OBAMACARE FINES START FOR HOSPITALS THAT READMIT SICK PATIENTS

Thanks to Obamacare, hospitals will deny care to the elderly and chronically ill to avoid big brother fines. Good job, Mr. President!

Here's the article:

Hospitals who re-admit patients within 30 days after they were discharged will now have to, under an Obamacare provision, pay fines as of October 1, 2012, which could force hospitals to slash programs that help the elderly, the poor, and the chronically ill.

According to a study, "about two-thirds of the hospitals serving Medicare patients, or some 2,200 facilities, will be hit with penalties averaging around $125,000 per facility this coming year."

This provision was inserted into Obamacare as a cost-cutting measure, but it will force hospitals to give the poor, elderly, and chronically ill substandard care.

In addition, critics also note that "large teaching hospitals that are affiliated with universities" could be negatively impacted the most because these hospitals are often on the front lines in dealing with the elderly and the poor in addition to people who have mysterious illnesses who constantly need to be re-admitted to the hospital for urgent care.

As the Examiner notes:

Some observers believe that the new provision will place an enormous amount of added pressure on these populations, given that patients cannot be certain that their treatment will be up to par in the event of the need for readmission to the hospital after discharge. And hospitals that are already feeling the squeeze financially due to cutbacks in reimbursements from the government may be forced to limit the level of care given during readmission, resulting in patients being discharged long before they are ready.

This is yet another reason why a plurality of Americans want Obamacare to be repealed before it it is too late, as more of such provisions will gradually be implemented.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...Patients-Begin

You have no credibility until you stop insisting LL didn't prove you wrong.
And even then you won't be able to prove you're not a weenie!

watched a program several months ago about people who had no insurance and went to county hospitals on a VERY regular basis for absolutely NO reason ... one woman in her 30's went 16 times in 1 month for the same reason .. nothing was wrong with her. Limiting visits that will save $$ sounds good to me, not you? ... not to mention if you need emergency treatment the hospital cant turn you away

Wellness (prevention) will chop the ER visits down. Universal care will also turn $1500 ER visits into $30 office visits. Unfortunately the hospitals don't want that, and they're fighting tooth and nail to keep sucking the Federal teat.

You watched a program. Good for you. I hope the chronically ill and elderly saw it. Then they might be as smart as you.

But you know it all, because you "watched a program".

the chronically ill and elderly cant be refused admission

But the hospitals can be fined for taking them. Either that, or they won't be reimbursed for their care, like they should be, under current law.

But the hospitals can be fined for taking them. Either that, or they won't be reimbursed for their care, like they should be, under current law. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

not if they need care

Now YOU are wrong. Didn't read the article, did you? Too busy Onanizing?

Now YOU are wrong. Didn't read the article, did you? Too busy Onanizing? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

hospitals cant refuse medical care to those in need, its the LAW.

Denny Crane

I know that, but they can also be fined under Obamacare, moron.

CJ7

I am guessing that you are neither a lawyer, nor a health care practitioner.

Hospitals are only required to provide emergent care. Once a patient is medically stable, it becomes the discretion of the hospital to determine if admission to the hospital is warranted.

COG's analysis is correct. In order to prevent "frivolous" care, hospitals will be subject to fines, individual fines can reach up to $10K per incident, if they re-admit patients previously discharged within 30 days or less. Ostensibly, this is to prevent multiple billing to the Medicare system. In reality, hospitals will have no choice to but to decline to admit emergent patients with chronic or long term illnesses once they are judged to be medically stable.

The old adage "take two aspirins and call me in the morning" is about to come roaring back as never before.

CJ7

I am guessing that you are neither a lawyer, nor a health care practitioner.

Hospitals are only required to provide emergent care. Once a patient is medically stable, it becomes the discretion of the hospital to determine if admission to the hospital is warranted.

COG's analysis is correct. In order to prevent "frivolous" care, hospitals will be subject to fines, individual fines can reach up to $10K per incident, if they re-admit patients previously discharged within 30 days or less. Ostensibly, this is to prevent multiple billing to the Medicare system. In reality, hospitals will have no choice to but to decline to admit emergent patients with chronic or long term illnesses once they are judged to be medically stable.

The old adage "take two aspirins and call me in the morning" is about to come roaring back as never before. Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

you are correct, Im neither ... frivolous is the keyword ... habitual readmissions cost medicare millions of dollars ... IF the person has an insurance policy medicare is out of the picture ... eliminating waste and saving money is a key element in the healthcare act .. again I ask why is that a problem when those in need of medical care cant and wnt be refused?

the hospitals examine a patient prior to admission, they determine if admission is necessary ... if the patient is habitual medical records show that immediately ... if the INSURED patient warrants admission they cant refuse

The crazy old goat doesn't have to worry they will admit him free just to watch him.

You watched a program. Good for you. I hope the chronically ill and elderly saw it. Then they might be as smart as you.

But you know it all, because you "watched a program". Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Oh, and you read Breitbart. I'll go with the the TV program everytime. At least there is a chance it is not pure, unadulterated right-wing propaganda bullshit.