Should the unvaccinated pay full costs if they end up in hospital with COVID?

[Stevicus]

Opinion: Don’t want the COVID-19 vaccine? Then pay the full cost if you land in the hospital

I thought this was an interesting idea. If someone refuses to get vaccinated, should they pay the full costs of their hospitalization if they get COVID?

(I wonder what that guy has against the Foo Fighters. I fancied a few of their songs, but I never thought they were guilty of crimes against humanity.)

Much of the argument about lockdowns and mask mandates boils down to disagreements about the level of risk that’s appropriate to impose on others and how much should be left to individuals to decide.

But now that vaccines are easy to obtain (and have always been free to the recipients), the calculations have shifted. Those who choose to remain unvaccinated no longer pose a serious threat to the vaccinated – but they’re still imposing a cost. Hospitalizations for COVID are almost entirely confined to those who are not vaccinated, often at the cost of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Who should bear those costs? Under our system of risk-sharing, it’s all of us, whether through government programs like Medicare and Medicaid or through private insurers. When someone who refuses to get the vaccine gets seriously ill, their bills currently are paid by taxpayers or others in their insurance group.

But why should the vaccinated bear those financial costs? Insurers, led by government programs, should declare that medically-able, eligible people who choose not to be vaccinated are responsible for the full financial cost of COVID-related hospitalizations, effective in six weeks.

That gives time for the unvaccinated to make a choice, based on their personal preferences and a truer sense of responsibility. Those who continue to believe that COVID is no more than a cold, or that the pandemic is a sophisticated fraud, or that sheep parasite medicine is more effective than vaccines with shockingly good efficacy, can put their money where their mouths (and keyboards) are.

One of the fundamental lessons of economics is that people respond to incentives – just witness the success of vaccine lotteries at encouraging vaccinations. But a policy of letting the unvaccinated foot the bill for their COVID-related hospitalizations is only partly about wielding a financial stick to push reluctant people into vaccination. It’s also about not expecting others to pay for your decisions. Standing up for your beliefs means being willing to bear the consequences. Otherwise, it’s just cheap talk.[

The most common objection to this policy is a slippery slope argument: what if the insurers stop covering the health outcomes of other lifestyle-driven diseases, like cirrhosis or Type 2 diabetes? Or not covering health costs for those who are unbelted in auto accidents?

Health insurers already do charge more to people who smoke and are permitted in many states to exclude coverage when injuries arise from illegal acts or under the influence of drugs – including alcohol. And a full debate about whether people should be charged more when engaging in certain activities is not unreasonable if the costs of these kinds of choices are going to be spread to everyone.

But more importantly, there is a direct and clear connection between vaccination and the likelihood of serious complications from COVID, unlike the decades-long development, mediated by genetics, between many health behaviors and serious illness. A more apt comparison would be if a safe single-shot cure for Type 2 diabetes was developed. The rest of us would be justified in refusing to cover the costs of complications for diabetes for anyone who refused to take the cure.

Those of us who are vaccinated did the responsible thing. It’s time for the unvaccinated to live up to the ideals of individual freedom and personal responsibility by taking on more of the consequences of their actions. Some are nervous about the possible risks of a vaccine and are waiting – but they should bear not only the health but also the financial risks of their hesitancy.


The complaint that lockdowns and mandates infantilize the population is reasonable. We should be able to make choices about our levels of risk tolerance. And every aspect of life comes with risks. But we don’t get to impose serious costs on others, and expecting others to pay is not only puerile but makes hard mandates more likely.

Real adults take responsibility for their decisions.

 

[exchemist]

Opinion: Don’t want the COVID-19 vaccine? Then pay the full cost if you land in the hospital

I thought this was an interesting idea. If someone refuses to get vaccinated, should they pay the full costs of their hospitalization if they get COVID?

(I wonder what that guy has against the Foo Fighters. I fancied a few of their songs, but I never thought they were guilty of crimes against humanity.)

No, that would be grotesque. Medicine should be a safety net for everyone, however stupid.

But, in countries relying on commercial health insurance, I imagine market forces might eventually cause insurance companies to increase the premium for the unvaccinated, just as is done, I believe, for smokers.

But this will take time to emerge. At present I should think it is too soon for actuaries to assess the statistical advantages of being vaccinated, given the highly dynamic situation with different variants, the evolution of better treatments for severe disease, and so forth.

 

[We Never Know]

I found this web search some what interesting. All three within less than 2 months of each other yet differ quite a bit.

Yes I know this is a little off topic, so to stay on topic kids can't be vaccinates yet so does that dismiss them(their parents) from having to self pay?

 

[Psalm23]

No, if one has insurance that covers the cost, insurance should pay for it. I think that people should be treated the same regardless of vaccination status.

 

[exchemist]

I found this web search some what interesting. All three within less than 2 months of each other yet differ quite a bit.

Yes I know this is a little off topic, so to stay on topic kids can't be vaccinates yet so does that dismiss them(their parents) from having to self pay?

View attachment 53599

"Cases" =/= serious disease, though. Almost all children get through it without medical interventions.

 

[We Never Know]

"Cases" =/= serious disease, though. Almost all children get through it without medical interventions.

I wasn't questioning the seriousness of the infections. Its about how the precetages vary.

However if kids account for up to 25% of covid cases and there is no vaccine for kids, in my opinion they will keep spreading it and maybe/likely produce varients.

 

[Debater Slayer]

No, as that would set an undesirable precedent with regard to free health care. If an exception were made for this, where would it stop? For example, would there be a law to also exclude smokers from free health care for smoking-related diseases? What about alcoholics who had liver issues? I believe none of these groups should be excluded from free health care, at least not in any society that values human life and well-being.

It's a rabbit hole, to be sure, and one that I don't think would work out so well in practice. I suspect there could be multiple efficient ways to encourage vaccine uptake that wouldn't involve setting such a problematic precedent.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Opinion: Don’t want the COVID-19 vaccine? Then pay the full cost if you land in the hospital

I thought this was an interesting idea. If someone refuses to get vaccinated, should they pay the full costs of their hospitalization if they get COVID?

(I wonder what that guy has against the Foo Fighters. I fancied a few of their songs, but I never thought they were guilty of crimes against humanity.)

No. That's against medical ethics and highly immoral-putting political issues and making them an attempt to keep vaccinated people safe.

No.

 

[metis]

I clicked on "Maybe..." because if an adult had the opportunity to get the vaccine but decides not to, then (s)he should be dealt with as if they got sick with some other illness or situation imo.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It occurs to me that instead of thinking up reasons to exclude people from free health care, the U.S. and many other countries would be better served by thinking of ways to instead extend the reach of free health care, seeing as how there are already a lot of people in multiple countries who lose their savings or even die as a result of being unable to afford health care.

 

[fantome profane]

I wasn't questioning the seriousness of the infections. Its about how the precetages vary.

However if kids account for up to 25% of covid cases and there is no vaccine for kids, in my opinion they will keep spreading it and maybe/likely produce varients.

Obvious solution here. We just need to kill all the children under 12.

 

[AlexanderG]

I can see the slippery slope argument, and that in theory we should just cover everyone regardless of their lifestyle choices. However, home insurance companies do not cover the loss if someone burns down their own house. I think that is more of an apt comparison, since these people are intentionally exposing themselves to a virus that imposes high medical costs.

I guess not getting a vaccine is similar to smoking, too, where health insurance providers do charge a higher premium, but smoking is at least a physiological addiction that is very hard to quit and almost all smokers start smoking as minors. Maybe it's hard to quit being profoundly ignorant about reality, too, but that seems more personally blameworthy somehow.

I bet it'll end up being like smoking, with the unvaccinated just paying a much higher insurance premium after a few years have passed and the virus is endemic and mutating every year, with good actuarial data about increased health care costs for that group. They'll certainly be in their own discrete pool of high-risk people due to their personal choices, and it makes sense for them to subsidize themselves.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

No, as that would set an undesirable precedent with regard to free health care. If an exception were made for this, where would it stop? For example, would there be a law to also exclude smokers from free health care for smoking-related diseases? What about alcoholics who had liver issues? I believe none of these groups should be excluded from free health care, at least not in any society that values human life and well-being.

It's a rabbit hole, to be sure, and one that I don't think would work out so well in practice. I suspect there could be multiple efficient ways to encourage vaccine uptake that wouldn't involve setting such a problematic precedent.

I think it would totally backfire since COVID symptoms overlap. So if a person came to the ER for breathing issues than find out they had COVID, should doctors kick them out the door....

I have medicaid 100% free everything. The only time I remember having to pay is when I walked out without getting a discharged signature.

I'm surprised somewhat people would think this but then say they are keeping people safe. It's a contradiction and political motivated.

 

[We Never Know]

Obvious solution here. We just need to kill all the children under 12.

Adult vaccines were given EUA in Dec 2020. Yet here in August of 2021(9 months later)still no kid vaccine. I wonder what the hold up is?
I mean if its safe, its safe.

 

[Vinayaka]

Governments somewhat got around the same dilemma with smokers. Non smokers wonder why smokers are given the same privileges when they're in large part to blame for their own lung cancer and other ailments brought on by nicotine use. What they did is impose a 'sin' tax on cigarettes, and that covers some of the cost. I don't see how you could tax the unvaccinated.

When Quebec announced the upcoming vaccination cards, there was a run on vaccinations. Strong motivation, as lots of businesses were threatening to enforce personal only serve the vaccinated.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

No, that would be grotesque. Medicine should be a safety net for everyone, however stupid.

But, in countries relying on commercial health insurance, I imagine market forces might eventually cause insurance companies to increase the premium for the unvaccinated, just as is done, I believe, for smokers.

But this will take time to emerge. At present I should think it is too soon for actuaries to assess the statistical advantages of being vaccinated, given the highly dynamic situation with different variants, the evolution of better treatments for severe disease, and so forth.

Opinion: Don’t want the COVID-19 vaccine? Then pay the full cost if you land in the hospital

I thought this was an interesting idea. If someone refuses to get vaccinated, should they pay the full costs of their hospitalization if they get COVID?

(I wonder what that guy has against the Foo Fighters. I fancied a few of their songs, but I never thought they were guilty of crimes against humanity.)

first thought: Yes

second thought: I agree with exchemist

 

[SigurdReginson]

This idea seems vindictive, and I don't think it would actually get people to vaccinate themselves. Not a fan.

Just mandate it, if we are going to implement it. No song and dance.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I thought this was an interesting idea. If someone refuses to get vaccinated, should they pay the full costs of their hospitalization if they get COVID?

No.

- health care is a basic human right.

- getting people with COVID-19 into proper care protects the community as well as the infected individuals. This isn't something we should discourage.

 

[Revoltingest]

Opinion: Don’t want the COVID-19 vaccine? Then pay the full cost if you land in the hospital

I thought this was an interesting idea. If someone refuses to get vaccinated, should they pay the full costs of their hospitalization if they get COVID?

(I wonder what that guy has against the Foo Fighters. I fancied a few of their songs, but I never thought they were guilty of crimes against humanity.)

I have a better question....much better...so much so that
I beam with pride at my genius....suuuper genius!

People who get very sick from Covid, & got their anti-vax
views from demonstrably false info on OAN, could sue OAN
for damages. If they die, family could sue OAN.
This would send a terrifying message to other purveyors of
bogus health advice.

 

[Wildstar]

If they are an anti vaccine advocate, have them pay the bill. However, this would require people to register themselves as anti vaccination in some sort of database. I support this for the record.