I’ve never heard of an American hospice that charged a patient for any of their services. They do take insurance of all types, and write off any co-pays.
I suspect that used to be the case when most hospices were run by non-profits, but according to Fortune magazine, that’s changed.
Hospice care, once provided primarily by nonprofit agencies, has seen a remarkable shift over the past decade, with more than two-thirds of hospices nationwide now operating as for-profit entities. The ability to turn a quick profit in caring for people in their last days of life is attracting a new breed of hospice owners: private equity firms.
In America, nothing, not even dying and death, is not seen as an opportunity to make a buck.
Oh, great. Just like the fortune made by DaVita and Fresenius, who have taken over dialysis.
Thank y’all for the kind responses. It sounds like, even with universal healthcare, there is a role for charity hospitals to play. I suppose that government-run hospitals are similar to American public schools. They enjoy substantial public investment and ongoing funding, but still fundraise for the “extras” like comfortable waiting rooms, etc.
The health minister just made a comment about hospitals in Ontario and their current sad state in addressing the problems from COVID. He mentioned “hospital corporations” so I looked up this:
Who owns hospitals in Ontario?
Ontario has 211 hospitals, most of which are private, non-profit entities (Government of Ontario, 2010). While each hospital is free to establish its own internal governance structure, most have a board of directors and are incorporated under the provincial Corporations Act.
So basically they are almost all charities - but as mentioned, a lot of their finances are dictated by the provincial government since it pays much of the bills. They are free to fund-raise for other objectives, and some do.
The Toronto Hospital for Sick Kids, for example, has a national reputation and transferring patients from other provinces is not unheard of, particularly for complex care. Since all local patient care is government paid at a fixed rate schedule, there are no complexities in transferring patients within the provincial system - nobody’s going to argue about “we don’t take that insurance” or such.
For clarity, most hospitals are not-for-profit corporations that are paired with a charitable foundation. It allows the charity to accumulate funds for future spending in a way a not-for-profit can’t.
And wouldn’t you know, today’s news brought a story about Medicare fraud committed by a doctor in my area.
Thanks. As the guy with orthotics says, “I stand corrected…”
Exactly that. There’s always a need for more money for the niceties, and charities play an important role in that. One of the hospitals I visited this week ( a children’s hospital) had recently had all their wayfinding signage changed to make it more accessible and child friendly (colour coded and themed floors, for example) - that was all paid for by an associated charity - The Wallace and Gromit children’s charity (Wallace and Gromit are a Bristol creation, and the hospital in question is in Bristol. Wallace talks to you in the lift).
The Wensleydale floor?
Ha, that would have been good, if a bit over the heads of the resident 4 year olds. It was more like planets, fairgrounds and forests.
As a wider generalisation, one could say almost all countries have a mixed-economy healthcare system of some sort, with the mixture varying from country to country; but in some countries, government has the dominant hand in ensuring as near universal access to the system as possible, by means that also vary by country but all aim at requiring little or no charge at the point of use.
I was surprised to see that Australian patients whose proposed surgeries do not meet government standards for healthcare funding can wind up paying enormous sums for operations in Australia or abroad.
*this particular neurosurgeon has recently faced criticism for linking brain tumors to cellphone use and for making a video appearance with a notorious antivaxer.
I’m not sure why you’re surprised; if my insurance of whatever sort (healthcare, automotive, renters’, etc) deems a particular service or device unnecessary or not worth it, but I still want it, I’d expect to have to pay out of pocket for it.
I assume that this is sarcasm, since it’s clear from your link that the restrictions that are being imposed are specifically against this one quack. While I’m not intimately familiar with UHC in Australia, I’m pretty sure that the standards for UHC coverage are basically the same as in Canada, namely that all medically necessary procedures are covered (and in Canada the coverage is 100%). In practice this means that the only major exception category is vanity cosmetic procedures (as opposed to those caused by illness or injury). Once it’s deemed medically necessary, it’s automatically covered, unless it’s one of the explicitly enumerated oddball exceptions which are invariably small potatoes, like the cost of glasses.
Not to beat a dead horse here, but it’s important to point out that one of the fundamentally significant differences between UHC and private health insurance is that the determination of what is “medically necessary” is made by the patient’s own trusted physician or specialist whose ethical and professional responsibility is the patient’s best interests, not by some insurance company hack who is paid – and performance-rated – for the sole purpose of saving his employer money.
One thing that I feel like is important, but that hasn’t really been brought up is that the hospitals like the Shriners and St. Jude hospitals are typically world-class specialty hospitals, not just general hospitals that are run through donations. Or at least that’s how they typically started out.
They are specialty hospitals in the sense that unlike a general hospital they do not have emergency rooms or treat people for acute conditions . But they are also not as specialized as an “eye and ear” hospital or a cancer center.
Really? We’ve got loads of specialty hospitals that aren’t even charities.
Example: MD Anderson Cancer Center: Cancer Treatment & Cancer Research Hospital | MD Anderson Cancer Center , rated #1 in the world for oncology.
MD Anderson may not be a charity, but they’ll accept your donations.
Maybe so, but it’s not free, and it’s not primarily funded through donations.