Should we begin charging Covid-19 patients who are unvaccinated by choice?

Kojensa
Kojensa: As from 8th December 2021, the Singapore government said it will “begin charging Covid-19 patients who are unvaccinated by choice”.

Should Australia (and other countries with public health system) follow suit?

The prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong, previously said the global business hub could not remain closed indefinitely, and Singapore has moved from a zero-tolerance strategy with lockdowns and closed borders to living with Covid-19 (hence the Covid vaccination).

The government said unvaccinated Covid-19 patients make up a sizeable majority of those who need intensive inpatient care, and “disproportionately” strain its health care resources.

According to a Singapore health ministry estimate, Covid-19 patients who need both care in ICUs and therapeutics in hospitals may have to pay about US$18,460.

The government has so far shielded residents and citizens from such medical costs throughout the pandemic by fully covering them.
(Edited by Kojensa)
2 months ago Report
2
WHlSKY
WHlSKY:
Singapore’s healthcare structure appears to be different from Australia’s.

—Issue 1: Differences in healthcare systems.

Australia’s public healthcare is financed through taxes. It is considered ‘free’. Compared to Singapore’s healthcare which appears to be a mix, but less dependent on support through taxation (spending very low of its GDP on healthcare).The vast majority is to be paid by the employer & individual via government organised healthcare saving plans or upgraded plans from competing companies.

Singapore is not ‘free’, but adequately subsidised.

How will Australia be able to justify rejecting healthcare to anti-Covid-vaxxers who pay taxes?

—Issue 2: Singapore has a reasonable position based on measures they outlined.

Based on what was released by the Ministry of Health in Singapore, it is only removing the provision placed by the Government for the special Covid-19 situation. The Government was paying full for Covid-19 medical bills as an emergency measure. The unvaccinated are still able to benefit under the usual original government subsidies and medical plans.

See this in full in the link below (points 15 - 18) [1]

Singapore is not introducing new payments but merely removing, how will Australia remove what they did not put in place? They will have to introduce new payments which will be difficult.

————

My thoughts: What Australia or countries with free public healthcare can do is perhaps have a separations. One section for Covid patients (sectioned into vaccinated and unvaccinated) and another non-Covid patients. If the Covid section is over flowing then these patients will have to seek private care. Leaving the non-Covid section free to operate without being overwhelmed.

At the moment, I can not see how it will facilitate making persons who choose to be unvaccinated to ‘foot a bill’.

It is a tricky situation but it appears impossible for Australia to make the move as Singapore since they have their own system set. I actually like the overall Singapore approach tbh.




[1] https://www.moh.gov.sg/news-highlights/details/calibrated-adjustments-in-stabilisation-phase_8Nov2021



(Edited by WHlSKY)
2 months ago Report
2
Kojensa
Kojensa: Yes Singapore Public Health System is subsidise by their government and not as "free" compared to Australia.

However the Singapore government did cover Covid related treatments (only hence aka free?) for all it citizens and permanent residents

The government took on full costs for coverage to "avoid financial considerations adding to public uncertainty and concern when COVID-19 was an emergent and unfamiliar disease," the Ministry of Health said in a statement.

Now, unvaccinated people "disproportionately contribute to the strain on our healthcare resources."

Though the government will still fully cover medical bills for patients who are ineligible for the vaccine, it will begin charging the "unvaccinated by choice" on Dec. 8.

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/news.yahoo.com/amphtml/singapore-halts-free-covid-treatment-232333053.html
(Edited by Kojensa)
2 months ago Report
2
WHlSKY
WHlSKY:
Yes, you are correct, by covering the cost it became ‘free’.

By removing that covered cost placed due to Covid, Singaporeans will still have the regular medical care (which is a mix of subsidies by the government & savings). They will have something to fall back on.

They are not completely left without coverage but only had that temporary aid removed and left for the vaccinated. So it becomes more like the Government is giving financial medical aid to the vaccinated. Later on they may even remove that too.

If Australia does that, there will not be any subsidies or things in place for those who are unvaccinated. It will be as a new position. As taxpayers wouldn’t they have a right to the public free healthcare? As this is based not on a special provision but based on human rights set by Australia?

Just appears that there will be some blowback in Australia vs the ease of how it is handled in Singapore.
(Edited by WHlSKY)
2 months ago Report
2
WHlSKY
WHlSKY:
I like the question though, as it brings up a flaw in ‘free healthcare’ that can be addressed and moved to improve.

Patients who are careless with their health for trivial reasons, not just the unvaccinated, but I’m thinking too the overly obese and others with lifestyle diseases.

I’m wondering if persons had to pay for themselves directly for preventable health situations, if they will get serious.

It is a lot on these types of healthcare systems. Takes away also from others who need it more.
2 months ago Report
2
Kojensa
Kojensa: I am thinking about your question. I am rephrasing it : Should a person pay for their own healthcare if it is the result of their own unhealthy lifestyle?

My short answer is yes but the government has to return the percentage of their tax that goes to the healthcare.

Is there a way to accurately measure what percentage of each type of illness is the results of the unhealthy lifestyle?

For example breast cancer, what cause it?
Genetic, environmental, stress, overweight and unknown factors are combination causes of breast cancer.

And each person with breast cancer is different in their combination causes.

I had personally known a overweight person with breast cancer and I personally also known of a very fit lean person with breast cancer.

It is impossible to calculate what percentage of the illness is cause by their unhealthy lifestyle currently.(Forgot to add this)
(Edited by Kojensa)
2 months ago Report
2
Kojensa
Kojensa: Not a topic but sharing what I just found out.

Breast cancer and weight: What's the link?
An emerging research shows that women with excess body fat have an increased risk of breast cancer, even if their BMI is normal. That mean they are not overweight!

https://www.mdanderson.org/publications/focused-on-health/breast-cancer-and-weight-whats-the-link.h19-1592991.html
(Edited by Kojensa)
2 months ago Report
2
WHlSKY
WHlSKY:
It’s a tricky position and hard to split through to me. Looks like the whole system will first need to be restructured to facilitate that change.
I do like the Singaporean model as a sort of saving plan with persons inputting more depending on their age. Maybe something similar.

2 months ago Report
2
Littleboo99
Littleboo99: I vote the government should stop footing the bill and leave it up to the individual insurance companies if they'll cover it or not.
1 month ago Report
2
Kojensa
Kojensa: For unvaccinated Covid patients by choice yes as the topic question but grey area for most other illness
1 month ago Report
2