Tourist tax under attack

[YeaBiGgiEs]

I suppose as long as it is for "tourists" with an actual tourist visa of any length then it shouldn't impact the rest of us ALTHOUGH now considering the fact that my healthcare would be covered for a mere 500b throughout the duration of my stay, that is a bit more appealing regardless of having to do the inconvenience and cost of bi-annual visa runs. I'll take it. $15usd or 500b for any medical expenses that I encounter for my extended stay in Thailand which of course is sure to happen, hell then perhaps foreigners may get wind of this and just before a pregnancy, major healthcare need, operation they can travel to Thailand for a mere 500b cost.

[tmd5855]

This will go in a total wrong direction and end up in a disaster.

When the word is out that you are entitled to medical services in Thailand for a 500 Baht flat fee monthly, expect tourist (patient) arrivals to jump sky high.

You've never been inside a governement hospital in rural Thailand, I can tell!

I have...

A very rural one at Ban Kam Ping, near Bamnet Narong.

Slashed my left foot open badly with broken glass, villagers wrapped about two toilet rolls around it and rushed me away on the back of a bike. Arrived hospital, told to wait... wheelchar brought out. in I went. Only problem?? No English nurses... But my Thai were good enough.

Wound all cleaned and 6 stiches later out I went with a carrybag full of tablets and ointments. Paid 220baht.

But now have my own plasticed hospital card with all my details.

If I had a heart attack, sure maybe problem.

But rural hospitals are excellent at treating rural accidents.

Showing them my company BUPA card would not of got me any better treatment.

Pom song satang

Edited November 4, 2013 by tmd5855

[roamer]

You are both wrong. No one is denied care at an American emergency room for lack of funds or insurance. I repeat "No one is denied care at an American emergency room for lack of funds or insurance". This goes for post ER care also. It's one of the reasons for the astronomical cost of US healthcare, those of us who can pay pay for those who can't, but that's not the issue here. If you are in good enough shape to pull out money or a card they will gladly take it. If you don't have one you will still be treated. The treatment will be the same if you are homeless or a millionaire.

Excuse me while I get my flack jacket on, I think I'll probably need it soon.

In principle, that's true. A hospital cannot deny you emergency care sufficient to stabilize you, if you present at an emergency room.

But what they can do is to wave off any ambulances so you're never presented for treatment. And the next one, and the next one, until an hour later, you end up at the pauper's hospital, if you're still alive by then.

Back to the topic at hand, the numbers have shown that this fee is 10-15 baht to reimburse unpaid medical care, and the rest for the general fund. It doesn't seem presented as any kind of insurance and anyone expecting to be treated without paying is probably in for a rude awakening. But there are always some folks that can't pay after they've received treatment (even people with travel insurance, which generally reimburses after the money is already long ago spent- and then only a percentage) and I think it's pretty reasonable to spread that cost out among all visitors.

Well in that case travel insurance for the US must be pretty touch & go. You mean that if I'm involved in an accident or suffer a heart attack, not able to confirm whether or not I have insurance I will end up in the "papers hospital" ? Seriously ?

Anyway of course this is to fill the coffers, about as genuine a tax as the "green" taxes I pay every time I fly from the UK, but a lot cheaper

[kbelyeu]

It was the Thai government that allowed foreign people to get basic treatment in Thailand. They should run it like in the USA and other countries, show and swipe your credit card before they give you treatment or take a cash deposit.

If they have no card, cash or insurance cover it is the fault of the patient so kick them out of the hospital with no treatment.

Easy, at least other tourists will not have to pay for them. As I said before, the ministers of the main departments have, (I Think) been told to think of some way to get more money in for the government to pay for the Rice cockup.

Rather shortsighted indeed.

Letting sick and injured people die because they have no insurance.

What about people that can not get insurance?

What about people who can not afford insurance?

Don't be too proud about the healthcare system in the USA.

It is frightfully expensive, not really affordable, and really very disgusting.

And sending a patient away because he or she has no credit card is directly against the doctors' oath.

Check your facts:

In an emergency situation, a patient has a right to treatment, regardless of ability to pay. If a situation is likely to cause death, serious injury, or disability if not attended to promptly, it is an emergency. Cardiac arrest, heavy bleeding, profound shock, severe head injuries, and acute psychotic states are some examples of emergencies. Less obvious situations can also be emergencies: broken bones, fever, and cuts requiring stitches may also require immediate treatment.

Both public and private hospitals have a duty to administer medical care to a person experiencing an emergency. If a hospital has emergency facilities, it is legally required to provide appropriate treatment to a person experiencing an emergency. If the hospital is unable to provide emergency services, it must provide a referral for appropriate treatment. Hospitals cannot refuse to treat prospective patients on the basis of race, religion, or national origin, or refuse to treat someone with HIV or AIDS.

In 1986, Congress passed the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) (42 U.S.C.A. § 1395dd), which established criteria for emergency services and criteria for safe transfer of patients between hospitals. This statute was designed to prevent "patient dumping," that is, transferring undesirable patients to another facility. The law applies to all hospitals receiving federal funds, such as Medicare (almost all do). The law requires hospitals to provide a screening exam to determine if an emergency condition exists, provide stabilizing treatment to any emergency patient or to any woman in active labor before transfer, and continue treatment until a patient can be discharged or transferred without harm. It also delineates strict guidelines for the transfer of a patient who cannot be stabilized. A hospital that negligently or knowingly and willfully violates any of these provisions can be terminated or suspended from Medicare. The physician, the hospital, or both can also be penalized up to $50,000 for each knowing violation of the law.

Anyway, it is quite simple, make a travel insurance obligatory for tourists.

And expats can get either private insurance, or for those who can get no private insurance fabricate an insurance run by and in the state hospitals.