|
Lucia
de Vernai
Read Lucia's bio and previous columns
August 4, 2008
Health Providers Reject
Immigrants to Serve the Bottom Line; Are Citizens Next?
The Sunday, August 3 edition of The New York Times
featured a story about immigrants deported by the U.S. health care
system. Apparently a widespread practice across the country, it has not
garnered much public attention even in my home state of Arizona, where
immigrant health care never leaves the political agenda. When the
argument for reserving resources for legal residents and citizens comes
up, our attitude is anything but bleeding heart. Like Medicaid and other
tax-funded programs, foreign aid is a separate budget consideration for
a reason, right?
Even if you accept this argument, the methods by which we protect “our”
resources are often heartless and in conflict with American principles
of due process and justice. The Minutemen, a vigilante anti-immigrant
group patrolling the desert border, raised an uproar from across the
political spectrum, as critics argued such a function should be reserved
for properly trained authorities with public accountability. Likewise,
hospitals are also circumventing proper government deportation measures
and using private companies to get rid of uninsured patients. One
Arizona hospital even tried to deport an American citizen because both
of the child’s parents were illegal immigrants.
What one lawyer representing an injured immigrant described as “patient
dumping” is not reserved for illegal immigrants. Certain legal
immigrants who have been in the country for a short period of time, or
are on short-term visas, are also not eligible for Medicaid. Hospitals
may want to disguise this as a political matter, but it all comes down
to the bottom line. If a student with an expired visa got ill but had
family abroad who would pick up the check, Homeland Security officials
wouldn’t be paying him a surprise visit.
Here is the really bad news about that: Millions of Americans are not
eligible for Medicaid since they make “too much,” but since they cannot
afford health insurance, they cannot afford the treatment either. Where
are they going to start dumping us?
Canada seems like the only geographically possible location,
but given the sheer volume of patients unable to pay for treatment that
the U.S. creates every year, there would have to be a special “medical
refugee” designation and mandatory paperwork (if you want social
welfare, you have to deal with the bureaucracy).
The term “cost of living” gains a whole new meaning when the
institutions that are meant to protect our health set a prognosis based
on a balance sheet. Perhaps what is even more disturbing is the lack of
legal intervention in determining the proper conduct with a patient who
may lack identification and is unable to communicate. “Well, he’s Latino
. . . if no one claims him in two days, ship ‘em to Guadalajara . . . I
hear they have great neurosurgery.”
Perhaps that is a crude portrayal of the decision-making process, but
when a patient’s medical chart consists of a tab, it is difficult to
imagine a more humane deliberation process.
The motivation of the health care industry is what Americans need to
keep in mind. The feeling that this will never happen to us because we
are citizens is an attempt to rationalize and give ourselves a false
sense of security. If medicine is allowed to be first concerned with
profit, not patients, none of us are safe.
© 2008 North Star
Writers Group. May not be republished without permission.
Click here to talk to our writers and
editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.
To e-mail feedback
about this column,
click here. If you enjoy this writer's
work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry
it.
This is Column # LB128.
Request
permission to publish here.
|
