Talk:Charity care

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

note

December 10, 2005

Guidelines for charity care schemes in the Untied States are rigmarole in nature, I understand that every U.S. state needs some kind of guidelines to help hospitals in those states deliver crucial health care to its patients. However, the United States would do much better if it were to develop guidelines for delivering crucial health care to all of its residents based on equal terms, regardless of income and ability to pay. Why? Consider this example, in an article (Encarta Reference Library 2003, “ Health Care System in Canada”) cites that Canada’s scheme for delivering health care, which is on equal terms, regardless of age, income, and ability to pay, is less complicated and less expensive to operate for that country than the U.S. health care scheme is; if the United States developed a health care scheme similar to Canada’s then I surmise that delivering health care in America would be less rigmarole or less complicated and less expensive to do.

Now, you might think I’m trying to make an argument to give publicly funded health care to the wealthiest living in America, however that’s not what I’m trying do. The argument I’m trying to make is that publicly funded care delivered on equal terms, especially, crucial health care is a better scheme than a scheme invented on bureaucratic attributes, which can led to an unequal playing field for America’s low-income residents.

In the U.S. state of Maine there is a charity care scheme call “Free Care” (10-144 Chapter 150). One of the guidelines Section (1.10 “ Obligation To Provide Service And Adopt Policy”) states: that no hospital in Maine can deny services to a Maine resident because of their inability to pay for those services; this section and similar sections like it in other U.S. states should be changed to read: All hospitals in the State of Maine (or another U.S. state) must provide crucial health care services to all of its residents on equal terms, regardless of the factors of age, income, inability to pay and without subjecting its residents to a evaluation of such factors; with this change, then the United States like other industrialized nations like Canada will be taking a step in the right direction in the policy war over more equality on low-income issues regarding health care.

Anon. User

controversy over "charity care"

This might belong under “Non Profit Organization,” but someone should address the huge and growing issue of how much charity care a hospital should provide to deserve its exemption from local property and sales taxes. Among the issues: Should not for profit hospitals provide a specific dollar amount worth of charity care? What should be included in “charity care” – discounts for expensive services? - care that is free because the patient never paid the bill? - the gap between the cost of Medicaid services and the reimbursement? Who should get charity care -- patients with incomes up to 100% of federal poverty level? 200% ? 300% Here are two commentaries on the subject.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/12/AR2006091201409.html

http://www.ihatoday.org/issues/payment/charity/support.pdf

Bettf 19:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PROD

Look for references first, if you do not find them, then is the time for proposing deletion.DGG (talk) 01:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree for some kinds of content, but a paragraph that seems to be using "many people advocate ..." language to express opinions really don't merit a reference search. Paul Turner (talk) 22:03, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Charity care. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:58, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]