Reopening and the Disabled

Risks and rewards of COVID-19 behavior for the disabled.

 
A while back, during more normal times, we looked at travel and the disabled. Now, we look  at reopening and the disabled.  As difficult as it may be for the rest of us, it is far tougher for those with disabilities.

COVID-19 Reopening and the Disabled

For insights on this important topic, we refer to Andrew Pulrang’s article in Forbes:

People with disabilities and chronic illnesses generally tend to side with caution. For various practical reasons, they are at higher risk of getting infected. And if infected, we are far more likely to get much sicker and die from COVID-19.

So most of us probably do tend to favor more precautions and longer restrictions aimed at curbing and stamping out the pandemic. Being part of the probable collateral damage of premature ‘reopening’ makes this all so much more concrete and immediate for disabled people.

On the other hand, disabled people exhibit some affinity for the risk takers. In most situations, disabled people tend to greater willingness to take risks, not less. Otherwise, we would never accomplish anything. We understand quite intimately what it means to weigh the risks and benefits that always come with freedom and opportunity.

Recognizing, rethinking, and adjusting to risk is in many ways the core of the disability rights movement and disability culture. This is especially true for assertive advocate sand disability rights activists. The right to take risks,  often phrased as “the dignity of risk,” is very important to disabled people individually, and to the disability community as a whole.

We cherish this right to take risks all the more because most disabled people at some point in our lives have to contend with some kind of outside authority either informally or formally telling us what we can and cannot do, simply because of our disabilities.

To read more, click the image.

Reopening and the Disabled
Getty

 

Will This Reopening Tool Work?

A CVS Healthcare testing tool

At the end of April, we addressed some of the issues related to getting out of the house. As well as the complexities of reopening. Since then, we have learned that opening up during the COVID-19 crisis is very tough. So, will this reopening tool work? CVS certainly hopes so.

Return Ready from CVS: Will This Reopening Tool Work?

Last week, CVS Health launched Return Ready to facilitate the opening of businesses and colleges, among others. According to CVS Health:

 CVS Health today [June 24, 2020] announced the launch of Return Ready™. It is a comprehensive, customizable COVID-19 testing solution for employers and universities. The solution helps return employees to worksites and students, faculty and staff to campuses How? It integrates COVID-19 testing for ongoing business continuity. With flexible technology options for on-site testing and/or drive-thru testing at CVS Pharmacy locations. Organizations can design a customized testing strategy to meet their unique needs. Return Ready builds on CVS Health’s commitment to helping the country on its path forward. By making COVID-19 testing available to consumers, the business community, universities, and vulnerable populations impacted by the virus.

At the core of the end-to-end solution is a customized COVID-19 testing strategy guided by clinical consultation that allows organizations to choose who, how, where, and when to test employees or students. 

To visit the Return Ready Web site, click the image. It contains a lot of information about the offering and its benefits.

Will This Reopening Tool Work?
 

Price Transparency and Hospitals

New court ruling to benefit consumers.

Earlier this year, we discussed “The Debate Over Transparency.” That topic involves providing more information to the public about all aspects of healthcare operations. One key part of this relates to price transparency and hospitals. Up until now, many factors related to the prices charged have been obscured.

New Court Ruling on Price Transparency and Hospitals

While yet a done deal, a major court decision will promote more price transparency in hospitals. Then, why is this not a done deal? Experts expect appeals of the verdict. For insights, we turn to two Fierce Healthcare articles by Robert King.

The Ruling

First, we look at the ruling:

[Last week], “a federal judge ruled against a lawsuit brought by hospital groups that challenges the Trump administration’s rule to require hospitals post charges they negotiate with payers. The ruling issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dealt a major blow to hospitals — as well as insurers — who claimed the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ rule that goes into effect in January is onerous.”

“Hospital groups sued CMS late last year charging the agency did not have the statutory authority to mandate the rule. It requires hospitals post payer-negotiated charges in order to give consumers more transparency. The judge also shot down hospitals’ arguments about the burden of the rule. The lawsuit said that the rule could require hospitals to publish a long list of charges because a hospital often negotiates a different charge with a different payer for the same service or procedure.”

What Will Hospitals Do Now?

Second, what is next?

“A court ruling upholding a controversial price transparency rule puts hospitals in a tight spot. How to comply with the regulation in the middle of a pandemic. Even though the groups issued plans to appeal, hospitals must weigh whether to start preparing for the rule. It goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2021.”

“’They need to be thinking about the practical implications of their compliance. They must make public information about pricing that has not up until now been public.’ According to Michael Abrams managing partner of the consulting firm Numerof Associates.”

“But hospitals have been hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. With some systems furloughing or laying off people. As well as clinical staff stretched to the limit to deal with cases.”

Click the image to read more.

Price Transparency and Hospitals
A federal judge ruled against hospital groups seeking to get rid of a CMS price transparency rule that requires facilities to post payer-negotiated rates. (Image: Pixabay)