17
Oct 2018
Public hospitals aren't 'free': so charge an accommodation fee
Published in General on October 17, 2018
 
                                                            A bill that is trying to be passed that affects emergency departments was almost completely turned down. The Abbott Government would like to charge a $7 copayment for any GP services offered in an emergency department.
Hospitals aren’t free by any means, and the Abbott government made this proposal for people who refuse to meet copayment. This proposal would allow public hospitals to charge for any service given in the emergency department that can be considered GP.
Many hospitals won’t charge GP patients at this point, and this proposal has also gained the interest of NSW Health Minister Jillian Skinner. Skinner has come up with a plan to use GP services done in a public hospital as a rebate from Medicare.
This plan is flawed in many ways, one of the biggest ways being that it will overcrowd with people seeking free GP care through an emergency department. If there is no copayment needed, they will skip their doctor’s office and use the emergency department instead.
There are thoughts that this plan won’t ever reach the status of being voted on because there aren’t enough GPs to equal the demand of them. Unless they start bringing them in from other places which is highly unlikely.
State governments shouldn’t make it seem like hospital services are free, because this is entirely untrue. Many hospitals in large cities charge for parking, which may also be called a sick tax.
The government should be finding a new way of direct cost sharing, not giving the public ideas on how to avoid their copayments. Medicare has been a big changer for federal funding since its funding relies on the public receiving treatment in public hospitals without being charged any money.
If the Abbott government wins the vote, hospitals will be able to charge for outpatient services. They can also take advantage of this time and allow hospitals to charge for inpatient care as well.
This copayment will be so small that it won’t cover any medical treatment that someone receives. Instead, it can be used to cover other amenities, such as food, overnight stays and cleaning. This can help hospitals earn more money through the public without actually charging them for their care.
This copayment or fee is very popular in different European countries. Europeans see it as transferring their normal living expenses that they spend everyday to the hospital. In France, they are charged about $27 a day to stay in the hospital. This amount doesn’t cover any medications or treatments, but it covers the smaller things.
Between 2012 and 2013, around 5.5 million people were admitted to the hospital, and this equaled almost 19 million days of hospital stays. If the hospitals would have charged around $30 a day as an accommodation fee, they would have earned roughly 565 million dollars.
This would have been an easier way for hospitals to make money, rather than charging outrageous parking fees or sick taxes. Each year, about 37 billion dollars are funded to public hospitals all around Australia.
The 565 million dollars that could have been raised would have helped lessen the amount of public funding, allowing that money to be used elsewhere. If this proposal is passed, it can help the public understand that medical care isn’t free at all.
According to the Australia’s hospitals 2016–17 - For patients who spent at least 1 night in hospital, the average length of stay was 5.7 days in public hospitals and 5.2 days in private hospitals.
 
                                                                                     
                                                                                     
                                                                                     
                                                                                     
                                                                                     
                                                                                     
                                                                                     
                                                                                    ![“Surprise Noises Can Feel Like Pain”: New Airport Rule Eases Travel for Autistic Passengers Emma Beardsley once dreaded going through airport security. “I used to panic every time they made me take my headphones off at security,” she recalls. “The noise and the unpredictability can be overwhelming.” Now, thanks to a new policy allowing noise-cancelling headphones to remain on during security checks, Beardsley says she can “travel more confidently and safely.”
In Australia, one in four people lives with a disability, yet the travel system has often failed to accommodate varied needs. Autism-inclusion advocates at Aspect Autism Friendly have welcomed the government’s updated guidelines that let autistic travellers keep their noise-reducing headphones on during screening, calling it a “major step” toward more accessible air travel.
Dr Tom Tutton, head of Aspect Autism Friendly, emphasises the significance of travel in people’s lives: it connects them with family, supports work and learning, and offers new experiences. But he notes the typical airport environment can be especially intense for autistic travellers:
“Airports are busy, noisy, random and quite confusing places … you’ve got renovations, food courts, blenders, coffee grinders, trolleys clattering … and constant security announcements. It’s really, really overwhelming.”
“What might be an irritation for me is something that would absolutely destroy my colleague [who has autism]. Surprise noises of a certain tone or volume can genuinely be experienced as painful.”
Under the new policy — now published on the Australian Government’s Department of Home Affairs website — passengers who rely on noise-cancelling headphones as a disability support may request to wear them through body scanners. The headphones may undergo secondary inspection instead of being forcibly removed.
Dr Tutton describes this adjustment as small in procedure but huge in impact: it removes a key point of sensory distress at a critical moment in the journey. Aspect Autism Friendly is collaborating with airports to ensure that all security staff are informed of the change.
For many autistic travellers, headphones aren’t just optional — they are essential to navigating loud, unpredictable environments. Until now, being required to remove them during security has caused distress or even deterred travel.
Aspect Autism Friendly also works directly with airports, offering staff training, autism-friendly audits, visual stories, sensory maps, and other accommodations. Their prior collaborations include autism-friendly initiatives with Qantas. Dr Tutton notes:
“Airports have become this big focus for us of trying to make that little bit of travel easier and better.”
He advises people planning trips for travellers with disabilities to consult airport websites ahead of time. Some airports already offer quiet rooms or sensory zones — Adelaide, for instance, provides spaces where travellers can step away from the noise and regroup before boarding.
Beyond helping autistic individuals, Dr Tutton believes that more accessible airports benefit everyone. “These supports help lots of other people too,” he says. “When people are more patient, kind and supportive, the benefits flow to everyone. We all prefer environments that are well-structured, sensory-friendly, predictable and easy to navigate.”](https://c3eeedc15c0611d84c18-6d9497f165d09befa49b878e755ba3c4.ssl.cf4.rackcdn.com/photos/blogs/article-1061-1759742013.jpg) 
                                                                                    