RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

Health-Care Bankruptcies Hurt All of Us

by Amy Barger 09-16-2009

A bankruptcy office was not on my dream list of places to work after college.  The legal realm seemed opaque and impersonal.  I expected a job in a law office to consist of filing court papers and researching statutes — not interacting with people.

I certainly didn’t expect that a bankruptcy office could double as an intimate classroom for learning about human experience.

It’s hard to ignore the humanity of bankruptcy clients while photocopying towering stacks of their medical bills.  Often, clients would receive so many bills that they’d just stop opening them.  In those cases, the legal assistants and clients would crowd around a conference table together and attack the piles of envelopes with letter-openers.  During these times, stories started coming out.

One young couple who visited our office had an infant in tow whose rare illness left the family financially devastated.  The child — whose head was slightly enlarged and misshapen from a string of surgeries — was perched on his petite mother’s lap as she tried to list all of her creditors.  The child’s father had started his own construction business and was having trouble soliciting jobs during a recession. Without employer-provided health benefits, the family budget wouldn’t allow for an expensive insurance policy.

By the time they filed for bankruptcy, this young family had already experienced their share of stress and fear; the endless tests and procedures listed on the medical bills could attest to that.  Unfortunately, however, the trials didn’t end when the treatments were finished.  The couple also had to deal with the stigma associated with filing for bankruptcy (bankruptcies are published in local newspapers — a fact many clients dread).  Add to that the personal shame many people feel when they can’t pay the medical professionals who cared for them.  And don’t forget about ruined credit scores and surrendered homes.

Admittedly, plenty of the folks who file for bankruptcy have created their own problems.  They’ve financed cars they can’t afford, or they’ve grown addicted to the easy swipe of credit cards.  But many of those who darkened our office door weren’t irresponsible; they were hard-working people who lacked the safety nets that many of us enjoy.  We regularly filed cases for small businesspeople — masons, electricians, hairdressers — who had barely managed to make ends meet until a medical emergency pushed them past their limit.

Even if compassion for the uninsured doesn’t move you to support health-care reform, there’s a legitimate self-interest argument to make here, too. The uninsured are not the sole victims of medical bankruptcies. The lack of universal health insurance is already dealing a blow to our nation’s economy. When people file for bankruptcy, medical providers aren’t the only companies taking a financial hit; the debtors’ other creditors lose money as well. This hurts all of us.

To suggest that health-care reform will bankrupt our nation, as Bill O’Reilly did on his show in August, ignores the casualties of our current system — on both the individual and the national level.  In fact, to people who’ve had to liquidate their assets after enduring a life-threatening illness, such a suggestion might feel more like an insult.

Amy Barger is an editorial assistant for Sojourners.

+Click here to tell Bill O’Reilly that Americans are already going bankrupt from health-care costs

Categories: Health
Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • socialmaker
    I think people need a more personal approach when it comes to doctors. I know i have a doctor which takes care of my problems(vigrx) and he is so nice. He always knows me by name, he's friendly and i gladly attent every meeting.
  • Healthcare is a major concern in the U.S. these days. With strong arguments on both sides, and heated debates, I'm certain this will be a major aspect of Obama's presidency. I don't think anyone believes in allowing others to suffer, but that's what's happening right now with everyone who's uninsured. You can't just turn a blind eye--we're all connected. And as the author stated, we're all paying for it, one way or another. So why aren't we moving in a direction of our own choosing? Just because something is doesn't mean it should be.
  • justintime
    Better than nothing, Kevin.
  • JohnH54
    How is the govt that has made a mess of medicare going to handle all of it?
  • JohnH54
    The ultimate issue is how much freedom do you want to give up? Personally, I
    say enough.

    And, as time goes by, you are already starting to see many of those
    countries begin to scale back their social safety nets.

    And if you do not think that we will end up with rationing, at best you're
    naïve.
  • lumens
    I'll copy and paste one for myself.
  • BelovedFollower
    We are the only industrialized nation that doesnt provide all of its citizens with healthcare, but we still spend more per capita on it than anyone else. Are all of the other countries bankrupt? If not how do they do it if we cant?
  • JohnH54
    Yes that is the name now. I had an insurance company client whose CEO was a big advocate of them back in the 80s. MSA is what we called them then and it is what has gotten written to my internal hard drive.

    These are certainly not perfect or a comprehensive solution but would help get some market forces back in the picture but the party in power is unlikely to consider them.

    OT: if there is waste and fraud (and I assume that there is with every govt program), why don't they demonstrate to us all the savings they can achieve over the next year and then come back with their comprehensive proposal? Otherwise, it looks like a takeover.

    At some point individuals have to take responsibility for themselves and their families. I suppose that it's easier for me to say this now because I'm now considered "rich" by the left but I felt that way when I was only driving one day per week and eating soup and PBJ for months because it was all we could afford. But now, FCOL, I give a bunch to charity (usually 15% of gross) and pay about 50% of adjusted gross in taxes at all levels and pay my own medical (about $10K per year for the two of us). When is enough enough? These bills will cost me more money. Frankly I have had it. I really object to people like Jim Wallis who want to take more from what I earn and pat themselves on the back for how charitable they are.

    I also own a small business that is in the not making any money stage. I can guarantee you that if any of the current proposals pass the likelihood that we will hire anyone is very, very slim.

    Heard this recently: the bigger the govt, the smaller the people.
  • justintime
    You're talking about Health Savings Accounts -- HSA's.
    McCain's HSA proposal was inadequate to cover normal insurance premiums
    and would have been a step backward.
    However, HSA's may have a place in a reformed health care reform bill.
    See Atlantic Monthly article, "How American Health Care Killed My
    Father", in which the author makes a proposal for a health care system
    including HSA's, catastrophic insurance and other features -- a good
    article.
  • lumens
    "My point (and the guy on NPR) is that if the republicans want to cover
    preexising conditions the only way will be to mandate everyone get covered
    (that's the only way insurance companies will justify the risk) and when
    everyone gets covered it's going to cost some money."

    I think a number of Republicans would assent to this sort of program, were
    it to be combined with free market mechanisms. You could, for example,
    provide a health care tax credit, voucher, or some combination of both,
    based on income. For those who still choose not to insure themselves, the
    cost will be that they aren't covered when they get sick. That's harsh, but
    so is a $3,800 fine.

    "We'll see if the republican plan gets any airplay and see if this "plays"
    out like the guest on NPR says. Anyway the repubs are only "preaching to the
    choir" at this point."

    No Republican plan will get any airplay. I'll settle that question for you
    right now. If the Republicans are preaching to the choir, polls suggest
    that the parishioners are listening as well.

    "How can you say that most people don't think that the uninsured is a
    "problem". Hmmm, could this be the religious right, replublicans, or both?
    Hmmm, could this be because of the recent "you lied" dealing with illegal
    aliens? Of course, any "true" christian knows that they don't deserve any
    freebies. (I know you're more libertarian than religious right)."

    I can't make heads or tails of this paragraph.
  • kansasmennonite
    Where does the money come from? If from one's own savings that's exactly the plan I have and I don't wish it on anyone that doesn't have the money for basic dr. visits, etc. Currently I'm not getting some personal things done because it's coming out of my pocket and I probably couldn't even find out what the procedure would cost because of our messed up health coverage in this country.

    I wrote about the replubicans plan in another column and a person who was interview on NPR about it. He said that the repub are in a hard spot becasue they want to eliminate pre-existing condtions but for the insurance comp. to accept that it will require a mandate to cover everyone and that means subsidies for the poor and that takes money from somewhere.

    Your plan is basically in effect now and won't do a thing for current problems. What about pre-existing conditions? How about people who live from pay check to paycheck in low income jobs? What about a continuing preexisting cond. that requires thousands of dollars everyyear and not just a one time deal?
  • justintime
    I've opened up a communications channel just for you, John.
    Let's hear your favorite plan.
    If you have one.
  • JohnH54
    Why don't you go ask the Democrats who are approaching Republicans about the Repulicans' plan.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/new...

    There have always been alternative plans out there that are more fiscally responsible, but I understand that it is sometimes difficult to hear in that echo chamber you live in. :)
  • Nathan Bedford
    One week before my mother died, I handed her my 4-month old grandson (and her only great-grandchild) and helped her support him while a picture was taken. Two years ago, I stood at the bedside of my sister-in-law and took my turn at feeding her what little nutrition she could accomodate.

    Both of these dear ladies would have been with us much longer if only they had access to medical care. (My daddy was fortunate enough to make it to 65 and because of the care he received, outlived Mom by several years.) I watched in frustration when another dear relative was told that her breast cancer was a "pre-existing condition" even though her family doctor had advised her that it was "nothing to worry about. She and her husband appealed to the state medical board which upheld the ruling of her insurance company.

    So it was with a great deal of hope that I began to look forward to a day in which families would no longer postpone trips to the doctor because they knew that the medical treatment would be out of reach. I was hopeful that legislation would be passed during the Clinton Administration; then watched helplessly as the AMA sponsored its multi-million dollar Harry and Louise commercials. I saw no substantive efforts during the past 8 years from an administration that launched two simultaneous wars costing billions of dollars.

    Fortunately, I have made it past 65 and thus already outlived my mother. but just because I know that I will be treated for a medical condition in no way obviates my concern for those who are younger and less fortunate. It grieves me to see so many outright distortions posted here and aired in the media about the health care plan that has been proposed. The only motivation that makes any sense to me is that the defeat of this plan will pave the way for their return to power.

    I am hopeful that I can live as long as my daddy which means that I have about 13 years. I pray that by then, all Americans will have access to health care.
  • JohnH54
    These have been offered up by me and others on other threads.
  • JohnH54
    There has to be some element of personal responsibility put into place, just like there is in other areas of insurance. I do not have coverage for maintenance and minor repairs to my car. If I did, if everyone did, it would open the doors to abuse.

    So, I would like to see a form of medical savings accounts where you are allowed a set amount per family which you are free to spend or not. It would be pre-tax dollars, and taxable only if you do not spend it. It might be $2,500-5,000 per family. You choose how that is spent. Insurance coverage would be for catastrophic or long-term chronic conditions.

    That's a start. It's been proposed, but rejected, in part because it will put a burden on individuals to manage their own care.
  • justintime
    If you had any viable solutions to offer, a substantive response would be warranted.
  • justintime
    Get a life, Kevin.
  • justintime
    Sen. Baucus's bill provides for non-profit co-ops to provide affordable insurance. This sounds like a reasonable course of action.

    Co ops won't work, WT.
    That's why the insurance industry is promoting them.

    The co-ops can only compete in the small group and individual markets. That is to say, if the co-ops prove effective, and The Washington Post would like to offer co-op coverage as an option to its workers, it can't. The co-ops are not allowed to contract with large employers, which is to say, they can't compete with private insurers in the largest market, and they can't get the purchasing power that would come from a serious foothold among corporate customers.

    Not only is their size restricted, so too is what they can do with their size. The co-ops can band together to increase their purchasing power, but they can't set national payment rates for their members, a la Medicare. As I understand it, they have to bargain with each provider and drug manufacturer and hospital and so forth separately, meaning they're denied one of the main advantages of size. The insurance industry is, in other words, being protected from not just public competition, but co-op competition.>/i>

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/200...
  • justintime
    Let's hear about other ways to approach this, John.
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008