Pavel Lishin Verified

Damn, a 19 hour wait.

Note to self, if I'm ever injured near Parkland, take the time to drive out somewhere a little further.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Tracy Yost Verified

This is very sad. Unfortunately, if you don't have insurance, Parkland is the only place you can go.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Chris Kidd Verified

Hence, another reason we need reform of health care in this country. Let Michaels death not be in vein, lets push for real change...

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

An interesting question is why Mike opted out of health insurance? Surely someone who owned a chain of restaurants could afford it...

Also, why are we talking health care reform when it seems evident he opted out of obtaining insurance?

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Travis Bush Verified

He probably dumped every penny he had into his restaurants and didn't think ahead. When times got tough, insurance most likely was not a top priority, which I am sure is the case for millions of us.

BTW, you know JFK didn't die from being shot in the head, it was the visit to parkland that killed him!

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

It's not at all my intent to criticize a dead guy, there's no point in that - people should learn from his misfortune, though. I imagine a decent amount of uninsured folks could afford catastrophic health insurance (aka major medical, hospitalization insurance, etc) for situations just like this one.

If you're currently uninsured I very strongly encourage you to click on the link above, read up, and get quotes on cat coverage. It's more affordable than full coverage, kicks in when you truly need it most, and I bet there are MANY people who have no clue it exists.

To peeps who feel our system is inadequate: Do you have any suggestions for a different approach that's attainable given our current system?

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Pavel Lishin Verified

"If you have a true emergency, any hospital you go to must treat you, or face a law suit."

True, but you might end up waiting 19 hours as other emergencies with a higher priority go ahead.

For the record, a word of advice a wise man told me that a quick way to get to the head of the line at the emergency room is to make sure that you have plenty of blood on your admitting paperwork.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Russ Vandeveerdonk Verified

Parkland is a great hospital, but it can only do so much for so many! That is it. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. Herrera's still has great food and I agree with CHO, RIP Mike.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Tracy Yost Verified

I have some personal experience with trying to buy insurance outside of the corporate umbrella - a healthy 21 year old person can buy minimal coverage at a reasonable price but if you have any kind of health issues (ie diabetes, high blood pressure) you can add a digit to that price. I also have some personal experience trying to take a very sick person who did not have insurance to a hospital other than Parkland and THEY WILL NOT TREAT THEM. Could I have waited for the person to die and then sue ? Well, I suppose, but that hardly seemed like the best course of action at the time.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

Tracy, maybe I'm crazy, but it seems pretty reasonable to me that if you have health conditions requiring more medical treatment than the next person...you pay more into the pool of money used for medical expenses. Why should someone who's higher risk be entitled to the same premiums as a healthier individual?

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Tracy Yost Verified

mmmm, well i didn't say they should be entitled to the same premiums. But I will say this - I find it quite unfair that I can choose to work for a corporation and thusly get outstanding healthcare coverage at approximately $500/month, REGARDLESS OF MY HEALTH, or I can choose to have my own business and then suddenly my health status comes into play, and if I have diabetes I can't buy healthcare coverage for any price :-) So my quality of healthcare is determined by what I choose to do for a living. This seems wrong to me and Mr. Herrera may well have been up against similar circumstances.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

Maybe they'll drop 'bar owner' premiums a bit when the smoking ban goes into effect. =)

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Tracy Yost Verified

Maybe. What about software companies ? Independent travel guides ? Restaurant owners (where smoking is already banned)?

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

Dunno, I'm not trying to sell you the stuff over here (feel free to send me premiums, though). Maybe try getting together with other downtown small business for group rates?

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Tracy Yost Verified

I have found a few but they do not compare favorably to the "corporate plans" in terms of cost or coverage. And I guess I'm just stupid because if all it takes is "a group" to get good coverage at good rates, then I don't understand why all citizens don't just get together and form one BIG group and get a really good deal ;-)

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Pavel Lishin Verified

jtmbls: Yes, I remember hearing about this, too. I guess even small companies banded together don't have the spending power of a big corporation.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

Citizens are different than businesses from a legal standpoint, Tracy. It's all b/c of those sheister attorneys, imo.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Tracy Yost Verified

jtmbls - that makes too much sense - therefore, there's probably a law against it !!

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Brett Hoerner Verified

I have found a few but they do not compare favorably to the "corporate plans"

Well, your employer generally contributes on your behalf, too, so it may seem "lower" but that's just less money that have available to give to you in a paycheck. I know for a fact that I could get insurance cheaper on my own because I'm young a healthy, yet employers pay a group rate (which in my case is higher because it factors in older / less healthy employees and families).

I don't understand why all citizens don't just get together and form one BIG group and get a really good deal

I assume you're alluding to socialized healthcare, but just to play Devil's advocate ... if it were that simple, it'd be the same as I said above. I'd be paying more simply because the national average of less-healthy-than-me would unfairly raise my prices.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Tracy Yost Verified

Not really alluding to full socialization, just saying, if the buying power were in numbers alone, it would seem we could do that and everyone wins (ie the ins. co.s get to keep making lots of money - nobody gets a free ride, everyone must pay a premium).
But anyway I think the real problem is that much of our collective available dollar for healthcare actually goes into a pot of "insurance company profit" and that if it went instead into healthcare proper we might all be surprised how affordable it would become.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

Methinks people are a bit quick to blame insurance co's for all their problems. At least, I rarely hear people crying about the ridiculously wealthy doctors who bill health insurance carriers.

Socializing things would likely mean the best of the best providers follow the money to privatized countries and docs who stick around tell me I've got lupus.

Not to mention, if you were truly hardcore you'd lobby to do away with health insurance companies altogether. But nobody seems to like the idea of pay-per-use when it's their funds on the line. Really doesn't seem to be a win-win solution here, simply a least annoying process.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Brett Hoerner Verified

They would have a large group of varied risks to choose from and package them appropriately

Isn't that exactly what they do?

Companies (or people) that do crab fishing or logging pay more for health insurance than someone who sits a desk all day. Companies of mostly older employees pay more than ones with mostly younger. And on and on.

Same reason car insurance is higher for an 18 year old male vs a 40 year old female. Risk is taken into account and you're charged accordingly. Does it mean safe young males are screwed? Yeah. But how would you fix that without charging all the 40 year old females more and the 18 year old males less?

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

What Brett said. Health insurance companies have historically performed very well in the face of adversity, which is why they're still around.

Between dealing with extremely strict regulation, grumpy sick people who don't want to pay their deductibles/coinsurance, ridiculous inflation in medical costs, etc...they take unfair scrutiny from everyone, imo. Considering year-to-year increases in health care costs have been heavily outpacing the economy's inflation for quite some time, cut these guys a break.

I'm no actuary, but I'm willing to bet the difference in premiums based on occupation alone isn't as extreme as you'd think. Life insurance, disability and workers compensation are more effected, imo. People who sit at a desk all day are probably going to live longer without being as fit as someone whose job requires more physical activity. Workers comp would come into play if you're injured on the job, and disability would kick in after x-amount of days off.

"Nonprofit hospital" sounds like a hell-hole, btw. Literally.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Jason Rice Verified

Howard Hughes Medical Institute is a nonprofit - granted primarily research and founded by a guy that walked around with his feet in Kleenex boxes and kept body fluids in Mason jars... all of it.

And, ok, maybe it was possibly a tax dodge for a friggin' huge defense contractor - but it could work. Ok, I can't even convince me. Nevermind. We're doomed.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Travis Bush Verified

There is also Scottish Rite for children. I believe it is a non-profit entity.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Rawlins Gilliland Verified

Too often, a story like this…and subsequent posts, becomes a litmus test where one can, at a glance, tell who is covered by health insurance …….through their employer probably…., who struggles as an independent to stay covered (heads up to SugarCreek2) and who just flat gave up because it became (in effect) realistically impossible.

A couple of points: 1) It does not hurt to be young and in one's health prime. 2) It's a real plus when you, at any age, are not involved in a catastrophic accident.
3) Clap if you're employed by a company that has health coverage.

A few tidbits for the uninitiated: When I became self employed in 1999, my monthly coverage (w/$5000 deductible) was $436 mo. As the costs rose, despite my ideal health, by 2002, my monthly premium (w/lesser coverage) became over $1,100 monthly. When it rose to $1,350, I caved. Then, a few months later, I cut off all my fingers on the left hand in a table saw accident. The rest became a 6 year personal finance history of determined survival and unimaginable vulnerability. Happily, that's history for me. But it's as current as a heart attack for no few likely reading my post.

Threads about healthcare generally descend into arguments about Canada's coverage horror stories and England's... contrasted inevitably with perfect-world truisms~~~ that ours is the finest health system in the world, yadayada. The new age reality of American health coverage is a no-man's land where unlikely people are caught between certainty and crap shoot-despair. Or death. Any way you slice and dice it, I beat the odds. Mr. Herrera, no matter what reasons, didn't.

Meanwhile, PS: The family across the street, who are wonderful and lovely people from Mexico, have their brother ...who still lives in Durango, Mexico... come up to Dallas periodically to have his medical care (involving his diabetes) at Parkland. Free.

Don’t shoot the messenger. I can’t afford to have the bullet removed.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Kevin Kunreuther Verified

$700 billion to bail out failed financial institutions could be used to pay for a Western European democracy style free health care plan for every citizen in this country for ... toting up the numbers ... five tears, taking into account inflation and escalating costs, new treatments, etc.

Would that guarantee faster treatment time in the E.R.? No, not really, nothing is guaranteed. But people put off health care until it is too late because of costs. Insurance companies are slow to pay or not at all when it comes to claims. That affects greatly how doctors and health care facilities treat you, when your insurance company starts playing games. Seriously, instead bailing out Wall Street, the government should nationalize health care. We can ride out a four or five year Great Recession, but the pending crisis in health care costs is turning into a perilous game of chicken. We will crash and when it happens, flesh-colored Band-Aids and Bactine is not going to solve the problem, fix it or make it go away.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

$700 billion... free health care plan...

Money's invariably coming out of the people's pockets. Government overtaking a traditionally privatized industry sounds like a pretty big gamble to Doyle.

Again, so quick to blame health insurers for rising costs - why is nobody concerned about what providers are actually charging?

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Tracy Yost Verified

Rawlins, thanks for sharing - today and every day.

For the rest of ya, here are some numbers that may or may not mean anything. According to the latest UN human development reports, the US ranks as follows on some healthcare measures related to "Committment to Health - Resources, Access and Services" -

+Public expenditure on healthcare as % of gdp - 12th (11 countries spend more)

+Private expenditures on healthcare as % of gdp - 1st (we spend more than any other country)

+Total healthcare expenditures per capita - 1st (we spend more than any other country per capita)

+Life expectancy at birth - 19th (18 other countries have longer life expectancy)

+Physicians per 100k people - 43rd (42 other nations have more physicians per 100k people)

Also, for what it's worth, I went to the ER in Belgium once, was seen immediately and it was free. Until they found out I was not a citizen and then it was $125.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

xDWx, while I do work for an insurance company, the health side isn't my thing. Only time I came close was interning for a commercial benefits brokerage in college.

For what it's worth, I'm of the mind that highly profitable insurance year over year is inefficient and taxing on society in the grand scheme (keep in mind my salary hits the books as expenses, nothing to do with profit - a raise would suit me just fine).

I've already asked once - naysayers of our current privatized health care system, please propose something remotely feasible given our current situation. As DC pointed out, we already have gubmint run options for peeps who can't afford care on their own - medicare, medicaid, et al. Look how well that's turned out.

1 year, 1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )