brycejones
Lifer
- Oct 18, 2005
- 25,992
- 23,792
- 136
It is not "just" where I live. Rural areas all over the nation are facing a doctor and hospital shortage. Even hospitals in decent sized towns are having problems.
Here is an example. A town by the name of Orange, Texas recently had its hospital stop providing in patient services.
https://www.beaumontenterprise.com/...osure-leaves-health-care-hole-in-10855556.php
Creating a hospital district vote failed, so now the hospital only provides emergency services. According to wikipedia Orange has a population of 18,595 people. The hospital also served several other communities:
Pinehurst
Little Cypress
Deweyville
Mauriceville
Orangefield
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange,_Texas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinehurst,_Orange_County,_Texas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauriceville,_Texas
Links provided for reference.
In all the hospital may have served 50,000 people? Just a rough estimate.
This is happening all over the nation. It is not "just" rural areas that are having problems.
So under your logic, all 50,000 people of that area should relocate closer to a hospital?
No they don’t have to move. They can elect to pay for a hospital. Why didn’t they do that? Don’t those people care about having a hospital? We can only assume from their vote that a few more bucks a month in their pocket is worth more to them than having to drive hours if they need care that can’t be handled solely in an ER. I would also guess that since care is so limited that there are going to be long term ongoing costs for things like additional medical evacuations via helicopter to get to patients to medical centers that can provide needed care.