Hospital discharged seriously ill man, left him on the street
wsbtv.com
wsbtv.com
My wife was an ER nurse until recently and they were often in a bind with abusive patients who refused treatment. They couldn’t release them for fear they’d quickly degrade, and they couldn’t keep them around because the staff would get hurt. ERs are kind of the dumping ground of society.
> We can only provide the best care with the cooperation and consent of the patient. We do our best to connect patients in need with ... social service organizations to provide appropriate after-hospital care.
Is this a failure of local social services? The patient clearly was ready to move to a different facility; and according to the hospital, refused assistance at placement. Were local social services involved? What were the conversations with Medicare? We may not know, because HIPPA could keep the real story confidential.
Hospitals are often stuck in a hard spot: Often, people are admitted to the hospital because there is no other place for the person to go. My wife was a pediatrics resident, and sometimes social services would admit children to the hospital until the local foster care system could find them a place.
Furthermore, patients leave against medial advice all the time.
I wouldn't read too deep into this without knowing more about what the hospital did to place the patient.
> Freeman said the 68-year-old man was discharged from the hospital Thursday. A hospital employee told officers that the man had been at the hospital for 35 days and that Medicare would not continue to pay for his treatment.
The employee said that security dressed the man and walked him out.
Freeman said an officer was told the man was cleared as “fit to leave” by two doctors and the hospital wanted him gone.
You just made my point.
Remember, the hospital tried to advise the patient. We don't know the exact advice, because it's confidential due to HIPPA.
I suspect that the patient was offered to be transferred to a facility like a nursing home, rehab center, or home care. The hospital can't transfer the patient against their will, nor can they continue to bill for treating someone who's condition is stable enough for cheaper treatment at a less expensive facility.
It's a beuracratic nightmare. Without knowing more, I wouldn't cast blame on anyone.
Healthcare US system is bonkers!
It's entirely possible he was fit for discharge and had a totally unrelated stroke. But I would agree the facts as presented don't look great.
He basically was supposed to be transferred to some kind of facility, like a nursing home, or under the care of a competent adult at home, or similar. The quote from the hospital at the end of the article implies that he refused service.
Reading between the lines, he probably needed to be sent somewhere against his will, but it sounds like bureaucratic problems prevented this.
The market fixed it. It just fixed it in a way that most people would consider immoral.
Notice how the dental industry doesn't have nearly the same problems even if you control for the scope of the work they do.
You can argue that one particular system has better trade-offs than another. But that is based on your incentives. We, as consumers, want the best healthcare for free right now. Consumers and providers must meet in the middle somewhere. However, if government eliminates meeting places on the map, you can expect non-optimal locations.