." It really bums me out that a human being working in healthcare here isn't able to even remotely predict the cost of a procedure at the hospital at which they work.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by dv_dt on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:33PM (#17860838)
For hospitals which really are non-profit a) the non-profit status doesn't prevent price gouging b) even if acting as a traditional non-proft, they may do so to balance revenue against people with no insurance and no ability to pay. (a burden we load onto hospitals that we should actually be sharing much more explictly and universally across our nation).
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by gowld on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @09:01PM (#17864331)
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by hogwild on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:50PM (#17863237)
HCA is owned by Bill Frist's family. Dirty stuff.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by ta76567656 on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @07:52AM (#17867485)
Maybe they could change their name to "Hospital of the Temple Moneychangers"
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bmmayer1 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:29PM (#17861456)
> squeezing money out of insurance companies because they can

FTFY.

But seriously, how can it possibly be the hospital's fault for doing exactly what the law and market incentives give them every reason to do? There's almost no downward pressure on prices: little competition, no transparent pricing, huge barriers to market entry, and third party payers.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by s73v3r_ on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:14PM (#17861934)
"But seriously, how can it possibly be the hospital's fault for doing exactly what the law and market incentives give them every reason to do? "

Because they're the ones actually doing it? Because they're run by adults who are fully capable of taking responsibility for their actions?

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by InitialLastName on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:47AM (#17868165)
The US (and others, but the US especially) has a long-standing practice of divesting corporations from the responsibility for their actions.

Worse, it's frequently the same people who argue that corporations are "people" arguing that corporations as a whole shouldn't be held responsible for their actions.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bmmayer1 on Thursday August 30, 2018 @02:17PM (#17879228)
A profit-making corporation exists to make a profit, which isn't illegal or immoral, so I fail to see what 'responsibility' they have other than continuing to do what their shareholders have literally given them money to do. Your problem is with the system, not with my grandma whose pension fund is invested in the hospital.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by lacker on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @11:52PM (#17865460)
For what it's worth, I'm not interested in blaming the corporation for trying to raise profits. I just think that clearly the system is not ideal, and the right way to fix the system is probably different depending on whether the diagnosis is 1/ inefficiently-operating nonprofits or 2/ non-consumer-happiness-optimizing corporations.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bmmayer1 on Thursday August 30, 2018 @02:09PM (#17879142)
Right, I definitely agree with you. My only point was that it's easy to point to villains but real solutions are structural.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by Sohcahtoa82 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @07:44PM (#17863943)
Nobody's denying the facts you gave...lack of competition, lack of transparent pricing, etc.

But to use people's lives as leverage to extract absurd amounts of money goes well beyond being immoral, it's just downright evil.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bmmayer1 on Thursday August 30, 2018 @02:14PM (#17879193)
If making money from using people's lives as leverage is evil, then let's go ahead and condemn doctors, nurses, ambulance drivers, insulin injector manufacturers, and lifeguards while we're at it.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by Sohcahtoa82 on Thursday August 30, 2018 @02:27PM (#17879335)
I'm almost rendered speechless at the absurdity of your suggestion.

Of course they deserve to be paid. And paid quite nicely, too, considering the education levels needed to work such jobs (Lifeguards, obviously requiring significantly less than doctors)!

But they can be paid nicely while charging reasonable prices. The $164k the hospital charged that man for his heart attack is beyond unreasonable.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bmmayer1 on Monday September 03, 2018 @12:56PM (#17903603)
But who gets to decide what is 'reasonable?' The point of the parent post is that there are no forces keeping prices down besides this vague standard of 'reasonableness', which obviously isn't very useful. Shame doesn't bring down prices; competition and structural reforms do.