Private Health Insurance doesn't work

[Star]

.
The average cost of a hospital delivery in America is $9,775, the highest in the world

By Margot Peppers

The cost of a hospital delivery in America has tripled since 1996, averaging out at $9,775 for a vaginal delivery - the highest cost of any country in the world, according to a new analysis.
A report by Truven Health Analytics for the New York Times found that the average total price for pregnancy as well as newborn care is about $30,000 for vaginal delivery, and $50,000 for a C-section, with insurers paying out an average of $18,329 and $27,866 respectively.

What's more, America is uniquely expensive when it comes to childbirth; in other developed countries, delivery is often cheap or even free, and post-birth care is significantly more extensive.



France, delivery costs $3,541

"...in Ireland, where women receive the same amount of high-tech maternity care as Americans, delivery is free at public hospitals."

UK it is just $2,641

United States, delivery costs $9,775

Separate charges: In America, services like an epidural, an ultrasound, a blood test, and even placenta removal cost a fee. Many other countries instead charge a flat fee for prenatal care and birth​

Problems: The factors that contribute to America's higher cost are excessive testing and ultrasounds, overly 'medicalized' deliveries and a tendency not to use midwives​

Post-birth care for mothers also pales in comparison to other countries like France, where women often remain in hospital for several days after birth, recovering and learning how to breastfeed.

In America, however, they are discharged after one or two days, since most insurance only covers that which is considered medically necessary.
.

 

[tjvh]

Star... You're nuts.

 

[ErikViking]

There has to be something missing in those graphs. Maybe what is missing is the definition of cost?
If a country offers free healthcare the cost doesn't show in the graphs, nevertheless it has to be paid for in some way, although not by/per patient?

Or are the graphs showing a very inefficient medical "know-how" so to speak?

 

[Katzndogz]

What's missing is the fact that birth in the United States is the single most litigated procedure in the world. Our doctors perform many more tests and do many more procedures that are unnecessary in the practice of defensive medicine just to combat a possible malpractice lawsuit.

With government paid health care, malpractice cases will be a thing of the past because no one will be able to bring that claim against a government employee.

 

[martybegan]

.
The average cost of a hospital delivery in America is $9,775, the highest in the world

By Margot Peppers

The cost of a hospital delivery in America has tripled since 1996, averaging out at $9,775 for a vaginal delivery - the highest cost of any country in the world, according to a new analysis.
A report by Truven Health Analytics for the New York Times found that the average total price for pregnancy as well as newborn care is about $30,000 for vaginal delivery, and $50,000 for a C-section, with insurers paying out an average of $18,329 and $27,866 respectively.

What's more, America is uniquely expensive when it comes to childbirth; in other developed countries, delivery is often cheap or even free, and post-birth care is significantly more extensive.



France, delivery costs $3,541

"...in Ireland, where women receive the same amount of high-tech maternity care as Americans, delivery is free at public hospitals."

UK it is just $2,641

United States, delivery costs $9,775

Separate charges: In America, services like an epidural, an ultrasound, a blood test, and even placenta removal cost a fee. Many other countries instead charge a flat fee for prenatal care and birth​

Problems: The factors that contribute to America's higher cost are excessive testing and ultrasounds, overly 'medicalized' deliveries and a tendency not to use midwives​

Post-birth care for mothers also pales in comparison to other countries like France, where women often remain in hospital for several days after birth, recovering and learning how to breastfeed.

In America, however, they are discharged after one or two days, since most insurance only covers that which is considered medically necessary.
.

The fact you are calling something "free" that isnt really free means you dont know what you are talking about.

Somone has to pay for it, always.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Now your HealthCare won't cost anything! It'll be free!

 

[thewanderer]

I don't know if the information posted above is accurate or not. I don't know how the U.S. compares cost-wise when everything is evened out to account for taxation, etc.

I do know this: the design of our current system (private 3rd party pay) ensures that costs will continue to go up.

It's very simple. In a capitalist system, for profit entities will seek maximum profits. Consumers will attempt to get what they perceive to be the most for their money.

The providers are for-profit. The private insurers are for-profit. The lawyers suing the providers are for-profit, as are the consumers who sue with the lawyers.

Health insurance isn't really insurance. Insurance works when you have a pool of customers paying in and very few using the product, which is not what we have with private health insurance. It's really a co-op.

Now, when a provider is maximally profitable only by performing more procedures (since insurance caps price), what do you think s/he is going to do? When a lawyer is maximally profitable when s/he can win big lawsuits, what do you think s/he is going to do? When an insurance company is only maximally profitable when it lowers reimbursement and raises premiums, what do you think it is going to do? When consumers pay ever increasing premiums, do you think they are going to be more or less likely to use the "insurance" in order to feel like they are getting something for their money?

In my research I have found private health "insurance" as far back as the late 1800s, long before government began to regulate it. I have only ever seen one trend: premiums go up and coverage goes down. The theoretical model predicts it and it's what has happened in reality.

If Obamacare had never happened that would still be the trend and the outcome would end up the same. Most of us would end up either uninsured (because we wouldn't be able to afford it) or they would expand Medicaid or create some other government program to cover the vast majority of people. Obamacare greatly accelerated the trend, but it didn't create it.

The trend is built into the system.

 

[dblack]

Insurance never works as a means of "financing" the expenses of life. And when it comes to health care, that's how we're using it - which is why the health care market is so fucked up.

Insurance is a hedge against risk - a 'side bet' to cover unexpected losses. It's irrational and harmful to markets to use it otherwise.

 

[Star]

.
Insurance companies are more than happy to pay the increased medical care costs and pay for unnecessary tests -- the higher the cost of care the more they can charge for premiums -- the higher the premiums the more money the executive staff pockets while simultaneously mollifying their shareholders, board members and premium payers by taking the same percentage of the gross for themselves and/or in many cases their shareholders and board members.

Most countries believe a healthy work force is good for their economy and regulate their healthcare industry to that end and-----and do it for a fraction of the cost in the United States and-----and with better outcomes.

In the United States we tack on profit every step of the way including rewarding quantity of care over quality of care. A recent report by a Seattle Newspaper included this quote; "As public and private budget pressures prompt sharper questions about how the system got so bloated, here is one answer: Hospital CEOs are paid to make it that way." then went on to show how hospital CEO after hospital CEO earned higher salaries and had bigger bonus incentives built into their contracts for inventing ways to suck more profit out of the system and into their own and their board members pockets and-----and very-very few examples of bonuses being paid for improving patient outcomes and-----and no examples of bonuses of being paid for lowering patient/insurance costs.

Private insurance companies love higher healthcare costs that suck money out of healthcare consumers pockets, hospitals love higher healthcare costs that suck money out of healthcare consumers pockets, doctors love ordering tests from labs they own a stake in or get kickbacks (defensive medicine -pewsh!-) from, that suck money out healthcare consumers pockets -- patient care and patient outcomes are of secondary concern at best-----at best. Healthcare industries in other countries don't get away with this crap-----what a passive wimpy lot we are in the United States.

"Hospital CEOs are paid to make it that way."​

.

 

[lynn63]

Is your graph about what the providers of care charge or what the fee schedules allow for all health insurance companies?