Speaking of Paying More

I'm posting this from the Albany Democrat-Herald since I couldn't even find it in the horrible, useless online version of the Oregonian.

Hospital settles class-action claim by uninsured

By WILLIAM McCALL
AP Business Writer

PORTLAND -- A settlement considered the first of its kind nationally was reached Tuesday in a class-action lawsuit against a major nonprofit hospital by uninsured patients who say they were overcharged.

The agreement with Providence Hospital System will affect tens of thousands of low-income Oregonians, attorneys say.

"This is a historic agreement and it will stick," said Brian Campf, an attorney representing uninsured patients.

Greg Van Pelt, senior vice president for Providence Health System, said the hospital disagrees with many of the allegations while sharing the concerns of low-income patients.

But it was cheaper to settle for all concerned, he said.

"Quite frankly the cost of litigation is so great it was in the patients' best interest and the hospital's to get this resolved, and this seemed the best way to do that," Van Pelt said.

The lawsuit is part of a national campaign headed by Richard Scruggs, a Mississippi attorney who helped win multibillion-dollar settlements with the tobacco industry in the 1990s to pay states for smoking-related health care costs.

Similar lawsuits have been filed against hundreds of hospitals in at least 27 states, alleging that tax-exempt nonprofit hospitals charge higher prices to uninsured patients than the discounts given to insured patients.

"Other hospitals around the country should take a hard look at this" settlement, said Sid Backstrom, spokesman for the Scruggs law firm.

Van Pelt said it would help Providence patients but the larger national problem of caring for the poor still must be addressed.

"This is more than we can solve as a single hospital or a single hospital system," he said.

The complaint filed in Oregon alleges that Providence contradicted its stated mission of providing universal access to health care, especially the poor, by charging uninsured patients much higher rates for the same services than other patients.

One of them was Gerry Hugo of Medford, a retired construction worker who walked to his mailbox one day and found a bill for about $13,000 for a routine hernia operation at a Providence hospital in Medford.

Hugo, 64, became one of the lead plaintiffs in the case after he took out a home equity loan to pay the bill when a collection agency hired by the hospital threatened to place a lien on his property.

He said the class-action settlement levels the playing field for poor people struggling to cope with corporate health care providers.

"So many Americans have a feeling of impotence, that the decks are stacked against them, the dice are rigged," Hugo said. "You can't go up against big corporations as an individual."

He said that he and many other patients simply wanted to be treated fairly.

"I never missed paying a bill in my whole life," Hugo said. "I was raised that way, and so were most people. But the bill has got to be fair."

The settlement covers medical charges to uninsured patients over a six-year period, going back four years and the next two years.

All charges will be recalculated in two steps. The first reduction will reflect the average 30 percent discount granted insured patients, and the second reduction will be based on patient income.

As an example, Hugo will receive a $7,300 refund on his hospital bill, attorneys said.

The class-action lawsuit named another Oregon hospital, Legacy Health System, but that case still is pending.

While I'm sure that hospitals will hide behind something like, "we have to charge more bereceivee are less likely to recieve payment on such bills" and "we charge them more because we have to cover other costs (providing care for the uninsured, marketing, exorbinate executive salaries) which other insurance providers won't allow us to pass along to them," the truth is much more like "we charge them more simply because we can!"

This is yet another, and quite perfect example, with what is wrong with the way we deliver health care in this country. And who really suffers? The honest person who was raised to pay his bills.

But what about the promises of a free market? Certainly competition lowers the cost of delivering such care -- but it isn't. Certainly the patient can shop around for the least expCertainlyre -- yeah, right. Certianly corporations can't get away with doing this kind of thing -- get a clue.

And here is the kicker, notice who is taking the robber-barons to task? The lawyers! That's why corporations like this are eager to work to convince consumers that lawyers are actually the one's responsible for driving up the costs of health care. This is why many in Congress are eager to render such lawsuits unfilable. But the silly American voter doesn't get it -- "just lower my taxes" they whine while giving away the store.