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

[Unveiled Artist]

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.

I wonder how that would go. The doctor would probably need to write another similar diagnosis for the patient to be treated and insurance pay. In mental health my therapist said they had to put down diagnosis that overlapped. I don't know if they get paid per diagnosis but I wonder if that's similar to medical since COVID symptoms mirror other conditions.

I mean if you're on your death bed and the person beside you were vaccinated what's the difference between that person and you (example say John)... We all die. I wish they'd stop the politics.

Sighs

 

[PureX]

If your health insurance provider requires you to get a vaccine, offers it free of charge, and warns that it will not cover the cost of contracting the virus if you refuse to get vaccinated, I think that would be reasonable. The problem is that when that person does get sick, and requires hospitalization, who is going to pay if the patient cannot? Because we aren't going to just let them die.

This is the ever-present problem of for-profit health care.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

No one's political standing has kept people from going to the hospital. That's borderline Nazish. To be blunt.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If your health insurance provider requires you to get a vaccine, offers it free of charge, and warns that it will not cover the cost of contracting the virus if you refuse to get vaccinated, I think that would be reasonable. The problem is that when that person does get sick, and requires hospitalization, who is going to pay if the patient cannot? Because we aren't going to just let them die.

This is the ever-present problem of for-profit health care.

It's a toss-up. They'd have to charge for the CAT, the MRI (if appropriate), the doctors appointments, in patient stay, extra treatment, even the hospital food. No hospital tells patients to pay because of their political positions over health and safety of "other people" not even in their area, related, and household. Only time I can think of other people involved is health pay and decisions is if someone is a beneficiary or have been given rights to speak on behalf of the patient when he or she can't speak for themselves. A lot of times these thing require an attorney since the doctors can't just deny treatment and thus not put a diagnosis so insurances can pay.

 

[We Never Know]

I wonder how that would go. The doctor would probably need to write another similar diagnosis for the patient to be treated and insurance pay. In mental health my therapist said they had to put down diagnosis that overlapped. I don't know if they get paid per diagnosis but I wonder if that's similar to medical since COVID symptoms mirror other conditions.

I mean if you're on your death bed and the person beside you were vaccinated what's the difference between that person and you (example say John)... We all die. I wish they'd stop the politics.

Sighs

Medicare and certain private health insurance companies pay for hospitalizations of their beneficiaries using a diagnosis-related group (DRG) payment system.

When you've been admitted as an inpatient to a hospital, that hospital assigns a DRG when you're discharged, basing it on the care you needed during your hospital stay. The hospital gets paid a fixed amount for that DRG, regardless of how much money it actually spends treating you. If a hospital can effectively treat you for less money than Medicare pays it for your DRG, then the hospital makes money on that hospitalization. If the hospital spends more money caring for you than Medicare gives it for your DRG, then the hospital loses money on that hospitalization.

Health Insurance: How Does a DRG Determine What a Hospital Gets Paid?

 

[PureX]

It's a toss-up. They'd have to charge for the CAT, the MRI (if appropriate), the doctors appointments, in patient stay, extra treatment, even the hospital food. No hospital tells patients to pay because of their political positions over health and safety of "other people" not even in their area, related, and household. Only time I can think of other people involved is health pay and decisions is if someone is a beneficiary or have been given rights to speak on behalf of the patient when he or she can't speak for themselves. A lot of times these thing require an attorney since the doctors can't just deny treatment and thus not put a diagnosis so insurances can pay.

Almost no one can afford to pay the cost of a serious illness. So just proclaiming that if one doesn't get the vaccine, and then contracts the virus, they will have to pay their own medical bills, isn't practical. Because they aren't going to be able to pay those bills.

So who is going to pay? Because we aren't going to just let them suffer and die because they didn't get a vaccine. Are we?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Almost no one can afford to pay the cost of a serious illness. So just proclaiming that if one doesn't get the vaccine, and then contracts the virus, they will have to pay their own medical bills, isn't practical. Because they aren't going to be able to pay those bills.

So who is going to pay? Because we aren't going to just let them suffer and die because they didn't get a vaccine. Are we?

I personally would not. I'd be surprised medical professions on RF and in general would do such a thing. I certainty wouldn't "want" someone to treat me if they are taking my and others political stance relating to their care. I honestly don't know. It shouldn't matter-what should matter is the well-being of the patient not his or her political views.

 

[pearl]

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

Absolutely not.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I expect this post to be unpopular.

My solution was for health insurers to sell general health care policies for those with proof of vaccination at a reduced rate, and raise the rate on insurance that accepts the unvaccinated if necessary to cover the revenue lost by removing the vaccinated from that risk pool. Eventually, people would segregate into two populations as the vaccinated gravitated to the lower rates, leaving the unvaccinated and any of the vaccinated willing to share risk with them to buy the more expensive insurance.

There's also an argument for not letting the willfully unvaccinated clog the hospital system. Perhaps they could set up MASH type units for them, like a hospice. My wife and I purchased an oxygen concentrator last year for the home that we never needed as a hedge against being unable to get a hospital bed while needing respiratory support - about $800 USD. These ancillary units could offer this, as well as comfort care.

 

[exchemist]

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.

Don't forget that they will acquire a degree of immunity from catching it, so in a fairly short space of time they will reach a level of immunity that may be comparable with vaccinated adults.

If that is so, then we will fairly soon reach a stable state in which all the children and vaccinated adults catch it occasionally and mildly, much as we do today with colds and 'flu', while unvaccinated adults continue to get severely ill or die - as they are doing in Florida, for instance. (That's probably a problem that will take care of itself eventually, one way or another.)

But I agree with your point about variants. If we have endemic virus circulating, there will continue to be new variants. From what I read, it is fairly hard for the virus to generate a variant that totally eludes previous immunity, but we may well find in future that top-up vaccines, tuned to new variants, are periodically required for most or all of the adult population.

 

[PureX]

I personally would not. I'd be surprised medical professions on RF and in general would do such a thing. I certainty wouldn't "want" someone to treat me if they are taking my and others political stance relating to their care. I honestly don't know. It shouldn't matter-what should matter is the well-being of the patient not his or her political views.

I agree. Which is why for-profit health care is inherently contradictory, and ultimately dysfunctional.

Also, many people in the U.S. profoundly distrust their own government, so that if vaccines were to be mandated, I think there would be a big backlash (stupid as it might be). I think the way to go on this is probably to try and get employers on board and have them demand that their employees all get vaccinated for the welfare of each other, and of their customers. I suspect that when the paycheck becomes a part of the issue, people will get the vaccine, grudgingly or not. I also think they'd do it for their coworkers and customers far more easily than they would for the government, or for some unknown random fellow citizens.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I agree. Which is why for-profit health care is inherently contradictory, and ultimately dysfunctional.

Also, many people in the U.S. profoundly distrust their own government, so that if vaccines were to be mandated, I think there would be a big backlash (stupid as it might be). I think the way to go on this is probably to try and get employers on board and have them demand that their employees all get vaccinated for the welfare of each other, and of their customers. I suspect that when the paycheck becomes a part of the issue, people will get the vaccine, grudgingly or not. I also think they'd do it for their coworkers and customers far more easily than they would for the government, or for some unknown random fellow citizens.

I disagree with vaccine mandates for regular businesses outside hospitals, teaching, and traveling. Its very sad and the attitude that you must vaccinate or stay at home is just as bad as making them pay for their own health coverage if the doctor diagnosis them with COVID. I don't see it ethical at all. It's a total political issue. Medical doctors ethically wouldn't push you to do/take anything that you don't want to in regards to your own health. They can suggest and strongly advise but they can't enforce. I kind of understand why they want to vaccinate in high risk areas but force is never an option.

 

[stvdv]

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

 

[stvdv]

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?

Another idea:
Give them their shot when they enter the hospital, and an extra one when they exit maybe. And when they were very sick, and got cured they might tell their other anti-vaccination friends that the shot did not kill them, and they even got cured in hospital, even with all the 5G around there

 

[PureX]

I disagree with vaccine mandates for regular businesses outside hospitals, teaching, and traveling. Its very sad and the attitude that you must vaccinate or stay at home is just as bad as making them pay for their own health coverage if the doctor diagnosis them with COVID. I don't see it ethical at all. It's a total political issue. Medical doctors ethically wouldn't push you to do/take anything that you don't want to in regards to your own health. They can suggest and strongly advise but they can't enforce. I kind of understand why they want to vaccinate in high risk areas but force is never an option.

Our employers force us to do things we don't like doing every day for the welfare of the business enterprise we're engaged in. So this idea that we can't be "forced" to do things is just silly. The government can force us to do and not do things , too, and it does so all the time. It's partly why government exists. And so do our employers, because cooperation is essential for both a nation and a business to function.

And this in NOT a political issue. It's a human health issue. The only people politicizing it are are people who are willing to exploit a global health crisis for their own political gain. ... not the kind of people we ought to be listening to, anyway.

 

[Sand Dancer]

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, but maybe a "stupid tax."

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Our employers force us to do things we don't like doing every day for the welfare of the business enterprise we're engaged in. So this idea that we can't be "forced" to do things is just silly. The government can force us to do and not do things , too, and it does so all the time. It's partly why government exists. And so do our employers, because cooperation is essential for both a nation and a business to function.

We go into jobs knowing our duties and contracts. They're not coercion and there's no ultimatum. It's a strict requirement "for" employment not to throw people out if they don't comply to "new" rules that should be optional.

The two does not compare. For example, the government cannot force patients to take treatments if he or she can make medical decisions on their own or someone to speak for them legally. This is a health-issue. People (I hope) are very cautious of their health. They can give up the need to wear a shirt to go into a building. They can bit their lip if taxes are raised or their boss decides workers can no longer use their cell phones in the office.

And this in NOT a political issue. It's a human health issue. The only people politicizing it are are people who are willing to exploit a global health crisis for their own political gain. ... not the kind of people we ought to be listening to, anyway.

I said: Its very sad and the attitude that you must vaccinate or stay at home is just as bad as making them pay for their own health coverage if the doctor diagnosis them with COVID. I don't see it ethical at all. It's a total political issue.

Ethical doctors do not force, coerced, or "strongly suggest or be fined" that patients receive treatments. The way this is handled anti/pro vax (one political example) is highly politically charged.

Even RF is a political club of anti/pro vaxxer views. If it were health related (only) there would be no sides. All in this "together."

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I cast my vote. Then I read the thread. Many of you made good arguments and I changed my mind based on that.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

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.)

From your article:

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.

There's a big difference between that and what you're suggesting, though. The difference is the marginal cost for the decision to seek care.

Sure, charge an anti-vaxxer (or a smoker, or whatever) a higher premium because of the extra risk and expense they represent. That's fine. When they realize they need care, they'll hopefully be willing to seek it. Their insurance cost is a sunk cost - they have to pay it no matter what option they choose - so it shouldn't affect their decision.

OTOH, if an anti-vaxxer realizes - correctly - that deciding to go to a hospital for COVID-19 could bankrupt their family, they're more likely to skip the hospital, have their family care for them instead, and inadvertently infect them.

 

[Twilight Hue]

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 guess if people can pay full cost there is no need for ACA to be around.

There you go.

Trash it.