ObamaCare Strikes Again

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I really wonder how many more examples we need before the Obamabots will defy their idol and admit what a steaming pile of shit the ACA really is.

WINDBER, Pa. (AP) — A southwestern Pennsylvania hospital will stop delivering babies after March 31 because its obstetricians are either leaving or refocusing their practices, and because hospital officials believe they can't afford it based on projected reimbursements under looming federal health care reforms.

The Windber Medical Center, about 60 miles southeast of Pittsburgh, is losing two obstetricians and two others are shifting their focus more to gynecology.

Hospital officials say the population of women of child-bearing age is dropping and that the number of births the hospital would be called upon to perform isn't enough for it to provide the service in the face of lower reimbursements under the federal Affordable Care Act.

The hospital delivered about 200 babies each year since restarting its obstetrics program in 2005.

Officials aren't sure how many jobs will be lost.

Southwestern Pa. hospital to stop baby deliveries - New York News | NYC Breaking News

 

[Greenbeard]

Obamacare is responsible for the population of women of child-bearing age in that area dropping? Devious.

 

[boedicca]

Oh goody. The few OBGYNs that malpractice lawyers haven't driven out of business finally have a reason to quit.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Hospitals have been duping their delivery units for years because they're not profitable. Instead, just like urgent care, there are now birthing businesses.

Hospitals need to be used for what they are good at - trauma and surgery. Many medical cases can be handled elsewhere.

For that matter, same with many surgeries. If you don't have to stay over night, there are now surgical businesses, privately run by doctors, that are much more profitable.

READ the article.

 

[dblack]

All hail government control of our health. Next up, food. Suck it up, slaves.

 

[Avorysuds]

Obamacare is responsible for the population of women of child-bearing age in that area dropping? Devious.

I love how you always have a reason why the ACA fails to fix anything or fail to live up to a single benchmark Obama set for Obamacare. Much like the stimulus, when it failed Obama and his lemmings simply made a whole new set of benchmarks... then of course they failed to meet those so they again make a new set of goals using the same failing plan of course...

 

[Greenbeard]

I love how you always have a reason why the ACA fails to fix anything or fail to live up to a single benchmark Obama set for Obamacare.

Believe or not, all things in the universe are not controlled by the ACA. If changing demographics remove the justification for a hospital in rural Pennsylvania to rebuild an OB department staff depleted by deaths and relocations because there simply is no longer enough service volume to make it worth the trouble, that isn't the ACA. That's life.

 

[tjvh]

Hospitals have been duping their delivery units for years because they're not profitable. Instead, just like urgent care, there are now birthing businesses.

Hospitals need to be used for what they are good at - trauma and surgery. Many medical cases can be handled elsewhere.

For that matter, same with many surgeries. If you don't have to stay over night, there are now surgical businesses, privately run by doctors, that are much more profitable.

READ the article.

Where would you propose women deliver there babies... Back alleys? I'm sure you are far more concerned about where they can get their inconveniences taken care of.

 

[Politico]

BAck alleys.Gives me an idea for a mobiledelivery business. Kinds like a food truck.

 

[auditor0007]

I really wonder how many more examples we need before the Obamabots will defy their idol and admit what a steaming pile of shit the ACA really is.

WINDBER, Pa. (AP) — A southwestern Pennsylvania hospital will stop delivering babies after March 31 because its obstetricians are either leaving or refocusing their practices, and because hospital officials believe they can't afford it based on projected reimbursements under looming federal health care reforms.

The Windber Medical Center, about 60 miles southeast of Pittsburgh, is losing two obstetricians and two others are shifting their focus more to gynecology.

Hospital officials say the population of women of child-bearing age is dropping and that the number of births the hospital would be called upon to perform isn't enough for it to provide the service in the face of lower reimbursements under the federal Affordable Care Act.

The hospital delivered about 200 babies each year since restarting its obstetrics program in 2005.

Officials aren't sure how many jobs will be lost.

Southwestern Pa. hospital to stop baby deliveries - New York News | NYC Breaking News

Okay, let's look at this closely. The hospital only delivers 200 babies per year, which is less than one per day. They need an entire department for this, yet it obviously does not make sense, and it obviously doesn't pay. Now if this was the only hospital in the county, then this would be a very big problem, but the fact is that this hospital is in Johnstown, PA, and there are a few other hospitals in Johnstown. Those hospitals will pick up the slack, and since they probably already deliver more than 200 babies per year, it will be much more cost effective.

Part of the problem we have with hospitals is that most of them try to do everything, and in many cases, because of that fact, costs skyrocket. Let me give you a quick example. I have to have an ultrasound done every year. Because I have cirrhosis of the liver, they check for cancerous tumors. Anyway, if I go to the hospital to have this done, the cost is between $1500 to $2000. Well, I have a high deductible, so I would have to pay the full amount if I went to the hospital, so instead, I go to an imaging center which is only a couple of miles from the hospital. They charge me $220.

Now imagine if I had a low deductible or Medicaid or Medicare covered me. A lot of people in this situation go to the hospital and we all pay for it in the end. Why the huge discrepancy in cost? Truthfully, it doesn't make a lot of sense. Yes a hospital is going to have higher overhead costs, but really? They really need to charge upwards of $2000 for a procedure that someone else can do for one tenth the cost?

See, these are the discussions we should be having about healthcare, and how we can reduce costs. Efficiency in our system is a joke.

 

[dblack]

See, these are the discussions we should be having about healthcare, and how we can reduce costs. Efficiency in our system is a joke.

There's no efficiency because there's no consumer demand for it (i.e. no consumer demand for lower health care prices). That's the core problem with the health care market and is uniformly ignored by PPACA. PPACA is, instead, preoccupied with cementing corporate insurance as a permanent fixture in our health care.

 

[Greenbeard]

Part of the problem we have with hospitals is that most of them try to do everything, and in many cases, because of that fact, costs skyrocket. Let me give you a quick example. I have to have an ultrasound done every year. Because I have cirrhosis of the liver, they check for cancerous tumors. Anyway, if I go to the hospital to have this done, the cost is between $1500 to $2000. Well, I have a high deductible, so I would have to pay the full amount if I went to the hospital, so instead, I go to an imaging center which is only a couple of miles from the hospital. They charge me $220.

Now imagine if I had a low deductible or Medicaid or Medicare covered me. A lot of people in this situation go to the hospital and we all pay for it in the end. Why the huge discrepancy in cost? Truthfully, it doesn't make a lot of sense. Yes a hospital is going to have higher overhead costs, but really? They really need to charge upwards of $2000 for a procedure that someone else can do for one tenth the cost?

Innovative uses of cost-sharing to steer people toward higher-value providers and higher-value services are the wave of the future. In some cases it's just a high deductible like yours, in others it's tiered networks where cost-sharing variations based on the facility you choose are built right into the terms of the plan, and in others it'll be value-based insurance design in which cost-sharing varies based on the value of the service itself.

Some of the insurers in Massachusetts, based on the rising prevalence of these kinds of products and new transparency requirements in their 2012 health reform law, are rolling out new products to make it easier for consumers to figure this stuff out:

New insurance tools will let patients discover costs

Harvard Pilgrim, based in Wellesley, plans to introduce a software application on its website this spring called “Now iKnow,” available to its 1.2 million members in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine. The program, which eventually will also be offered as a stand-alone mobile app, is designed to help people make better decisions by ranking doctors and hospitals based on cost and quality and rewarding the providers offering the best value.

Now iKnow will present consumers with options in simplified fashion customized for their insurance plan, showing, for example, how much they have spent to date on deductibles and how much more they have to spend out of pocket before their insurance kicks in. For each service, it will list a range of pricing estimates, showing both the total cost of the visit or procedure and the amount to be borne by the individual.

“It creates a competitive force that hasn’t existed in the health care industry,” Schultz said. “Those who demand the service will now have the cost and quality information.”

Harvard Pilgrim has been a leader in the burgeoning movement to control medical costs and improve quality by arming consumers with information. Last year, it introduced a rewards program called SaveOn through which members, who have been given referrals for imaging tests and other procedures by their doctors, are invited to contact a “clinical concierge” service that directs them to hospitals or facilities that charge less for the same tests. In return, members receive a check from Harvard Pilgrim, ranging from $10 to $75.

Other health insurers in Massachusetts are working on their own online tools, responding in part to the payment overhaul law passed by the state Legislature in 2012 that requires them to make price information available within two days effective Oct. 1, and immediately by the same date in 2014.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, the state’s largest health insurer, is upgrading online self-service for its 2.8 million members. A new cost estimator tool called “Find a Doctor” will be rolled out to preferred provider organization members from select employers next month and extended to all PPO members by July. The tool, which will be offered to health maintenance organization members later this year or early 2014, will help consumers find providers and compare out-of-pocket expenses for 128 common medical services.

 

[dblack]

Innovative uses of cost-sharing to steer people toward higher-value providers and higher-value services are the wave of the future...

Using the regulatory regime to 'steer' customers toward favored providers is indeed the core mechanism of PPACA. But it's naive in the extreme to assume that efficiency or cost sharing will be a significant consideration for those doing the steering. PPACA is textbook corporatism and its primary function is to distribute perks to special interests (chief of which are the insurance corps).

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I just noticed a typo in the original post. The first line should read,

Hospitals have been duMping their delivery units for years because they're not profitable. Instead, just like urgent care, there are now birthing businesses.

Sorry 'bout that.

 

[Underhill]

Hospitals have been duping their delivery units for years because they're not profitable. Instead, just like urgent care, there are now birthing businesses.

Hospitals need to be used for what they are good at - trauma and surgery. Many medical cases can be handled elsewhere.

For that matter, same with many surgeries. If you don't have to stay over night, there are now surgical businesses, privately run by doctors, that are much more profitable.

READ the article.

Where would you propose women deliver there babies... Back alleys? I'm sure you are far more concerned about where they can get their inconveniences taken care of.

Home? I know women who have done this. Midwives/Nurse Practitioners facilities? We have a thriving practice down the street that delivers babies by the dozen this way. Cost half as much as the hospital and is 6 blocks away in case things go bad somehow.

Birth is a pretty routine thing these days. And if things go south, they can always call a doctor in or take them to the hospital.

 

[emilynghiem]

All hail government control of our health. Next up, food. Suck it up, slaves.

(1) If we've had this little luck getting government to follow the Constitution for offices that are UNDER it, how so for services that are NOT directly authorized under the Constitution

(2) as for slavery, you aren't kidding!
anyone around the 40% tax range (if you look it up, there should be a day of the year that marks when people start working to earn for themselves instead of giving to govt) is basically the equivalent of 3/5 free. Where you keep 60%of your labor and owe 40% as an indentured servant to govt. So we are back in the days of slaves not free and equal by law.

I believe this can be addressed by setting taxes at a fixed 10% like tithing, and only paying for the budget that all parties agree on 100%, and then delegating the rest to loans or payments through party of choice to pay for the programs that taxpayers choose to fund. parties would be free to organize by state or by issue, and lend surplus to each other. Taxpayers should get interest on paying more than their 10% share as loans to govt, and have a direct say on the terms of where the money goes and how it gets paid back or fwd.

 

[proudveteran06]

[http://Click here: Undernews: Obamacare: the good, the bad, the unpredictable & the dangerously unknown[/URL]