Doctors group to U. of C.: Practices close to 'patient dumping'

dont have all the facts wrote:

<quoted text>
Just make sure you don't put it in the Tribune, they would rewrite their findings to fit their own agendas.
And why we are discussing rights to healthcare in relation to this is absurd. Nobody's rights have been violtated in anyway. You do have the right to go to the ER in an emergency, you won't get turned away, if it is an emergency. If you don't like the care you received, you also have the right to go someplace else!

aghhhhhhhh wrote:

<quoted text>
TOUGH! It's survival of the fittest---THAT is the liberal mantra. YOU LOSE!

spot on wrote:

<quoted text>
This is so true. It was very irresponsible of the the Trib and this ER group to stretch the truth. For the ER group to judge UCMC third-hand off the Trib's yellow "article" is appalling. The mother of this child waited several hours before seeking care-- that is why the boy could not have surgery at the time. This info was lacking from the Trib's bogus piece.
Also, what's clearly missing from all this "communication" about the UC's plans is the fact that the UC turns away non-critical ER patients from the ER regardless of ability to pay. If you show up with a headache and the place is crazy busy, they're going to try to get you to go to the PROPER place-- a community hospital, a doctor's office, etc. The local community hospitals are not as busy as the UC and their overhead is far, far lower than the UC's.
Another thing that no one is addressing about the national ER group's statement is the issue that these docs don't want care to be diverted from ERs for very selfish reasons. Think about it-- if fewer people are clogging ERs for general, routine care (headaches, superficial wounds, etc) then ERs are going to need fewer emergency physicians. The care will be diverted to primary care offices (and yeah, I know there aren't enough of those in many poor areas). And no, I am not saying that this kid's injury was not serious... but the Trib pulling out an example from last summer and trying to tie it to current restructuring plans is serious-- SERIOUSLY WRONG. So sad to see the Trib turn into Chicago's own local version of the National Enquirer.

Smart wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry but our free health care that we give gets repaid by the state. Guess how long it's been since we got reimbursed? Going on 9 months. In the meantime fellow coworkers have lost their jobs. If I get layed off I have money saved for Cobra and the drive to find another job with insurance. I don't care if that means working at Starbucks. You know why? Because that is what responsible people do.