Feb
12
Posted on 02-12-2008 at 08:00am
The Future of General Hospital
Filed Under (Health) by Rachel Walden on 02-12-2008

Council moves closer to upping loan to Nashville General - Metro council members have expressed support for a resolution to “extend the reimbursement date of a loan to Nashville General until June 2009, while increasing its line of credit by $11.5 million.” Apparently the hospital is operating with an estimated net deficit of $7.1 million for this fiscal year.

Relatedly, Gail Kerr opines on whether General should be shut down, and notes that “efforts to persuade patients with health insurance to pick General have not worked.”

It seems as though a financial crisis for General almost every year, but how can this be rectified? The hospital is specifically intended to serve as a “safety net” for those without the ability to pay for care and to reduce healthcare disparities, including in its mission statement, “We are committed to providing excellent healthcare regardless of age, race, creed, gender, sexual preference or ability to pay.” Is it possible to have what is in many ways essentially a charity hospital, and have that facility not operate at a loss? Is this deficit simply an accepted part of providing this type of community care, and if so, how do we financially support these services to the community?

I don’t have answers, but I’m interested in your thoughts.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Furl
  • RawSugar
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
    Read More   

Comments

Jon on 12 February, 2008 at 8:48 am #

Perhaps the soap opera ought to have to pay royalties to all the General Hospitals in the country.

I’m not entirely sure I’m joking :)


democommie on 12 February, 2008 at 12:24 pm #

What is the alternative? People not receiving care or people coming to the “nice” hospitals and clogging up their ER’s?

Why it is that folks don’t see the connection between the high cost of healthcare/insurance and “free care” given to the indigent population is beyond me. Even if one is inclined to say, “tough love” will work in this situation, they should bear in mind that folks who are poor, intravenous drug users (for instance) contract such diseases as highly contagious, antiboiotic resistance TB. Since I don’t believe that most folks are ready to jump aboard the eugenics meat wagon, some other plan will have to be tried.

My sister (bless her soul) used to work as a charge nurse in a county hospital. She had about 40 patients, all chronically diseased, demented, or in persistent vegetative states. They were also, strangely enough, uninsured or had costs that had exceeded their coverage. She was a great gal, who worked hard to make the patients as comfortable as possible.

One day she saw a piece in the paper about how the county board was going to buy a facility (racetrack and fairground, essentially) with $25M of county funds. This was shortly after she had been told that the hospital was going to have its budget cut. The next time she saw her hospital director hobnobbing with some county bigwigs she let all of them have it. I don’t think she was the only one, but the “buy out” died a quick death at the next county board meeting. It seems there’s always money for the important stuff, it just depends on what you consider important.