Health Law Bans New Doctor-Owned Hospitals, Blocks Expansion of Existing Ones

Here you go! Another whack to free enterprise compliments of HCR and your current Emcee Barack Obama.

The new health care overhaul law, which promised increased access and efficiency in health care, will prevent doctor-owned hospitals from adding more rooms and more beds, says a group that advocates physician involvement in every aspect of health care delivery.

Physician-owned hospitals are advertised as less bureaucratic and more focused on doctor-patient decision making. However, larger corporate hospitals say doctor-owned facilities discriminate in favor of high-income patients and refer business to themselves.

The new health care rules single out such hospitals, making new physician-owned projects ineligible to receive payments for Medicare and Medicaid patients.

www.cnsnews.com...

Freedom to choose?? It would not appear so. These facilities will be slowly squeezed out of existence after being strangled by red tape.

These physician owned hospitals are too good for our govt. standards.

Oh... The irony and the waste of money...

Pelosi was right!! God that hurts me to say that. Now that HCR has passed, all of the dirty details come out in the wash.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 12/4/2010 by Mirthful Me]

What right wing site sold you on this? Have you checked it out? I'm sure you verified this cause they lie an awful lot about Obama you know.

reply to post by damwel


So you're contribution is to say it might be false?

What source do you cite to validate this 'possibility of deceit'?

Your question is legitimate, but a bit ironic.

My wife works for a doctor owned hospital and confirmed the info. Also they had a huge increase in doctors buying in before the door was closed by the bill.

Originally posted by damwel
What right wing site sold you on this? Have you checked it out? I'm sure you verified this cause they lie an awful lot about Obama you know.

The rules fall under Title VI, Section 6001 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The provision is titled “Physician Ownership and Other Transparency – Limitations on Medicare Exceptions to the Prohibition on Certain Physician Referral for Hospitals.”

Look it up genius!! I did. It is all there black and white. You want to debunk it do some homework yourself.

OK here is the deal.....each state sets its own health care policy. Most states need a certificate of authority to allow beds to be increased at facility's. What I am saying is that hospitals cannot expand because there are things called certificates of authority. The state sets the bed number. Don't just hate the doctors who own the bonds for hospitals............see hospitals sell bonds so they can build........the state tells them how much they can build..........the doctors and boards sell and buy the bonds......it is all very tightly controlled. The state and the private doctors and board members control this.........it has been this way for a long time, especially since medicare and insurance companies pay the bills.........it is a business just like any other. first you decide how you are to be paid, then you make the rules to GET paid.......and create competition so that the bills can be high enough to compensate the workers.......really the administrative staff at hospitals are what costs......they sit in offices and collect money and make the rules. the nurses and doctors who do the work are the ones who should be the profiteers.........anyway it is a controlled business.

Doctors are terrible businessman in many regards. If hospitals were all run by doctors they'd do one of two things: either completely gouge the consumers which is what this article purports happens.......or the business would go bankrupt. Leave running a business to business people and leave practicing medicine to doctors...........Doctors are not business people and receive very little training in doing so. But the bottomline is government needs to get out of healthcare in general. Most hospitals would go out of business if it wasn't for charity. They are for the most part a completely flawed business model to begin with. Having doctors in charge won't make a damn bit of difference and might even make things worse.

reply to post by damwel


Your obvious acquiescence to all that Obama and his administration is posing says volumes about your ability to actually understand what this law will do. Everything and I mean everything the right has proposed and talked about in this bill is irrefutable as to it's short comings and it's ability to control every facet of our daily lives. Should this law prevail it's challenges, I'm sure you will gladly take what ever dictates you are given and be glad your such a sheep. At least most on the right can understand the misgivings of some we have elected but this fool,Obama, is a god to folks like you and is infallible. I can't wait to hear the bleating and gnashing of teeth when it starts to take the lefts liberties away and they are under the thumb of a government they thought was right!

Zindo

This is just a strengthening of the Stark Law which has been in effect since 1989. It keeps physicans from referring to their own business. Abuse was RAMPENT prior to the stark law.

This is a good thing.

From a practical perspective, one of the few workable concepts to ensure universal healthcare as a necessary adjunct to society (if that were your agenda) would be to restrict/eliminate the profit incentive from the entire health care industry.

Zosynspiracy has a good points about doctors and business. I'd submit that it's the business people not the medical people that create doctor's hospitals for profit rather than provide better health care, but they sell the health care aspect to the docs.

gj

Sorry, the source in OP is simply more Right wing fear mongering from a neocon site.

Here, get informed:

Unblocking a mischaracterization: Health Law Bans New Doctor-Owned Hospitals, Blocks Expansion of Existing Ones

WASHINGTON (AP) - Tucked into President Barack Obama's health care bill are several 11th-hour changes that help major insurance companies and doctor-owned hospitals.

An Aug. 1, 2010, deadline on new doctor-owned hospitals to apply to the government for eligibility to serve - and get paid for - Medicare patients would be extended to Dec. 31. Aides and lobbyists said this would help roughly 13 facilities. These include Mercy Hospital in Monclova, Ohio; Scranton Orthopedic Specialists in Dickson City, Pa.; and Paragon Rehabilitation in Goodlettsville, Tenn. So this is about the hospitals that receive Medicare patients.

Source


The entire premise of the OP with direct citation of source in OP is debunked above.

Nice try, but no cigar.



[edit on 12-4-2010 by kinda kurious]

I'll be honest, I couldn't even count how many times lately I have seen posts with right-wing fear spreading nonsense on here! Many of the posts QUICKLY being DELETED by the author when a responder with brains points out the REAL facts.

Folks really need to stay away from these loony right-wing sources of news (actually biased IGNORANCE) as some folks here are getting SICK OF THIS NONSENSE. For the record I am partly Conservative, AND partly liberal. But 100% AGAINST BIASED LIES AND NONSENSE!

reply to post by jibeho


And I'm guessing these Doctor owned hospitals set there own prices riiiight? Are their standards for what a stay would cost, a day, a week, a month? Equipment costs....

....oh all those hospital bills that are left to the poor when they get sick, hurt etc.

Blame the government on this one too? I guess?

[edit on 12-4-2010 by BoSock]

Two threads on this nonsense no less.

Section 6001 – Limitation on Medicare Exception to the Prohibition on Certain Physician Referrals for Hospitals

Section 6001 modifies the Stark Law exception that allows physicians to hold an ownership interest in hospitals. This detailed section limits the expansion of physician owned hospitals, increases disclosure requirements related to physician ownership and provider agreements (including the names of the physicians and the extent of the ownership interest) to patients, on the hospital website, hospital advertising, and in annual statements to HHS, and expands requirements regarding physician ownership in the hospitals. omwhealthlaw.com...

starklaw.org...

Physician self-referral is the practice of a physician referring a patient to a medical facility in which he/she has a financial interest, be it ownership, investment, or a structured compensation arrangement. Critics of the practice allege an inherent conflict of interest, given the physician's position to benefit from the referral. They suggest that such arrangements may encourage over-utilization of services, in turn driving up health care costs. In addition, they believe that it would create a captive referral system, which limits competition by other providers. en.wikipedia.org...

Looking things up is fun for the whole family, even conservative puppets.

[edit on 12-4-2010 by haterproof]

They did this so that they had a nice place to go that won't be plugged up with medi-care, medi-caid patients. These are the nice places, and they said they would ensure that they didn't have to tie into this hcr. So for everyone not on the gov's health care plan, like the super rich, they have a nice place to go.

Originally posted by BoSock
reply to post by jibeho

 

And I'm guessing these Doctor owned hospitals set there own prices riiiight? Are their standards for what a stay would cost, a day, a week, a month? Equipment costs....

....oh all those hospital bills that are left to the poor when they get sick, hurt etc.

Blame the government on this one too? I guess?

[edit on 12-4-2010 by BoSock]

It is called freedom to choose! There are plenty of public and charity hospitals for you to go to right now. Freedom of choice is apparently expecting a little too much these days. Thanks for sharing.

The aim of the HCR bill is to control costs of healthcare. physician-owned hospitals are profit driven and have a negative impact on health care costs.

source

Most private owned hospitals have the "choices" to accept Medicare and Medicaid patients.

What this will create is Split system of care where the rich and the poor will be divided and care will be provided.

The wealthy will get top notch care while the poor will have to wait on less than desirable conditions to have a doctor care for them.

In other words is nothing new, money talks and BS walk.

The losers? those that will depend on government assistant care for their needs.

Originally posted by jtma508
The aim of the HCR bill is to control costs of health care. physician-owned hospitals are profit driven and have a negative impact on health care costs.

source

No where in the health care bill is anything even remote to control the way that private insurance companies will be gouging the consumer at all

Neither Democrats or Republicans in congress could even think that part of how to regulate the private insurance businesses without losing their pimps and financiers of campaign funds.

Originally posted by kinda kurious
Sorry, the source in OP is simply more Right wing fear mongering from a neocon site.

Here, get informed:

Unblocking a mischaracterization: Health Law Bans New Doctor-Owned Hospitals, Blocks Expansion of Existing Ones

WASHINGTON (AP) - Tucked into President Barack Obama's health care bill are several 11th-hour changes that help major insurance companies and doctor-owned hospitals.

An Aug. 1, 2010, deadline on new doctor-owned hospitals to apply to the government for eligibility to serve - and get paid for - Medicare patients would be extended to Dec. 31. Aides and lobbyists said this would help roughly 13 facilities. These include Mercy Hospital in Monclova, Ohio; Scranton Orthopedic Specialists in Dickson City, Pa.; and Paragon Rehabilitation in Goodlettsville, Tenn. So this is about the hospitals that receive Medicare patients.

Source


The entire premise of the OP with direct citation of source in OP is debunked above.

Nice try, but no cigar.

[edit on 12-4-2010 by kinda kurious]

You have debunked nothing sherlock and you attack my source by crossing through the poppy fields of Sodahead. Too Funny!! I hope that was a joke. Your dubious source and its headline is a Sodahead interpretation of this article www.realclearpolitics.com...

Deny Hypocrisy.

This all about getting certified as a medicare provider in order to stay afloat. If a facility is not certified by the deadline bye bye.

There are currently 60 to 65 physician-owned hospitals under construction. Those that aren't finished and don't have a Medicare provider number by Aug. 1 (Dec. 31 if the reconciliation bill passes) will probably never open their doors. Without a provider number, such hospitals can't treat Medicare patients, which are usually essential to financial survival.

So, according to your source 13 of the 60 or so hospitals in development will be assisted with the deadline extension to Dec. 31. I just hope that they don't run into any construction delays to meet the Medicare Certification deadline and requirements.


[edit on 13-4-2010 by jibeho]