Daughter had bandage applied to her finger

[tapper]

Just for the record, the school nurse had recommended that we seek additional medical care for her when she was picked up from school.

Maybe it had to do with the size of her finger, but if the same cut was done proportionally to my finger then I would have expected to get a few stitches.

[mn54]

[QUOTE=Westernskies;916048]Yep, it's the schools responsibility to protect kids from every conceivable incident every second of the school day. Obviously the kids had been fully trained and certified in the use of scissors by their parents at home, but were somehow issued dangerous and defective cutting implements and placed in a hazardous situation without adequate supervision by an irresponsible teacher. This wasn't just a simple minor childhood accident, it is gross negligence on the part of the teacher, the school district and the state board of education. Turn over the phone book and dial for dollars!

No such thing as an accident anymore. Someone else needs to pay!

I'm not saying there's no such thing as an accident. Accidents happen all the time. I'm just bringing up the question of liability. If someone walks into your house, or even just onto your property, and they trip and fall and injure themselves you are legally liable for their injuries even though you did nothing wrong.

[Westernskies]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mn54 If someone walks into your house, or even just onto your property, and they trip and fall and injure themselves you are legally liable for their injuries even though you did nothing wrong.

...and therein lies the problem.

YouTube - Get off my lawn

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Westernskies Yep, it's the schools responsibility to protect kids from every conceivable incident every second of the school day .... rant over....

OTOH, if the school didn't insist that the child went for treatment, and the finger did get infected (Rich expressed some concern about this), then a parent might be suing the school. I think the school did the right thing, better safe than sorry.

The $400 doesn't seem so out of line all things considered. If you came in with a heart attack, or a burst appendix, they would be prepared to treat you. There is a cost associated with that overhead and 'preparedness'.

Now, if you opened shop and hung a sign that said "Minor Medical Treatments only - cuts, hangnails and scrapes our specialties", with a sign pointing to the Emergency Clinic two blocks away for real emergencies - then you might expect to pay $40.

For comparison, see what it costs to get a $400 TV fixed. I doubt you can get a repair estimate for less than the cost of a new set. And those people (if they exist anymore) didn't have to go to medical school, or carry lots of liability insurance. It's just the way it is.

-ERD50

[Meadbh]

The reason it costs 400 dollars is because you are in a for profit healthcare system. Everybody's goal is to make money on the transaction.

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meadbh The reason it costs 400 dollars is because you are in a for profit healthcare system. Everybody's goal is to make money on the transaction.

And the for-profit legal system adds to that.

But the real problem is not so much 'for profit', it is lack of a truly free market. I doubt the OP would feel ripped off if he spent $400 on a TV, and that is a for-profit industry. And everybody's goal is to make money on the transaction, from the miner of the copper and tantalum, to the refiners, to the component makers, to the assemblers, the dealers, and all the shippers and distributors and all the middle-men in between.

-ERD50

[travelover]

So tapper, if this happens again, take your daughter to a TV repair shop.

[eridanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERD50 And the for-profit legal system adds to that.

The legal system adds little to the cost of the health care bill in Minnesota. An internist pays mid-1000s annually. It's a red herring.

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eridanus The legal system adds little to the cost of the health care bill in Minnesota. An internist pays mid-1000s annually. It's a red herring.

It may be a red herring, and it's often exaggerated as a contributor to health care costs.

But it's very regional. An internist in Fla might pay $15,000 a year.

[eridanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich_in_Tampa It may be a red herring, and it's often exaggerated as a contributor to health care costs. But it's very regional. An internist in Fla might pay $15,000 a year.

Definitely. The premiums for a Florida ob/gyn, for example, are more than most of us make in a year.

But the OP is in Minnesota, where rates are near the lowest in the nation. There are other factors at work for the cost of this particular care.

[kumquat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eridanus The premiums for a Florida ob/gyn, for example, are more than most of us make in a year.

Many years ago, an oncologist friend moved from Canada to Florida. He told me his malpractice insurance premium would be higher than his Canadian gross income. He added "and my patients are expected to die".

[DblDoc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eridanus The legal system adds little to the cost of the health care bill in Minnesota. An internist pays mid-1000s annually. It's a red herring.

You are ignoring the hidden costs. In order to defend myself from potential law suits I order tests that are not indicated and create copious documentation to cover my a*#. Additionally every health care organization has to have a legal department to defend against suits. Also you chose a field that is seldom sued in a state with low rates...

DD

[eridanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DblDoc Also you chose a field that is seldom sued in a state with low rates... DD

This thread is about the cost of care for a finger wound in Minnesota. Even general surgeons in Minnesota have low premiums. It's a red herring in Minnesota.

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERD50 And the for-profit legal system adds to that. -ERD50

Quote:

Originally Posted by eridanus The legal system adds little to the cost of the health care bill in Minnesota. An internist pays mid-1000s annually. It's a red herring.

I don't know that it is a red herring the way I stated it. I merely said it adds to it. I don't know if it is a big number or not (seems like it is not), I just didn't want to appear to be 'picking' on the health care people - there are profit makers and service providers all up and down the health care chain.

No biggie, just wanted to clarify. - ERD50

[anes]

stay home next time and don't call at 3 in the morning when it's infected and hurting

[REWahoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by anes stay home next time and don't call at 3 in the morning when it's infected and hurting

We are still talking about a finger...right?

[travelover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by REWahoo We are still talking about a finger...right?

[clifp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tapper So I recently got the bill and then requested a detailed breakdown of the bill. Allina Hospitals and Clinics in Minnesota charged us $560 dollars for the 30 minute visit. The detailed breakdown was as follows (the detailed breakdown sucked since it failed to provide much detail): Procedure / Charge / Insurance Adjustment / Final Cost Office/Outpt / $146.00 / $19.86 / $126.14 Apply Finger / $104.00 / $58.73 / $45.27 Repair Superf / $310.00 / $39.91 / $270.09 Which results in an out of pocket expense of $441.50 for me to pay. I find these charges utterly appalling. $441.50 to rinse a finger and apply a bandage.

My initial reaction was the same. That is outrageous.

However, when I stopped to think about it, maybe it isn't so ridiculous.
I would hope that it shouldn't take 30 minutes for a nurse or Doctor to clean a wound and put on a bandage. But assuming there was medical reason for such a lengthy procedure what is a reasonable price to pay?

I am curious how much should we as society pay for 30 minutes of doctors time, and/or 30 minutes of nurse and the facility to let them do this as well handle much more severe injuries. $50, $100, $200, $500, $1,000?

I really have no idea.

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clifp I am curious how much should we as society pay for 30 minutes of doctors time, and/or 30 minutes of nurse and the facility to let them do this as well handle much more severe injuries. $50, $100, $200, $500, $1,000? I really have no idea.

In any other country in the world, a lot less than $400.

Ha

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

I am not a defender of the current system. But there are factors at play aside from greed and gamesmanship.

A facility which is open to patients in an immediate access scenario must be prepared for every reasonable scenario which might be anticipated. These range from booboos to cardiac arrest, seizures, and everything in between. This in turn implies appropriate staff, defibrillators, IVs, and everything in between. Drugs expire, machines require regulation and calibration, and staff requires training. Industrial strength liability mitigation and risk management must be paid for.

A laceration clinic, if such a thing existed, would not require all this. But an urgent care facility does. The emergencies are unlikely but must be prepared for.

Was the laceration care in this case worth $400? Probably not. But if heaven forbid the same child had refractory seizures or worse, most of us would be very grateful the facility was prepared to handle it, even if it meant high prices for some of the less urgent conditions. Back in the day, the family pediatrician would have accommodated the cut in the office.