Sarah Palin warned of government “death panels” on her Facebook page and was nationally ridiculed. Politifact.com awarded Palin with the “Lie of the Year” for that statement. President Obama called her out during a joint session of Congress saying the claim is “a lie, plain and simple.”
I thought of Sarah Palin when I heard the story of Helen Wagner. Helen is 91 years old and is the mother of my sister-in-law Peggy. Give Helen five minutes and she will list a dozen times she has held death at bay. But now she is up against a much greater force: Medicare.
Helen lives with Peggy and my brother Bob. In August, she fell and broke her arm. In the emergency room at Lansdale Hospital, a doctor examined her and determined that the fall was probably caused by a minor stroke, possibly two. He was also concerned about a spot he saw on her lung on an X-ray. The doctor ordered more tests and said Helen would be “admitted.”
Only she wasn’t. Instead she entered a Twilight Zone of new Medicare regulations. Two days later the hospital called and said Helen would have to be picked up. When my sister-in-law asked about the tests, she was told they had not been done. In fact, Helen was never admitted to the hospital. She was just being “held for observation.”
A flurry of dialogue among the hospital, my brother and sister-in-law and doctors lasted four days and ended with a threat that Helen would have to be picked up or she would be transported to a nursing home with an available bed and the family would be billed.
My sister-in-law rushed to the hospital where, she says, her mother was weak and barely conscious. Peggy navigated her Mom’s broken arm and bruised leg as she dressed her and wheeled her out of the hospital. There were no discharge papers. (Lansdale Hospital would not comment on this specific case because of privacy laws.)
Helen and her family are just one of the latest victims of new Medicare regulations, and an even more recent crackdown on those regulations that cause agita for hospitals and heartbreak for families who care for the elderly.
The cost-saving rule is just a few years old and requires hospitals to hold some patients “for observation” instead of admitting them. The difference in terminology means that the hospital is reimbursed far less money than they would have if the patient had been “admitted.” When I asked a spokesperson from the hospital to tell me the difference in care between admission and observation, I was told, “There is none. It is just billing.” And yet, one would have to believe, that hospitals are reluctant to conduct tests that will be under-compensated or not covered at all.
Observation can last up to five days, according to the new rules. That may explain the hurried need to get Helen out of the hospital on day four. If a hospital doesn’t adhere to the Medicare regulations, it will face an audit that could mean a huge loss of federal reimbursement dollars.
The burden on families is even greater. If a patient is not admitted, rehab at the nursing home is not covered by Medicare. Even if you have private insurance, many companies base their criteria on Medicare. If Medicare is not covering, the insurance company isn’t either.
My brother and sister-in-law recently had a meeting with administrators at Lansdale Hospital, including the COO, who called the new Medicare rules “the bane of our existence.” Thousands of families have complained since “observation” started over five years ago.
According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “observation” status claims climbed 26.7 percent from 2006 to 2009—from 828,353 to 1.131 million. The increase in claims for “observation” patients kept for more than 48 hours is startling. It tripled from 26,176 to 83,183.
Observations are supposed to be limited to 24 or 48 hours, with five days being the absolute maximum. CMS believes this shows hospitals believe many patients are too sick to go home and feel pressured into not admitting them under Medicare rules.
So what is the criteria for who gets to be admitted and who gets “observation”? Those who don’t get admitted don’t meet the “evidence-based criteria.” A minor stroke, for instance, can be seen as part of the normal aging process. Helen Wagner, like many people who make it to 91, has a pacemaker and can’t undergo an MRI, the test that would provide evidence of a stroke and its severity.
Helen is now at St. Mary’s nursing home. St. Mary’s is also feeling the Medicare pinch and support Bob and Peggy’s efforts to get the “observation” status changed to admission. The matter is going to an appellate board.
When I heard Helen’s story about a new crackdown on government rules that can impact a patient’s care because of their age. I couldn’t help but think that maybe Sarah Palin was right.
Larry Mendte writes for The Philly Post every Thursday. See his previous columns here. To watch his video commentaries, go to wpix.com. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter @LarryMendte.





















October 20th, 2011 at 11:45 am
October 20th, 2011 at 12:01 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 1:27 pm
Look at those recent recos for limiting breast cancer, prostate and not cervical cancer screenings…where does everyone think they are coming from??? Easy answer, the govenment. And thy are going to use those new recos and MUCH MUCH more to limit health care for everyone.
I encourage everyone to learn as much as they can about what went into that Obama Care bill and begin calling your congressmen to fight all of it!! STAT!
October 20th, 2011 at 1:32 pm
But this article clearly says it’s a Medicare issue, and that the “observation” policy started FIVE YEARS AGO. This is exactly what I meant by how the provocative headline would mislead readers, especially those already predisposed to have certain opinions.
October 20th, 2011 at 1:39 pm
The Liberals / media got away with making this untrue cliam by virture of NAME, there is no such thing “called a Death Panel” For those who knew better, they were intentionally trying to deceive.
Gov Palin pointed out many examples. Remember, even Obama himself said, if you’re older, we can give you drugs instead of having an expensive precedure. Except, the procedure FIXES the problem and is actually CHEAPER than keeping folks on drugs that have so many side effects and expense and problems themself.
Who makes a mint off of a human feed like keeping someone on Cumadin and associated drugs, where they haVe more problems and get to go to Doctors office and hospital to fix from these drugs, vs getting your heart shocked, one time, boom bang, all better! OH NO.
I never realized how unaware or cruel our population was.
October 20th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
To those who fear bureaucrats making health care decisions, why are you not worried about health insurance companies making said decisions? For-profit insurance companies have a primary responsibility to their bottom line–to their shareholders, not to you and your doctor.
October 20th, 2011 at 1:53 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 2:07 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 2:11 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 2:30 pm
What we need is universal coverage via Medicare for everyone and with an emphasis on preventive care and funded by high enough Medicare taxes to pay for it. Overall this would be the most cost effective solution in terms of the percentage of GDP consumed to insure a healthy citizenry.
October 20th, 2011 at 2:46 pm
i actually got to the paragraph that gives statistics from 2006-09, the only ones stated in the article, perhaps the last available. so all this happened under “obamacare” haters beloved dubya, but not a single person commenting who embraces the death panel meme seems able to read that far in the article.
and if you think medicare death panels are bad, pay some attention to private insurers.
October 20th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
It is very easy for hospitals to blame medicare/government/insurance. Your family member is old and should be treated with dignity which also includes getting the correct level of care and not ordering tons of tests on someone who is 91. you do not even note why she is not at their home…so many details left out and we all know the devil is in the details. I think this one was a shock value story and I for one am very disappointed.
October 20th, 2011 at 3:38 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 4:15 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 4:27 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 4:32 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 4:39 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 4:53 pm
I said that I thought of Sarah Palin and her claim when I heard about Helen’s story. I never mentioned Obamacare – not once. I do want to follow up on the new crackdown on the Medicare rule to see if that is related. Private firms are reportedly being hired with consultants who get bonuses when someone is “observed” over being admitted. I wasn’t ready with that part of the story but will write about it.
But the point is still on target – if the Government is over-ruling a physician to save money because a patient is too old – then “Death Panel” seems appropriate, as the Government is making the call.
The “new crackdown” may have nothing to do with Obamacare but the timing of that is more suspect. Again, that needs more digging and I will do it.
Finally, to think that Medicare has nothing to do with Health reform is naive.
This is a story about human beings and their health care. It is a story about families who suffer. The Sarah Palin reference got your attention – good. Now see beyond the politics of both sides that there is a real problem.
October 20th, 2011 at 5:08 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 5:17 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
http://www.kplr11.com/entertainment/kplr-mendte-palin-death-panels-101911,0,2115743.story
October 20th, 2011 at 5:47 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 6:28 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 7:13 pm
The government should not be involved in life and death decisions.
October 20th, 2011 at 7:15 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 7:56 pm
The ‘observation’ rule started 5 years ago, during the Bush administration. It has nothing to do with Obama OR Palin’s comments.
You state that she was held for four days, so clearly they did observe her for further symptoms for four days. Given that they couldn’t do an MRI, what else were they supposed to do to determine if she had a minor stroke?
If you want to grind an axe, go for it. But your article is clearly reaching (hence all the negative feedback). If you want to pin blame on anyone, pin it on the hospitals. They didn’t admit her because they had no proof that she needed to be admitted. So, in order to get 4 days of pay out of her Medicare, they put her into an “observation” status. I’m sure by the second day it was clear that she was not suffering continued stroke symptoms (had they had any symptoms, they would have converted her to ‘admitted’ status for the extra payments.)
Hospitals suck and everyone deteriorates in those conditions, that your grandmother also had a traumatic injury (broken arm), added to her deterioriation. I suggest if you want to do something for her, then spend time making sure that she is getting good nutrition, adequate rest (so her body can handle recovery from the trauma) and positive stimulation (depression can set in quickly after trauma). She needs caring people, not the cold sterile environment of an understaffed hospital.
I hope she heals quickly and goes on to have many more years.
October 20th, 2011 at 8:02 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 8:04 pm
I can tell you that I have been HELD in hospitals for longer than needed because my insurance would pay the extra day.
This woman’s experience was a direct result of what her insurance would pay for and nothing more. Had they been able to point to even a single solid symptom of stroke, she would have been converted to ‘admitted’ immediately.
I have also seen hospitals bounce patients. Essentially, they discharge a patient that they know will crash so that the patient can come back in through the ER and start the billing cycle all over again.
This is NOTHING NEW and has been the standard operating procedure for over a decade. It has nothing to do with Obama or Palin.
October 20th, 2011 at 8:06 pm
Where was/is your outrage at this?
October 20th, 2011 at 10:40 pm
October 20th, 2011 at 10:47 pm
You’re STILL doing it. You’re still characterizing the Medicare rule as “new” in the same breath you acknowledge it predates Obamacare!
And on reading this article a second time, I’m rather fuzzy about how Helen (and I wish her the best, by the way) was subjected to a “death panel.” Number one, she’s alive, due to the fact she was under hospital care for almost five days and is now in a rehab facility, both of which I assume are being paid for by Medicare. If there was a test she should have been given and was not, yes, that needs to be addressed. But I seriously doubt that without Medicare, neither she nor her family would be able to afford a fraction of the costs that these two stays have incurred.
Again, your headline choice is unfortunate and rather cheapens what could have been a thoughtful exploration of a Medicare policy that might need changing, or for that matter, if the hospital is making some bad judgement calls just to make a little more money.
October 20th, 2011 at 11:01 pm
October 21st, 2011 at 4:43 am
October 21st, 2011 at 11:43 am
October 21st, 2011 at 6:50 pm
There, I said it.
Now, maybe in this case, things weren’t done as properly as they should have, but such things happen.
My grandfather, in his mid-80s, suffered a stroke and would up in the ICU for three months. He essentially wanted to die, but no one would let him, not my family, not the hospital. Finally, he got himself well enough to leave the hospital, and go to a Manor Care facility, where he promptly died the next morning. Cost to the taxpayers, $450,000. To keep alive a man who would have virtually no quality of life and wanted out of his misery.
A decade later, in her late-80′s, my grandmother had taken ill, was diagnosed with dementia, and was living in an assisted living facility. While there, she fell and broke her hip. Surgery was an option, but after going through what we went through with my grandfather, we came to the conclusion that putting her through such a surgery would be too much. We had a nice night with her, and she passed away peacefully in her sleep, rather than undergoing an expensive and painful procedure during which she almost certainly would have died, anyway.
We need to start making smart choices over how our health care dollars are doled out. We spend so much money to keep the drooling husks of what used to be our parents and our grandparents “alive” that it is destroying our economy, our future, and our government.
I’m not proposing a Logan’s Run type of solution here, but doesn’t someone have to decide how much treatment is too much? Are you familiar with “Provenge”? It’s a Medicare approved vaccine for advance stage prostate cancer patients that extends their lives by about four months. Median age of those taking it is mid-70s. Cost to the taxpayer? $93,000 per person. Where is all of this money coming from?
October 21st, 2011 at 8:15 pm
October 21st, 2011 at 8:39 pm
October 24th, 2011 at 11:04 am
Th Point of the mandate is to insure that my costs don’t reflect those who end up at the emergency room without insurance and insure that the costs are spread over a larger pool (everyone). Of course everyone wants something for nothing. Some people would like to get rid of the EPA regulations. Well if you don’t live downstream from a polluter, there answer is why do this. Everytime someone is not insureed shows up at emergency room that increases my costs. They are freeloaders. When a polluter endagers someone elses health, they don’t appreciate the costs either. I love people who expect something for nothing and that we are in this together one way or another.
You never did point out the central point which is what in the Health Care Law Prevented Larry Mente’s sister’s mother in law not get the care they believed they were entitled. I think we both know because the healthcare law has nothing to do with it.
I enjoy your rants with all the Tea Party talking points, especially when you talk about how everyone comes to this country for care. Well there are 50 million who are already here and have virtually no access to affordable care. Hopefully they will stay well. If you are wealthy and connected you still need to find the best doctors. Unfortunately that is only a small percentage of the public with a leg up.
October 26th, 2011 at 4:32 pm
October 26th, 2011 at 4:39 pm