I was given three estimated prices that ranged from $800 to almost $1800, with an expected final cost of $1000 being the most likely outcome. Surgery came out to $975.
And this is with a non-communicative and uncooperative animal, not a human.
Not to belittle what a doctor does, but I totally agree that a doctor should be able to estimate the most likely and most extreme situations and gauge the range.
No one's going to spend a million bucks on a severely premature puppy, but we will for a human, regularly.
"This might be $500, or $250,000" isn't super helpful.
Really, reading all the stories on this thread is insane when I think my wife and I could just walk into a hospital and get out three days later with a baby without having to worry about paying a buck. Same when my father went to the ER and came out over a month later after an emergency heart surgery, a week in the ICU and two weeks of physiotherapy.
And considering that 90 percent of costs are borne in the last year of life by dying patients, it's naive to think there won't be something like death panels in some form, whether it's that explicit or not. Simple economics says price fixing creates shortages.
The USA doesn’t put more value on life. We put more costs on it, but our outcomes aren’t meaningfully better.
By the way the vast majority of people who die in the US are an a socialized medicine system at the time (e.g., medicare).
Either way though, yes, of course there's "death panel" behavior or other cost-controls which effectively lead to the same result (e.g. doing harm through inaction rather than direct action), in any system.
For automotive I'm typically getting a problem diagnosed first, then after diagnosis, I'm agreeing to a price for a fix. This is the norm for that industry.
For a walk in appointment for a rash, I'm agreeing to a fixed visit fee, PLUS signing that I agree to pay any charges my insurance does not agree to pay. The true costs can (and should) be computed by the provider, so the only true unknown in that equation is what Insurance will cover. THEN the provider (wanting to cover their bases) is putting that risk of not getting paid by insurance, back onto the patient.
I like to think we're 1 killer app away from a shift in consumer behavior here to change the expectations
I worked in Australia for a little and had a couple of doctors visits (mole removal, fractured rib). They were able to tell me, on the phone, cost for a consult, removal, xray, check-up, etc. I was able to pay for the mole removal + biopsy with cash...
I'd love to see something like this in the US:
"Assuming a standard hernia surgery, you're looking at $3000 base for the procedure, with another $300-900 for consumables. 91% of surgeries are at or under $3500, 99% are under $4100. Though patients can go home the same day, 24 hour of hospital bed are covered under the fee; additional days in hospital beds are available at [X] rate. In the event of serious complications, consumables, beds, and misc. are billed at [Y]."
It's baffling how medicine can't produce accurate estimates. Sure, there are edge cases and differences between patients. However, every surgeon has a rough idea of how they're planning to do a procedure. They've been trained and practiced on it many, many times.
I have a torn meniscus. The doctor can happily tell me how easy it is to clean up and exactly what he'll do to fix it. He certainly knows what the risks are and potential complications.
Why he can't document that prior to surgery, I have no clue.