Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Ah.Hmmm, not according to this study:I am aware of the economic model/operating margins of both faith and non-faith based hospitals; not much a difference between the two, in fact some might say zero difference. ....
An interesting read from Thompson-Reuters: Differences in Health System Quality by Ownership
"Our analysis of the quality performance of the 255 health systems in the Health System study showed that significant differences in performance exist between classes of ownership. Specifically, we found:
Catholic and other church-owned systems are significantly more likely to provide higher quality performance and efficiency to the communities served than investor-owned systems. Catholic health systems are also significantly more likely to provide higher quality performance to the communities served than secular not-for-profit health systems.
Investor-owned systems have significantly lower performance than all other groups.
Performance of other church-owned systems (non-Catholic) is not statistically different from either Catholic or not-for-profit systems."
This analysis references performance indicators. I am speaking to the balance sheet.
I have ZERO love for the church...any church for that matter. I truthfully could care less what the church wants or does not want.
However.... this is a dangerous slippery slope of government interfering in religions. I hope the bishops don't back down and close everything.
And lets see how a national catholic strike goes over.
In keeping with the spirit of the thread, I am more interested in stopping Obama's blasphemy of the US Constitution.
And?Two thumbs - if the church leaves it is not their show to run.
California Girl - you are ignoring that business occurs, cities overt crisis' and hospitals are bought and sold and change from holding to operating companies everyday in the USA.
I leave my house, it's still my house.
The church closes a hospital, someone will have to buy it. The church is under no obligation to sell, since they will be confident that obama will be forced to keep his word.
Again..the church does not own the physical entity nor the contents within, most are built on bond financing under a complex debt model.
Well, email them and ask. I'm not your personal wiki. Stop being so fucking lazy. If you want information.... ask them.
You made a claim. I am asking you to support it. But you can't, obviously. And your need to resort to profanity is amusing.
No, I already know.... because I make it my business to know. We own a lot of our facilities.... not all. Ain't no one gonna be taking our property away from us.
If you don't like profanity.... try not to be so fucking stupid.
I have ZERO love for the church...any church for that matter. I truthfully could care less what the church wants or does not want.
However.... this is a dangerous slippery slope of government interfering in religions. I hope the bishops don't back down and close everything.
And lets see how a national catholic strike goes over.
And?I leave my house, it's still my house.
The church closes a hospital, someone will have to buy it. The church is under no obligation to sell, since they will be confident that obama will be forced to keep his word.
Again..the church does not own the physical entity nor the contents within, most are built on bond financing under a complex debt model.
Ah. Thanks for explaining that. Do you have any data about the percentage of Catholic hospitals that have such a situation with the site? That might be interesting data to have.And?Again..the church does not own the physical entity nor the contents within, most are built on bond financing under a complex debt model.
It is not private property to be open and closed at will. Two thumbs said if he leaves his house, it is still his house. The same is not true for (again most) hospitals...think of it as a probate situation with a public heatlhcare need (looming crisis) which would propel the city into action to immediately find an operator of the building.
Probably because it was planned and organized.caritas sold their hospitals around here and there was no interruption of service at all.
Probably because it was planned and organized.caritas sold their hospitals around here and there was no interruption of service at all.
Again?Probably because it was planned and organized.caritas sold their hospitals around here and there was no interruption of service at all.
my experience with bishops doesn't lend itself towards seeing them as steely eyed men of determination.
there will be monkeys flying out of my butt before they close a hospital over this.
Ah. Thanks for explaining that. Do you have any data about the percentage of Catholic hospitals that have such a situation with the site? That might be interesting data to have.And?
It is not private property to be open and closed at will. Two thumbs said if he leaves his house, it is still his house. The same is not true for (again most) hospitals...think of it as a probate situation with a public heatlhcare need (looming crisis) which would propel the city into action to immediately find an operator of the building.
Secondly, (a) in the situations you describe, the new operator will obviously not be Catholic, and the data shows that the healthcare provided will be of lower quality and higher price. That's bad. And, (b) in the transition period, if there is one, local folks will be out of healthcare, urgent and emergency, for a significant time. That's bad.
I would imagine that is true, for some of those who are not devout Catholics. I see it breaking out in the following manner:If catholics start closing hospitals over this the backlash against Catholics will set them back 100 years.
If catholics start closing hospitals over this the backlash against Catholics will set them back 100 years.
This is as much about politics as it is about the Church's stand on birth control. Conservatives are jumping on the bandwagon with the Blunt amendment which in effect would nullify Obamacare. The bill would prevent healthcare providers from including in healthcare plans specific items or services which are against the moral or religious convictions of the individuals covered by the plan or institution that is providing the plan. So Catholic institutions can exclude birth control, Christian Scientists can exclude any medical items that's against their beliefs, and other institution and businesses can exclude whatever they want.I don't see why Catholic institutions would be forced to close. The requirements are the same for Catholic, Jewish, and Protestant institutions as well as government and privately owned institutions. I admit I haven't followed this issue very closely but it seems rather unlikely these church institutions are going to close their doors. Contraception coverage is part of health care plans in Italy and nearly all other European countries yet I haven't heard of any church institutions closing in these countries in protest.
The only difference is that the health care plans that cover contraception in Italy are covered by the government, not the Church. This really is a complicated issue. I understand the Church's position. What I find interesting here is that it seems to me that if the Church, as an employer, is going to offer health insurance that does not cover contraception, then the premiums should be lower, allowing the employee to purchase her own contraception with the difference. In the end, someone is paying for birth control pills or whatever the woman may use, so is there a real difference if it is included in the plan at a higher premium or if it is paid for out of pocket with a lower insurance premium?
Outside of that, I do wonder what will happen if this planet hits 10 billion people and we can no longer support everyone with our resources. Will the Catholic Church still insist everyone should have 18 kids? I won't be around that long, but it is something to wonder about.
You're operating under the assumption that the church will let other people run the show.
She keeps ignoring the reality of the situation... as stated in the article:
Imagine the impact if these hospitals shut down, discounting the other 400-plus health centers and 1,500 specialized homes that the Catholic Church operates as part of its mission that would also disappear. Thanks to the economic models of these hospitals, no one will rush to buy them. One in six patients in the current system would have to vie for service in the remaining system, which would have to absorb almost $100 billion in costs each year to treat them. Over 120,000 beds would disappear from an already-stressed system.
Two thumbs - if the church leaves it is not their show to run.
California Girl - you are ignoring that business occurs, cities overt crisis' and hospitals are bought and sold and change from holding to operating companies everyday in the USA.
I think you're wrong. Healthcare plans at Catholic institution already cover contraception. Twenty-eight states already require organizations that offer prescription insurance to cover contraception and since 98 percent of Catholic women use birth control, many Catholic institutions offer the benefit to their employees. My younger sister is a nurse in a Catholic hospital and birth control is covered by the hospital provided healthcare plan. In fact the pharmacy in the hospital dispenses birth control pills.My impression (and I could be wrong) is that they will shut their doors. They seem quite serious about this, and I can't blame them. As most know, I am not a Catholic (and I am not a Christian, just a theist), but, in this case, the Church has a better grasp of the US Constitution than the POTUS. From a constitutional standpoint, I agree with the Church that the POTUS is wrong. And the Church has the ability and means to make this point, not just with the hospitals.If I understand what you are asking, you want to know is the Catholic hospitals actually own the real estate upon which their hospital is.
I may be mistaken, but that is my understanding of your question. Please correct me if wrong.
So, I'm wondering what significance that has to much of anything. If they own the property, they own it. If they lease the real estate, I would imagine it is a long-term lease. And, if they lease the property, as long as they pay their lease, I doubt the landlord is going to care what they heck they do on that property, as long as it is not illegal or damaging to the property.
So, bottom line, why is that important information to know in this case?
If the Catholics shut down the hospital. Will it really shut down or just be ran by someone else?
The same healthcare law that applies to businesses, government, and individuals, applies to churches. I don't think an exemption should be made for the Catholic Church.I have ZERO love for the church...any church for that matter. I truthfully could care less what the church wants or does not want.
However.... this is a dangerous slippery slope of government interfering in religions. I hope the bishops don't back down and close everything.
And lets see how a national catholic strike goes over.
