Health insurance is getting almost as much attention as the debate over gun control in the aftermath of the Aurora, Colo., theater shootings, amid reports that some of the most grievously injured lack coverage.
“This does seem like a new part of the conversation” following a tragedy, said Dr. Ned Calonge, president and CEO of the Colorado Trust, a health care advocacy group.
Fifty-eight injured were taken to area hospitals after the shootings in the midnight showing of “The Dark Knight Rises.” The most seriously wounded continue to fight for their lives and may face medical bills in the hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars. Among them is 23-year-old Caleb Medley, who is in an induced coma after being shot in the head, and whose wife, Katie, gave birth to their first child last week. The couple has no health insurance, and their friends and family are raising money online to pay their medical bills.
Like Medley, many of the victims are between the ages of 19 and 34 – a group with a 28 percent uninsurance rate in Colorado, the highest among any age group, according to a 2011 survey by Calonge’s group.
Calonge notes that many young people are employed and have the opportunity to buy insurance through their jobs but decline coverage because they are making comparatively low salaries and see themselves as young and healthy.
“One of the things the tragedy points out is that assessment of risk isn’t always right,” he said.
The conversation about health coverage began when several hospitals, including the Children’s Hospital, the Medical Center of Aurora and Swedish Medical Center, the last two owned by HCA-HealthOne, announced they would “limit or eliminate personal financial responsibility” for hospital costs to those wounded in the shootings who had insufficient insurance or resources. Those hospitals have treated 22 victims. Officials noted the hospitals’ action would not affect doctors’ bills.
Other providers, such as Denver Health, have set up charity funds to take donations to help defray the cost of victims’ care. Members of the public, including Warner Bros., which released the movie, have contributed almost $2 million to charity funds set up to help the victims.
Some believe the discussion about the victims’ medical bills may change attitudes about the 2010 health care law. “It will make the issue of people without insurance suddenly needing care more vivid,” said Norman Ornstein, resident fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.
Dan Mendelson, president of Avalere Health, a health care consulting firm, is not so sure.
“I don’t believe this is a transformational event,” he said. “It is one in a series of stories that may improve Americans’ understanding of what’s contained in the law.”
Subscribe
That’s funny, Republicans say George W. Bush era health care was working perfectly fine in America. Republicans say, let’s repeal Obamacare and go back to the pre 2010 system where greedy insurance companies controlled everything and they canceled your policy if you got sick, or shot. Goodness knows, it todays armed society, it’s looking more and more likely that you might die of a gunshot wound than you will of cancer, heart attack or stroke. We know that the children of this tragedy were covered for their medical expenses thanks in large part to Obamacare. And, at least the young adult victims, those under age 26, might have been covered on their parents policy thanks to Obamacare. As for the others, Republicans say “your out of luck”. In a Republican world, the poor simply do not count!
Dr. Calonge’s comment, “points out is that assessment of risk isn’t always right”, if I understood the context correctly, is a bit galling (?) or appalling (?). Said from a financial viewpoint radically different than someone making minimum wage, attempting to pay rent, food on table, and cover other expenses. As if this type of financial profile will allow an individual to pay out another bill of $100+ premium each month. And enough about the “high deductible”, or the HRA/HSA options, tax breaks, tax deductions, if you have no funds beyond the basics in the first place, there is no “disposable” funds for these types of “cost effective plans”. The interesting lacuna in all of these discussions is how the census figures for the income distribution showing that X% of the individuals in the United States are not necessarily flush with funds to allow a % of their income each month to be diverted to free-market health insurance premiums is the real issue. And then add the “balance billing”, “deductible”, “copayments”, “premium payments” into the mix….is it any wonder that X% of United States citizens are under-insured or uninsured. Having lived overseas in countries with National Insurance programs, it is disgusting how the United States is so opposed to these types of models given the reality of what the free market response to equity in health care and full access to health care has done. It is as if the 16th century Calvinist concepts of “the select” is the guiding principle for 21st century medical care.
I am so glad someone else noted the high uninsured in this tragedy. I thought it would be glossed over.
And now on top of everything they have endured, these survivors are to be charity cases. I am sure that makes them feel just great. We should grow up as a country and cover all our citizens. We actually could have healthier neighbors. Maybe trouubled teenagers would have mental health services including anger management.
ACA at least would cover so many more if it survives the onslaught of the self righteous who can’t seem to walk in anyone’s shoes. When will we learn we are in this together and that bad things can happen anywhere. Why are the Republican Governors so proud of slashing Medicaid? Why are we racing to be last in the health olympics!
I walk into a rock concert and see the vast majority of young adults with no health insurance. I walk into performance of my local symphony see the vast majority of adults covered by Medicare. The young adults are working and helping support universal healthcare for those 65+ and certain chronic illnesses. The least our society can do is extend affordable health insurance to those contributing to ensure Medicare stays solvent.