Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

advertise-here4


Slip Opinions


First they came for the birthday card . . . (fp)

Let the jailbreaking begin! (kw)

For the Niall denial files. (fp)

Professors as processors. (fp)

Great Moderation hits Great Mortification. (fp)

Understanding the Shirley Sherrod story. (fp)

Credit score cruelty. (fp)

Slowing Interior's revolving door. (fp)

Great risk shift: Americans more insecure; BC/BS enjoying a surplus. (fp)

Leamer: Economic theory is fiction; econometrics is journalism. (fp)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments


    • Harris Telemacher on Starbucks' Secret Menu

    • Patrick S. O'Donnell on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Nate Oman on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Patrick S. O'Donnell on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Michael S. Langston on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Nate Oman on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Patrick S. O'Donnell on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Nate Oman on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Nate Oman on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Frank Pasquale on Three Defenses of Markets

    • A.J. Sutter on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Jeff Lipshaw on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Jeff Lipshaw on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Marc DeGirolami on Three Defenses of Markets

    • Jeff Lipshaw on Three Defenses of Markets
  •  

    Site Meter

    About the Blog

    Concurring Opinions is a multiple authored, general interest legal blog.

    (Image: Wikicommons)

Just Go to the ER

posted by Frank Pasquale

Given my earlier points on SCHIP, I thought the following might be of interest:

Bush spent a fair amount of time talking about health care . . . . “The immediate goal is to make sure there are more people on private insurance plans. I mean, people have access to health care in America,” he said. “After all, you just go to an emergency room.”

As I noted earlier, this isn’t great medical advice. Bush is referring to hospital obligations under EMTALA, an act that requires hospitals merely to screen and stabilize those who come to the ER. Once you’re stable, EMTALA doesn’t offer much protection. So if you have a slowly growing cancer or some chronic condition that is gradually killing you, don’t expect the hospital to be legally obliged to help under EMTALA.

To the extent any of this was unclear, Bush’s HHS helpfully clarified matters a few years ago. From a summary of the regs:

The regulations further clarify that a hospital’s obligations under EMTALA end at the time that the hospital, in good faith, admits an individual for hospital inpatient care, regardless of whether the individual is experiencing an emergency medical condition.

As Paul Krugman notes, the media needs to interrogate attitudes like “just go to the ER” or “Americans have the best health care system in the world,” rather than simply reporting them. Laws like EMTALA are scarcely airtight guarantees of care.


 July 17, 2007 at 4:01 pm   Posted in: Health Law   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (3)

  1. LM - July 18, 2007 at 1:29 am

    Seems to me that the first half of the quote by Bush is just as revealing about his plans for health care as the latter (especially when considered in light of your post on SCHIP).

    “The immediate goal is to make sure there are more people on private insurance plans….”

    Translation: “We don’t really intend to support health care programs that would be detrimental to private insurance companies.”

    Another Freudian slip on Bush’s part? Or perhaps I’m reading too much into things…

  2. Frank - July 18, 2007 at 10:34 am

    I don’t think it’s a Freudian slip, particularly if you look at the inefficient “Medicare Advantage” plans the admninistration is now subsidizing. These plans are designed to route more Medicare dollars through private insurers.

    The House Democrats want to fund SCHIP expansion by cutting subsidies to these plans. The Administration is vehemently opposed to that. So in other words, they appear to prioritize the partial privatization of Medicare over getting insurance to poor and near-poor children. Here are some details:

    (from

    http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042007E.shtml)

    “2003 Medicare legislation . . . sharply increased payments to Medicare Advantage plans, which . . . funnel Medicare funds through insurance companies.

    [T]hose Medicare Advantage plans cost taxpayers 12 percent more per recipient than standard Medicare. In the next five years that subsidy will cost more than $50 billion – about what it would cost to provide all children in America with health insurance.

    As a result, Medicare – originally a system in which the government paid people’s medical bills – is becoming, instead, a system in which the government pays the insurance industry to provide coverage. And a lot of the money never makes it to the people Medicare is supposed to help.”

  3. Anon - July 19, 2007 at 7:45 am

    Usually “free market types” use the “poor people can go to the ER” statement as sarcasm for how messed-up our system is–one where people can’t afford insurance but can go to the crazily-expensive ER. I suspect Bush was being sarcastic here and that you guys have not picked up on that. Or Bush could just be stupid. I admit that later is perhaps more likely.

Leave a Reply

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove
Kaimipono Wenger
Dave Hoffman
Nate Oman
Frank Pasquale
Deven Desai
Danielle Citron
Lawrence Cunningham
Sarah Waldeck
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Solangel Maldonado
Gerard Magliocca

Guests

Thomas Crocker
Kristin Johnson
Tuan Samahon
Corey Yung




Need A Solicitor?
Find the right solicitor to advise you on all your litigation law, employment law, divorce law and family law related matters. Use the award winning legal search and matching service from TakeLegalAdvice.com









Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
Adam Benforado
Gaia Bernstein
Francesca Bignami
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Jennifer Collins
Thomas Crocker
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Lisa Fairfax
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Michelle Harner
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
Sherrilyn Ifill
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Kristin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Jeffrey Kahn
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Alex Kreit
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Youngjae Lee
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Viva Moffat
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Angela Onwuachi-Willing
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
Marc Poirier
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Judd Sneirson
Adam Steinman
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Melissa Waters
Frank Wu
Alfred Yen
Corey Yung
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Michael Zimmer
Jonathan Zittrain

Ownership

Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

Blogroll

Above the Law
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Derechoalderecho
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Just Books
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress