Robert Maxwell wrote:
No, they don't have to wait. The ambulance company was sued in the past for doing just that, so they answer every call. And laws were enacted, not for the whiners but for the legitimate errors by medical personnel, which carry over to allow the whiners to abuse them.
As I said, there are legitimate medical issues requiring immediate assistance, even by the whiners and abusers. And the whiners and abusers shouldn't have to grovel to receive it. But they should follow the rules and they should not seek unneeded special priorities under circumstances that don't require them, taking resources away from others who actually DO require them at that moment. We're not talking emergencies here, just routine care.
How does that work? What people who need immediate attention aren't getting it because of fraudsters and whiners? It is not illegal to triage.
There has been at least one case. And due to the lawsuit, they will not triage, but transport. It's not right.
I don't think you're getting what I'm saying.
If there are x
ambulances available, and they have x
calls within a short span of time, then they are going to have to delay picking up y
individuals, or refer them to another hospital's ER, where the same calculation will have to be made.
That they do not appear to have had to make such a choice thus far just shows there is currently some slack in the system, which is actually a good sign, considering how ERs tend to be overloaded. Now, if we cover more and more people, there should be less ER traffic, because ERs are often used by
people who are uninsured so they can get care. Such care is often expensive and complicated and could have been handled in a much cheaper and more orderly fashion by the patient's assigned GP.
In other words, this "abuse" you cite of ambulance services should actually diminish under Obamacare.