Wow, I would call this one of the worst ideas ever and move me from my stance against socialized health care. If someone needs medical care would you want the hospital to judge their willingness to give you the best they have because of a credit type rating? Give me a break

Wow. Its days like this that I start seriously thinking about moving to Canada, or some remote Carribean island.

I see how hospitals that are strapped for cash would want something like this, but at some point they'll find out that most of the people going to those hospitals can't pay their bills. And then what? Deny care to everyone who doesn't have insurance and can't pay 100 dollars for a freakin bandaid?

You don't have good credit so you don't get hired someplace where you can get health insurance. If you get hurt without insurance, you can't afford to pay off your medical bills, preventing you from getting that good job with health insurance...

Canada, here I come. This is awful.

Wow, I can't even begin to describe how fucked up that is.

"Sorry ma'am, your credit is poor, so you'll have to deal with that easily treated infection yourself."

I'm going to go ahead and start getting used to enjoying hockey and cold weather.

The government needs to crack down on Fair Issac already. They have more control over people's lives and are totally unregulated. This is just too far over the line.

Of course this will be used to determine care. If your seriously ill or have a chronic condition your going to probably have some issues even if you have insurance, keeping up with bills. So the people that probably need care the most won't get it. People that are healthier and more able to pay their few and far between medical bills will get all the unneeded care they want.

Employers will use it too and nobody with a chronic condition or a past major medical situation will be able to get a job. Since they will probably be able to see WHO you owe money to they will be able to guess at what kind of problems you might have. If there is a bill from a mental health provider you could be blacklisted even if your condition was something that is irrelevant. Anyone seeing an oncologist would get blacklisted. Nobody wants a cancer risk on the payroll.

Someone smart should be able to find a way to stop this as a HIPPA violation. Showing who you received care from gives away a portion of your medical history that is supposed to be private.

I try not to be a conspiracy theorist, but this is *TOTALLY* a ploy by the far-left to get moderates on board with socialized healthcare

This right here is a damn good reason for national health insurance. This medFico would be rendered obsolete.

@Troy F.: Ha! It must be working on me already.

Wow, the level of fucked-upedness in that story is stunning.

Someone smart should be able to find a way to stop this as a HIPPA violation.

@bohemian: Please, please, please!

What's the point of this? You can't turn someone away from the ER if s/he needs treatment, regardless of ability to pay, and I'm pretty sure that ERs see a whole lot of patients who can't pay. Therefore, in one of the primary situations where one might encounter patients who can't afford treatment, the rating system to determine that ability is completely worthless. Good game, guys.

Oh, and I would also like to take a moment to relate my story about the medical industry.

My mother was 60 when she was suddenly stricken with and pretty much crippled by rheumatoid arthritis. She'd always had a bit of arthritis, but this all set in within a month. So after that happened she was unable to work. Fortunately her company she was working for was in the business of apartment management, so she wasn't homeless as they let her do their month end stuff for them in exchange for a place to live. However, after years of having health insurance, saving up for retirement, and paying for life insurance, all of that was suddenly gone. And she was a single parent (father passed when I was 8) so she didn't really have the income to put aside a lot for an emergency fund or to have a big savings account. As far as medicare she was about a year or so from qualifiying, and on top of that she would have had to take a $100 pay cut from her SSI disability AND would have to pay something like $200/mo for medicare.

Long story short she could only go to the doctor or afford her medicines every now and then (heart medicine, lortab 10, and rheumatoid arthritis medicine is very expensive, as well as the specialists). She ended up pretty much confined to her chair in the living room and, with help, the bed. She passed November of '06 because her heart gave out due to not being able to afford heart medicine or to see a doctor.

And *this* is why I'm a big fan of socialized medicine. It's easy to say, "Oh well people without health insurance are lazy and don't deserve it because they work a crap job," but it's easy to lose health insurance and end up on the other side of the fence. And nobody should have to go without medical care just so some people can make money. That's just fucking sick to make a profit (a rather nice one at that) at the expense of other people's well-being.

Thank God I live in Canada.

Why USA is the only industrialized country in the world that does NOT have universal coverage? (And universal coverage doesn't mean no private healthcare, it's just means everybody has a safety net for health spendings.)

@Troy F.: Now you sound like the far left ''conspiracist'' :)

This might put an end to the days of group health insurance where every employee pays the same rate. Having a job with a good health plan won't mean much if you are priced out if it due to your "medfico" score. There's just all kinds of fucked up about this.

A doctor chiming in here-this is perhaps the worst proposal I have yet seen in terms of health care funding. The potential negative consequences go far beyond simply being at higher risk to be rejected as a patient, and I can envision many ways in which this plan will lead to very difficult ethical quandries for physicians and other providers. Doctors and patients must speak out with one voice against proposals such as this, which add no value to the quality of care and only lead to additional difficulties for both parties.

@CumaeanSibyl: They can't turn anyone away, but they don't have to treat those with a bad MedFICO score in timely fashion either. Haven't you heard of people dying in the ER while waiting?

But will they stamp "DIFFICULT" across my chart a la Elaine Benes?

Welcome to Managed Care. This is just a preview of what Universal Care will look like. You cannot possibly manage a finite resource like healthcare when the demand is infinite. Go look at the U.K. to see what a sorry mess the NHS is in.

@misstic: Really? Point to the countries with some form of UHC that assign their citizens a score that determines the level of health care, if any, that they receive. Because that's exactly what will happen if this MedFico business is allowed to happen.

@Troy F.: Your attempts have failed. You are now a conspiracy theorist.

The main problem here is that it specifically targets pretty much only the sick (or post-sick), the poor, and of course, the uninsured.

It also sorta implies that the only way to even GET a score is to have been sick/hurt etc in the past. Why would my med-fico score be low or even exist if i've never had a reason to rack up a medical bill?

It also targets an area of 'business' where the 'customer' has no choice. meaning we all agree that we don't have sympathy for the person with a low FICO score that got in over his head buying stupid luxury items, yeah?

How is setting a broken leg a luxury item? How is removing a busted appendix (sp?) a luxury?

The 'Consumer' in this situation has no choice. If they do not have the funds even if they DO have health insurance, they are penalized for a financial situation that they could not help but create.

@mindshadow: To say I am sorry about your mom sounds too superficial, but I really am. I didn't have to know her to wish that healthcare were available to her as she needed. I don't mind having to pay more if that is where the money goes. She was a fellow citizen, a fellow human being, and I want no less for her than for members of my own family and friend circle.

As voters + citizens we need to push our government to stop bailing out private and corrupt corporations, funding useless 'pork' spending, and other waste, and devote that money to universal healthcare.

Rather the follow Britney (and others) around, perhaps the media needs to devote some time to challenging the American value that some people (corporations, rich) are worth excess government spending, whereas making sure all people, regardless of income, race, education, location, etc. have the best healthcare available?

Certainly hospitals treat patients differently based on how they can pay for their care. The quicker they can tell this, the quicker they can implement the unequal treatment. It is disgusting that ability to pay is a factor at all beyond being a side-note to be handled.

For all of us, we should add one more belated New Year's resolution -- to press our government for a healthcare system that CARES for the health of all of our people.

Troy F- ah yes the "far left." Fox News watchers are so easy to spot. Fox News labels all democrats and some moderates as "far left" in an attempt to shift what "moderate" means. So anything left of Mussolini is a "far left."

The average of few polls (ABC, CNN, etc.) is that around 60% of people want some sort of national health care. So are you suggesting a fairly significant majority of Americans are "far left?"

It's funny, we accept "socialized" fire departments, police departments, and other services because we think they're vital (FYI- there's used to be private fire departments, they'd only put out the fire at your house if you paid that company the annual fee). So, I don't get why health care isn't vital.

Bad bad bad all around. I can just see them throwing your score in the toilet because your insurance company refuses to pay for an ER visit due to "going out of the network" or whatever BS reason they'll come up with, and you can barely afford to make payments to the bill.

Then your insurance raises your rates through the roof because they look at your medFICO and see that whoops, your score dropped, that means you're a deadbeat! So you lose your insurance, are stuck with a hospital bill that you may never pay off for years, and if you get sick again, you're even further in the hole.

This is so amazingly low. People can, for the most part, control their FICO score. People cannot control what medical treatment they need.

Besides, can't care providers already ding your regular FICO if you don't pay? What possible reason is there to have a separate score, other than to treat equal human beings unequally?

In the Medical FICO future:

"Sorry sir, you'll just have to deal with the pain, your Patient Score is under 600"
"You won't pay us, sooooo, could you go sit on the curb so other people can get medical attention? Okay, thanks!"

@mindshadow:

My wife works as a physician and has no shortage of people who cannot afford all their drugs. When one government plan fails, there's always another one to fill in the gap. When the fed fails, the state and county are there to pick up slack. It requires work researching all the programs.

Doctors can certainly help. They have no shortage of free samples.

The drug companies don't need more congressional investigations. They frequently help out with free and discounted drugs for the truly indigent. When the drug companies try to buy my wife and partners lunch, they ask them to sponsor a patient instead.

I'm not sure if I believe the details of your story. I also wonder why YOU didn't help her out with prescription money if it was a matter of life and death. I'd get another job to pay prescriptions if it meant my parents lives.

Bring it on, health care bastards! The only hope for health care in this country is for the industry to totally alienate, marginalize, and screw over enough people to where there's an outcry for reform. I'm damn serious.

I'm looking forward to the talk radio pundits ramping up their slant on MedFICO as a matter of personal responsibility, and citing the "lardasses" and burger culture, while brushing aside cancer, genetic ailments, and so forth.

I think when my wife finds out about this she's going to be pushing for us to dust off our plans to sell our house and move out of this country.

@tinmanx:

The order in which people are seen in the ER is by triage. Typically there is a strong Charge Nurse running triage (a nurse who earns salary, and wouldn't give a shit about ability to pay).

Mistakes and accidents are still made, humans work in medicine! The current thinking is to sue the shit out of them all (and deter any young people from medicine).

I still don't like this idea of a MedFICO!

@ARP:

You miss the article about the house in Alaska what was 180 yards past the border. The fire trucks were turned back because they didn't pay the right taxes. The was public fire service.

@Troy F.: GRUDNOWSKI, THOMAS G. MR. (FAIR ISAAC CORPORATION/C.E.O.), (Zip code: 55331) $2000 to BUSH-CHENEY '04 (PRIMARY) INC. on 12/03/03

You have got to be kidding me, dude. Pretty much any time the rights of citizens go down the shitter, you can blame it on a right wing "conspiracy," not the left. Get off the Fox News for a few days.

This is 100% "New World Order" type material.

OMG, this was *totally* a Star Trek episode. Voyager, I think. HAHAHAHAHHA!

I laugh, because it's so scary and sad... you gotta laugh.

@Kevin Cotter: So one event happens at the end of the earth in the middle of nowhere, and that's supposed to be damning evidence of how socialized public services don't work?

This is yet another sign that the health care system, as it exists today, is completely broken.

At this point I would love if the states would start experimenting with different forms of universal health care, so perhaps we find a better system and move away from this expensive monstrosity.

As it stands we spend more than double per patient than any other first-world nation, but by all measures, our outcomes are (at best) average. What a fucking waste.

@ARP: @youbastid:

You partisan loons are a hoot! I never watch Fox News so apparently Fox News watchers are not as easy to spot as whackos...or humor posts on internet forums. See you guys at Drum Circle.

@Kevin Cotter: It's difficult to get free samples from doctors when you can't afford to go.

And I don't really care if you believe the details of my story, I wasn't begging for sympathy or anything like that, just pointing out that people suffer because of a profit-driven healthcare industry.

And I did help as much as I could, but I was in college (and she refused to let me quit as she knew she wasn't doing well and didn't want me to hinder my future for her), I have a maxed out credit card from paying for what I could for her, on top of car payments and what not. Even with a decent job doctors visits are not cheap, especially cardiologists and rheumatologists.

@Troy F.: Oh I'm sorry, I mistook you for a Fox News junkie because your "humor post" was of the Fox News variety, and your retort was similar. Making drum circle tree hugging hippie remarks at anyone who takes anything besides a republican stance? Very Hannity.

FYI: I work a corporate job, eat steak and pussy, and drink beer. I also believe that health care is a right and not a privilege.

Jesus, I need to lay off the coffee.

EMTALA already forbids barring access to emergency care based on a patient's financial status or ability to pay. So that's out.

@CumaeanSibyl: Hospitals don't just see emergency cases. There's the ER, then there's all the other departments of the hospital where doctors see patients and schedule them for procedures. Those kids of procedures that are not emergencies and are scheduled in advance are called "elective". To most people, elective would indicate something like cosmetic surgery, for example. But in fact, if your doctor schedules you for an angioplasty in 2 weeks, it is deemed elective. And, potentially, this is where the danger of a medical FICO score could lie. If you are not insured, you *could* see cases where the hospital runs the score and weighs the risk. Technically, the hospital could say that because the patient can get the same procedure elsewhere, then they don't *have* to allow the doc to perform the procedure there. I'm just extemporizing on this, based on my own experience in my line of work, not saying it would indeed happen that way.

@youbastid: If the "*totally*" didn't tip you off it's because you're too busy looking for people to compartmentalize. Maybe you should stop taking your political cues from television - any of it.

I didn't make the drum circle comment because you don't have a "republican stance" (there you go with the mindless assumptions again), I made the comment because turn about is fair play. I like how you make an assumption about my entire political ideology based on a single offhand comment but then are quick to criticise me for doing the same. This in itself speaks volumes about both of our ideologies.

@Troy F.: Note the coffee comment. I'm a little amped up this AM with nowhere to put it at the moment. Apologies for my abrasiveness.

@Pithlit: Those days are already over. Many companies already charges additional monthly fees (between $20 and $100) if you smoke, and word around the campfire is that extra fees for unsatisfactory BMI's and cholesterol levels are just around the corner.

@Kevin Cotter: When one government plan fails, there's always another one to fill in the gap. When the fed fails, the state and county are there to pick up slack.

There are at least 47 million uninsured people in this country. Do you honestly believe they are all doing without just because they haven't found the right program yet? Unless you are on Medicare or eligible for VA benefits the Federal government doesn't do jack for your health care or lack thereof. Medicaid is administered at the state level, and they have a lot of leeway as to how that happens.

Will the state or county entity pick up your tab? I suppose that may be true if you're the right person living in the right place. However, in most parts of the country if you're an individual earning more than $20,000/yr (about 200% of poverty level) the likelihood of there being any free or subsidized program that would insure you is very small.

@misstic: The UK is widely thought to have the most poorly-run and financed health care system in the EU, ergo people who don't like the idea of universal health insurance like to use it as an example. When you look at exemplary systems like those of France or Germany, it makes the American system appear even less defensible than it is.

As for finite resources, that's certainly true. That said, what we spend on health care would go a lot farther if 30 cents of every dollar didn't go to things like: insurance company profit and overhead, the army of accounting staff that doctors have to employ to get insurers to pay their bills, doctors wasting time arguing coverage and pre-approvals with insurance companies, and us arguing coverage and pre-approvals with insurance companies. I would love to see the day when 'medical billing specialist' isn't a job description I see in the paper anymore.

Indeed, there are not a large number of programs that help people with Rx needs. As an example, when Oregon's Medicaid program stopped covering prescriptions, things went into a tailspin. Pharmacies are under no obligation to give you your meds without money up front, and many people saw their conditions worsen because of their lack of access to meds. If there were so many programs, pharmacies would have had every incentive to help patients find these programs because some revenue is better than no revenue.