Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by robbiep 4656 days ago
No, if you need lifesaving surgery, you get it. And you don't get a bill that ends up costing a second mortgage.

Elective procedures - that's a different story. But it is location specific, and in many countries with mixed public/private systems you can pay through your nose if you like anyway
2 comments
dnautics 4656 days ago
who gets to decide what is lifesaving and what is elective?
link
taylodl 4656 days ago
Currently the insurance company does, and since they were most likely selected by your employer whose objective was to hold down costs, what do you think that insurer's priorities are going to be? Plus, who's the customer in this situation? For whose business is the insurance company really working for?
link
dnautics 4656 days ago
no doubt having your employment being tied to your insurance is a really, really bad idea, but may I remind that state of affairs is because of a government incentive put into place by FDR.
link
markost 4656 days ago
I believe it was originally because of postwar wage/price controls, which led to employers giving health insurance to attract employees, which led to the IRS taxing health insurance, which led to Congress exempting health insurance from tax, which led to the current regime we have today, compounded by the McCarran-Ferguson Act as well as the HMO Act.
link
taylodl 4656 days ago
You failed to mention the context of that government incentive - World War II. And the incentive you're referring to was put in place by the War Labor Board in 1942, during FDR's presidency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Labor_Board
link
dnautics 4656 days ago
you'd think that with the end of the war, the incentive would have been removed.
link
taylodl 4656 days ago
It was. But perqs proved popular with employers because their value were hidden from the employees. Thus large employers could use their negotiating power to procure health insurance for their employees at a relatively low cost. They were effectively getting cheaper labor, a huge competitive advantage. The ruse was up once health insurance costs started skyrocketing.
link
robbiep 4656 days ago
In australia if you're in a hospital and you need surgery, you get it. Today if necessary.

Nothing needs 'approval'. Because everyone has the same insurer (The government), if you present to a hospital you are triaged according to your risk and treated appropriately. No 'approval' and no 'rejection'. It just happens.

And if you have osteoarthritis of your knees and want surgery in the private system (which can generally happen on demand instead of - because it is an emergent/elective condition - some time between now and 12 months from now) then you can go ahead and organise that.

If you would like to read a media release by the College of Surgeons have a look at [1] which not only describes emergency and elective but talks about about how surgery is managed in the hospital.

whoops, missed the link. [1] http://www.surgeons.org/media/307115/sbm_2011-05-24_separati...

link
sliverstorm 4656 days ago
It's like the line between "cosmetic" and "reconstructive". You would think it was a pretty clear line, and then discover it isn't.
link
pvarangot 4656 days ago
In most systems, doctors.
link
LekkoscPiwa 4656 days ago
yeah, like bribes to doctors so they actually perform this cancer tumor surgery to my dad instead of asking him to wait in line for months more. Seen a doctor? Has a belly and a family. Needs money. Simple. But some idiots believe in "free". There is no free. You pay a ton of money for healthcare in any system.
link
mason55 4656 days ago
> There is no free. You pay a ton of money for healthcare in any system.

I'm confused. Is your argument that universal health care is more expensive than the current US system? Most studies have shown that to be false.[1]

I don't think anyone believes that universal health care is free.

[1] http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/21/4/88.long

link
LekkoscPiwa 4655 days ago
go outside US and you will see that societies are concerned about people with deadly diseases like cancer having to wait months for surgeries. Because there arent enough doctors. Because there arent enough beds in hospitals. Because there just aeent enough medications. People have much more serious problems with socialized medicine than cost. ie waiting line of 6 months for prostate cancer surgery when every day counts. There are many much more important aspects of healthcare than affordability. Wouldnt you trade this 6 months waiting line for bankruptcy? Really?
link