State of the healthcare system in America: Let's discuss why it's failing

Check this out, here’s a story from just down the road: an elderly lady gets rushed to this hospital (I won't say which one, keeping it quiet), and she was dealing with some diarrhea. They transferred her over to the infectious disease ward, where they found blood in her stool. Those folks at the infectious disease unit wouldn't let it go—they insisted she be sent right back to the first hospital because they figured a blood clot in her intestine had burst, and she ended up needing surgery. Honestly, if the infectious disease team hadn't pushed so hard to get her back there, that poor woman wouldn't even be with us today.

Look, you’ve got plenty of examples here, but honestly, the way the problem is being framed is just fundamentally wrong.

Diarrhea—which, let’s be real, we’ve all dealt with at some point—is usually totally harmless. Most of the time, it’s just an infection. People love to throw around vague nonsense about "a burst clot" or whatever that actually means, but half the time it's nothing.

So, here's the logic: if a patient is dealing with diarrhea and their primary care doctor can't get it under control, they should see an infectious disease specialist first—assuming there isn't obvious blood in the stool indicating something much more serious.

From what I can gather, this grandmother went straight to the ER... because of diarrhea? Seriously? Out of 10,000 cases of diarrhea, sure, maybe one is going to be life-threatening... but that doesn't mean you need an infectious disease expert, an internist, and a surgeon to look at every single one of those 10,000 cases.

Kate Collins67 said:Look, you’ve got plenty of examples here, but honestly, the way the problem is being framed is just fundamentally wrong.

Diarrhea—which, let’s be real, we’ve all dealt with at some point—is usually totally harmless. Most of the time, it’s just an infection. People love to throw around vague nonsense about "a burst clot" or whatever that actually means, but half the time it's nothing.

So, here's the logic: if a patient is dealing with diarrhea and their primary care doctor can't get it under control, they should see an infectious disease specialist first—assuming there isn't obvious blood in the stool indicating something much more serious.

From what I can gather, this grandmother went straight to the ER... because of diarrhea? Seriously? Out of 10,000 cases of diarrhea, sure, maybe one is going to be life-threatening... but that doesn't mean you need an infectious disease expert, an internist, and a surgeon to look at every single one of those 10,000 cases.

No, she called 911 for an ambulance to come to the house. It wasn't some minor thing. And look, because the infectious disease unit insisted she go back to that hospital, she ended up getting surgery. Casey Palmer57 has every right to be pissed at everyone involved because this could have ended terribly.
From what I understand, blood vessels in the intestines burst along with a clot. I don't think diarrhea is ever "harmless." They found issues during hematology tests at the infectious disease ward. Why couldn't that have been caught at the first hospital?
And don't even get me started on how hospitals and departments can't coordinate. They just bounce you around—like how my GP sent me from ENT to neurology to psychiatry, then back to psych to neuro, then to internal medicine, then back to the GP. And that went on for a year and a half! You never know if things go better when you pull some strings, or if you don't, or if you follow the official recommendations. As a patient, I've seen far too much of this nonsense.

Just because someone calls 911 from home doesn't mean the situation is actually critical. Honestly, more often than not, it just means the person lacks a ride to the doctor and decides to use an ambulance as a glorified taxi service. The issue here is that paramedics aren't there to ferry you to your GP—they take you to the hospital, period. And that’s how you end up with a grandmother being rushed to the ER via ambulance just because she had a couple of bouts of diarrhea yesterday; she might feel fine today, but hey, better safe than sorry, right?
These are just a few examples from my own experience, not to mention the countless others out there. So, you try to be smart about it.

At the end of the day, diarrhea isn't a primary emergency. In any country that actually respects its healthcare system, you don't get rushed to the hospital for a stomach bug unless there are serious secondary symptoms involved (which I won't even bother listing right now).
Even when a trip to the hospital is necessary, the patient should be heading to Infectious Disease, not just being dumped anywhere. But because of the attitude some EMS staff have—where their only goal is simply "getting the patient to the hospital" and letting the hospital staff figure out where they belong—it creates a massive headache for everyone involved.

So, the crux of the matter is TRIAGE. The problem is that our emergency responders frequently fail to perform proper triage, which brings us right back to the question of who is actually working these shifts, and we're stuck in the same endless loop.

You have to fix the problem at the root, not just deal with the fallout at the end.
Supposedly, the process of creating specialized roles in emergency medicine is underway. They say the first wave of dedicated ER specialists should be ready in about four years—but whether that actually changes anything remains to be seen.
We also have FAMILY MEDICINE SPECIALISTS, and look at how this entire system goes out of its way to discourage them from actually practicing.

ruggedscout91 said:Don't expect her to pick you up in the car. My patients are so insignificant that I can't even recall a single case where someone actually won in court without having a mountain of cash for a high-priced lawyer. And let’s be honest—they all likely feel like they can get away with it, provided the crime isn't an obvious murder or running someone over.
I’ve reached the conclusion that I can only ask for scraps if I want anything at all. But honestly, if I were that private gynecologist, I wouldn't be able to sleep knowing a victim of my incompetence was still out there. I am still mentally replaying how to make this right. As long as he continues to practice and keeps leaving women disabled, I will never have peace. Never.
I'm currently taking some phytohormones to try and patch my life back together because my mental state has completely shifted. Is it true what I read somewhere—that fools always seem to fare better when they cause unintentional harm to others? 😠

We’re working on expanding our association's scope to include legal aid. Believe it or not, we actually have medical law specialists right here in the States. There are a handful of them who carry so much weight that when a letter arrives at a medical facility on their official letterhead, the whole issue gets smoothed over in the blink of an eye.
Most legal battles involving medical malpractice or violations of patient rights usually end in a quiet settlement behind closed doors—even that whole mess involving Maskarin.

I’m jumping back in here to point out another massive failure in the US healthcare system: we don't provide our medical professionals with adequate malpractice insurance to protect them from honest mistakes. Let's be real—nobody is perfect. Humans make errors, and sometimes those slips can be fatal. We should be giving these workers a safety net so they can actually do their jobs without the constant fear that one single mistake will ruin their entire lives.

Kate Collins67 said:@ Casey Palmer5

Look, if you’re going to post like this, you really ought to bring some actual medical arguments to the table—which, unfortunately, are nowhere to be found in your previous message.
If I understood that link you shared correctly, we were talking about NHL (Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, right?)
If you want anyone in the medical profession to take your arguments seriously, you need to include the discharge diagnosis from the hospital summary and the stage of the disease at the time of diagnosis—at least that much.
Your post is absolutely loaded with emotion, but let's be honest: those feelings stem from that sense of helplessness, sadness, and pure rage that hits when someone close to you gets seriously ill. It's understandable, but in all likelihood, those emotions don't actually help solve the problem.

Regarding the transfusion—blood is typically given when hemoglobin (not hematocrit) drops below 8, though some might wait until it hits 7. There are plenty of exceptions where they won't give it even if it's lower, or they'll give it regardless of the specific number.

Medical staff have to maintain a certain level of distance—patients often mistake this for coldness or a lack of care, but it's necessary for them to do their jobs. That's just how it works. You don't have to like it, and you certainly don't have to understand it, but it’s a prerequisite for functioning normally; otherwise, most of them would end up in psychiatry within a week.

Personally, I’d like to know specifically which part you’re angry about, and what exactly you think should have been done differently to prevent the situation from ending up the way it did.

It wasn't about the NHL—honestly, the specifics don't even matter right now. What I'm actually furious about is how poorly the pain was managed and that whole exhausting battle just to get the medical records...

Since my fiancé is a doctor, there’s really no point in me looking for outside opinions; we've already gone over every single detail together. And the thing is, they promised us they'd run blood tests right when he was admitted. Instead, they didn't get them done until three days later—just three hours before he passed away. It's almost impossible to tell what his hemoglobin levels were after those three days because that specific result is missing, but his levels must have been plummeting fast, considering he had already dropped about 30% within five days before even reaching the hospital...

I’m absolutely livid because I was supposed to have my results processed within two weeks. Does my primary care doctor actually benefit more from getting me sorted in fourteen days, or from letting my processing drag on for a year and a half? It’s not like it doesn't affect things—this delay automatically triggers medical leave filings and who knows what else. And yeah, I have every right to be pissed, whether you like hearing it or not. This wasn't just some "stomach bug" situation; there was blood in my stool because someone skipped a screening or someone totally dropped the ball. Casey Palmer5 is furious because someone she cares about didn't get treated, and if they had reacted in time, they might actually still be alive today. She knows deep down she won't change anything, though. Honestly, for that elderly woman, it was probably just a weekend of misery. Emergency rooms aren't called "emergency" for nothing, even if some people act like they aren't. Someone actually had to drive her to the hospital. This wasn't some minor thing. From what I understand, she had ruptured vessels in her intestine plus a blood clot.

Brandon Newman95 said:I’m absolutely livid because I was supposed to have my results processed within two weeks. Does my primary care doctor actually benefit more from getting me sorted in fourteen days, or from letting my processing drag on for a year and a half? It’s not like it doesn't affect things—this delay automatically triggers medical leave filings and who knows what else. And yeah, I have every right to be pissed, whether you like hearing it or not. This wasn't just some "stomach bug" situation; there was blood in my stool because someone skipped a screening or someone totally dropped the ball. Casey Palmer5 is furious because someone she cares about didn't get treated, and if they had reacted in time, they might actually still be alive today. She knows deep down she won't change anything, though. Honestly, for that elderly woman, it was probably just a weekend of misery. Emergency rooms aren't called "emergency" for nothing, even if some people act like they aren't. Someone actually had to drive her to the hospital. This wasn't some minor thing. From what I understand, she had ruptured vessels in her intestine plus a blood clot.

Well, that’s exactly why I say our healthcare system is drowning in money. Your sick leave payments come out of that very same system. I’ll go on record here—politicians would call it making a formal claim—that if those tests had been finished in two weeks, it would have cost the healthcare system several times less than this mess.

Susan Rodriguez4 said:Well, that’s exactly why I say our healthcare system is drowning in money. Your sick leave payments come out of that very same system. I’ll go on record here—politicians would call it making a formal claim—that if those tests had been finished in two weeks, it would have cost the healthcare system several times less than this mess.

Exactly! My whole point is that I want my primary care doctor to have fewer sick days, and I want my own tests wrapped up in two weeks flat so everything functions normally and gets handled properly. I'll shoot you a private message with the full story. But seriously, the cost to the US healthcare system would be cut in half if things just worked.

Take women in cities like Los Angeles, for example. They vent on women's health forums about how nearly impossible it is to get an abortion at a public hospital. Instead, they’re forced to pay private clinics double or even triple the price, risking their lives in the process. It turns out many doctors from the municipal hospitals perform these services privately. And if a woman actually manages to go through with it at a public facility? Well, the whole city finds out who she is.

If we take a look at the US healthcare system and analyze this specific sector, isn't it high time that a new maternity and gynecology wing brought with it a modern standard of conduct? Shouldn't patients have a fundamental right to privacy regarding why they walked into a General Hospital in the first place?
Do we live in Afghanistan? Why must women resort to clandestine procedures just to avoid being labeled a "social problem"? And why do doctors dodge these services so relentlessly, only to end up performing abortions or curettages under abysmal conditions with subpar anesthesia?
It leads to one inevitable conclusion: women in American society simply do not enjoy the same right to equal healthcare as any other group of citizens.

ruggedscout91 said:Take women in cities like Los Angeles, for example. They vent on women's health forums about how nearly impossible it is to get an abortion at a public hospital. Instead, they’re forced to pay private clinics double or even triple the price, risking their lives in the process. It turns out many doctors from the municipal hospitals perform these services privately. And if a woman actually manages to go through with it at a public facility? Well, the whole city finds out who she is.

If we take a look at the US healthcare system and analyze this specific sector, isn't it high time that a new maternity and gynecology wing brought with it a modern standard of conduct? Shouldn't patients have a fundamental right to privacy regarding why they walked into a General Hospital in the first place?
Do we live in Afghanistan? Why must women resort to clandestine procedures just to avoid being labeled a "social problem"? And why do doctors dodge these services so relentlessly, only to end up performing abortions or curettages under abysmal conditions with subpar anesthesia?
It leads to one inevitable conclusion: women in American society simply do not enjoy the same right to equal healthcare as any other group of citizens.

This is absolutely true, especially in smaller towns. Privacy should be a right.

And look, patient privacy? That’s a whole different beast. The US can feel like one giant small town sometimes, where everyone knows everyone else's business—it's nearly impossible to keep anything under wraps.

Once we actually function as a modern, organized society—once the national mindset shifts away from all that old-school baggage, the obsession with communist era ghosts, partisans, various wars, veterans' politics, the church, and all those other things constantly dragging the country backward—then maybe, just maybe, we'll get actual privacy. But honestly? I don't expect that for at least another 15 or 20 years.

I really think we need to tackle the massive, systemic issues first. Instead of politicians constantly bickering over trivial nonsense just to dodge the real problems (look at how they're handling the current situation with Josipovic), they should be focusing on fixing the economy and the legal framework. Once those are sorted, then we can finally address the healthcare system.

Look, our US healthcare system actually has a decent amount of cash flowing through it, but the way that money is being thrown around raises a whole host of other massive issues.

You guys keep insisting that you should have just stayed in the hospital for two weeks to get every single test done at once... Sure, that’s one way to handle it, but let’s be real—that doesn't rationalize spending; if anything, it usually drives costs through the roof, regardless of what you think you're achieving.

There is one thing you clearly don't grasp: imagine a Doctor is running a CT scanner that serves both outpatient visits and inpatient needs. If they can manage, say, 10 scans during their shift, and then you decide to get hospitalized so you can run "everything" at once—including that CT—two things happen. Either someone else loses their spot in line and gets pushed down the schedule because of you, or—which happens way more often—the Doctor just squeezes you in as number 11. That kills the quality of care because they have to rush through every single scan to stay on track, or thirdly, the Doctor ends up staying late working unpaid overtime just to finish the job.

Now, if we wanted that CT machine to run afternoon and night shifts specifically for EMERGENCY patients, we would need to hire two more Doctors. We'd have to pay for their training, their salaries, benefits, and everything else that comes with it. Honestly, that is the only actual way to shorten waiting lists if we aren't looking to strip away patient rights (whether those rights are justified or not).
Secondly—and this would be much more efficient and logical—the solution is to actually practice MEDICINE. Which brings us back to protocols and shutting down requests for tests that aren't medically indicated (at least not on the taxpayer's dime; if patients want to spend their own private cash on unnecessary testing, fine, let them).

So, looking at this article, the reporter mentions the daily cost for a hospital bed back on $467. Now, look—I have absolutely no clue what the actual market rate for a bed is, but if we assume the journalist is more or less on the mark, then those two weeks of yours would run you about 14 x 1400 = 19 $200.

Kate Collins67 said:Look, our US healthcare system actually has a decent amount of cash flowing through it, but the way that money is being thrown around raises a whole host of other massive issues.

You guys keep insisting that you should have just stayed in the hospital for two weeks to get every single test done at once... Sure, that’s one way to handle it, but let’s be real—that doesn't rationalize spending; if anything, it usually drives costs through the roof, regardless of what you think you're achieving.

There is one thing you clearly don't grasp: imagine a Doctor is running a CT scanner that serves both outpatient visits and inpatient needs. If they can manage, say, 10 scans during their shift, and then you decide to get hospitalized so you can run "everything" at once—including that CT—two things happen. Either someone else loses their spot in line and gets pushed down the schedule because of you, or—which happens way more often—the Doctor just squeezes you in as number 11. That kills the quality of care because they have to rush through every single scan to stay on track, or thirdly, the Doctor ends up staying late working unpaid overtime just to finish the job.

Now, if we wanted that CT machine to run afternoon and night shifts specifically for EMERGENCY patients, we would need to hire two more Doctors. We'd have to pay for their training, their salaries, benefits, and everything else that comes with it. Honestly, that is the only actual way to shorten waiting lists if we aren't looking to strip away patient rights (whether those rights are justified or not).
Secondly—and this would be much more efficient and logical—the solution is to actually practice MEDICINE. Which brings us back to protocols and shutting down requests for tests that aren't medically indicated (at least not on the taxpayer's dime; if patients want to spend their own private cash on unnecessary testing, fine, let them).

Look, I’m telling you, I should have stayed hospitalized for those two weeks. I don't care who anyone thinks is "more urgent" than me. I have just as much right to a bed as anyone else. And please, spare me the lecture about how certain people—like addicts or alcoholics—are taking up space. We all know damn well there are "available" beds if they want them to be. There are plenty of doctors around, too, unless we're talking about psychiatrists—and yeah, maybe we're trailing behind the rest of the world on that one. If I had stayed those two weeks, I would’ve totally justified the cost. First off, to my employer, then to my primary care doctor and the specialists. Sorry, Mr. Know-it-all, but as someone whose employer (or I personally) pays into Medicare and social security—and let me tell you, it's not a small amount—I have a right to be admitted. They only find time for everyone when it suits their schedule and their whims. I’ll just go get my tests done privately, and then the hospital can try to ignore the results or claim something else entirely. Besides, we all know how the game is played: someone works privately and has a little "arrangement" with a specific hospital, and suddenly they're being fast-tracked to the front of the line. It's an open secret. And don't even get me started on the ER. They definitely bill overtime. They run CT scans during the afternoon and night shifts, so don't even try to convince me otherwise. I was stuck in the internal medicine ER because of blood clots in my legs, and sure enough, late in the evening—after 7 PM—they were running a CT scan. Not for me, obviously, but for some other patient. The media loves to sensationalize everything, but that's a different story. Instead, they'd rather just cut costs on actual people. Half of my tests were paid for out of my own pocket. It feels like it's in everyone's interest to just have fewer people getting help. I bet there are fewer empty beds than the journalists claim; they should spend more time looking at the actual state of the US healthcare system instead of chasing headlines. I'm the one paying for the beds, the water, the electricity, and all the other overhead in this system. Last year alone, I spent well over... $1000 I mean, I don't even know how much more of this we can take. We're talking about private stuff, all kinds of things, and even when it went through the DB—it was being handled within six weeks. Seriously? Couldn't that have been knocked out in two weeks? It would've been way simpler and honestly just better.

Are you absolutely certain about those two weeks? I mean, you can get a handful of tests done at a day surgery center in just a day or two—there’s really no reason to be stuck in a hospital bed for two weeks, even if you're undergoing a series of surgeries, let alone just waiting for results. Now, if you're saying the waiting lists here in the States are absolutely insane, then yeah, you're totally right about that...

Casey Palmer5 said:Are you absolutely certain about those two weeks? I mean, you can get a handful of tests done at a day surgery center in just a day or two—there’s really no reason to be stuck in a hospital bed for two weeks, even if you're undergoing a series of surgeries, let alone just waiting for results. Now, if you're saying the waiting lists here in the States are absolutely insane, then yeah, you're totally right about that...

In my case, things dragged on for a year and a half. It sounds like you haven't had much luck with the US healthcare system either, and honestly, neither have I. I'll shoot you a private message to finish this conversation. And hey, I totally get why you're pissed off.

The doctor told me right away, without even checking me, that I’d be waiting at least two months for a CT scan. He certainly didn't offer any guarantees about my survival if my surgery was delayed by five days.
So, today is the 15th, the surgery is scheduled for 13 days from now, and there is still no guarantee I'll make it through.
He seemed to think it was perfectly normal for a patient to run out and pay privately, because what is $317 compared to a life? They always treat you this way, almost like a form of blackmail. He even expressed his blatant contempt for anyone trying to use their insurance to save a few pennies on their own health.
Thank God everything turned out fine, thanks to his professional and dedicated commitment.

Ultimately, this leads me to believe that poor organization within the healthcare system is to blame, rather than the doctor himself. It was his duty to say what needed to be said and explain what was impossible to achieve at the General Hospital, especially since he actually cared about performing the surgery correctly.

All of this has left me feeling completely indifferent toward life and survival. I was shocked by the total lack of humanity from the gynecologist who, after a five-year delay, simply pointed me toward surgery and sent me on my way.
Even now, despite all the obvious physical progress, I don't feel okay. It’s as if, after this surgery, I am no longer myself, but someone else entirely. I hate myself for it.

ruggedscout91 said:The doctor told me right away, without even checking me, that I’d be waiting at least two months for a CT scan. He certainly didn't offer any guarantees about my survival if my surgery was delayed by five days.
So, today is the 15th, the surgery is scheduled for 13 days from now, and there is still no guarantee I'll make it through.
He seemed to think it was perfectly normal for a patient to run out and pay privately, because what is $317 compared to a life? They always treat you this way, almost like a form of blackmail. He even expressed his blatant contempt for anyone trying to use their insurance to save a few pennies on their own health.
Thank God everything turned out fine, thanks to his professional and dedicated commitment.

Ultimately, this leads me to believe that poor organization within the healthcare system is to blame, rather than the doctor himself. It was his duty to say what needed to be said and explain what was impossible to achieve at the General Hospital, especially since he actually cared about performing the surgery correctly.

All of this has left me feeling completely indifferent toward life and survival. I was shocked by the total lack of humanity from the gynecologist who, after a five-year delay, simply pointed me toward surgery and sent me on my way.
Even now, despite all the obvious physical progress, I don't feel okay. It’s as if, after this surgery, I am no longer myself, but someone else entirely. I hate myself for it.

It depends on what kind of CT we're talking about. For me, I needed a gynecologist exam within a week—you call the General Hospital and they tell you they can see you in a month. Of course, you go private, because it's an emergency.

I can't help but feel like we're slowly losing our grip on being a social welfare state... everyone just wants to pivot toward private companies because they're faster and more efficient, and honestly, that’s just such a classic American principle... what blows my mind is how the US keeps trying to model its healthcare after the American system, which is widely known for being totally unsupportive of the people, and the biggest irony here—we're chasing an example that is actually trying to fix itself, like how America is working to reform its system and build up social medicine while we're basically throwing ours away...

We have some truly brilliant specialists in our medical field... doctors who haven't even graced a TV screen or a radio show once, yet they perform their jobs perfectly well. Of course, this whole mess in healthcare is incredibly demotivating for them, and all patients seem to know how to do is shout about their rights. Sure, there are mediocre people among both patients and doctors, but that’s where the State needs to step in by ensuring decent working conditions for doctors and proper care for patients. People don't even know anymore which insurance they have or what's actually "covered," so a green light has basically been given to private providers. On one hand, it's not all bad since competition can end up being better for the patient in the long run, but looking at the reality of it, it's also pretty bad, and that's the exact reason why patients are fleeing to private clinics in the first place...