Health Industry Archives - ��ϳԹ�� News

The Peculiar Politics of Hospitals

Thu, 30 Apr 2026 19:15:00 +0000

The Host

Julie Rovner ��ϳԹ�� News Read Julie's stories. Julie Rovner is chief Washington correspondent and host of ��ϳԹ�� News’ weekly health policy news podcast, "What the Health?" A noted expert on health policy issues, Julie is the author of the critically praised reference book "Health Care Politics and Policy A to Z," now in its third edition.

Republicans and Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee had strong words for hospital CEOs about their prices at a hearing this week. But it remains unclear whether they will follow up their words with actions to force prices down.

Meanwhile, in a rare bit of positive health policy news, a study of the first two years of the new 988 suicide prevention hotline shows it reduced suicides among young people, and more so in states that fielded more calls.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of ��ϳԹ�� News, Joanne Kenen of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Politico Magazine, Shefali Luthra of The 19th, and Rachel Roubein of The Washington Post.

Panelists

Joanne Kenen Johns Hopkins University and Politico

Shefali Luthra The 19th

Rachel Roubein The Washington Post

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

Hospitals have long been the most sacrosanct of healthcare stakeholders to politicians, partly because every member of Congress has at least one in their district. Hospitals are often major employers and have a powerful lobbying presence. So it was notable that members of Congress from both parties were willing to criticize hospital CEOs strongly at a hearing to examine hospital prices.
The Supreme Court heard arguments this week about labeling for the controversial pesticide glyphosate, which may or may not cause or contribute to cancers. The issue divides the Make America Healthy Again movement, which sees the Trump administration’s support of the Environmental Protection Agency’s conclusion that the product is not carcinogenic as a political betrayal.
A study demonstrating the effectiveness of the national 988 suicide prevention hotline in reducing youth suicide is a bit of good news stemming from a rare bipartisan effort to address a serious problem.
Another pair of studies this week suggest that the Trump administration’s delay of the recommended birth dose of the vaccine to prevent hepatitis B could increase the number of cases of the disease and cost millions more in health spending to treat its complications.

Plus for “extra credit” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week they think you should read, too:

Julie Rovner: The New York Times’ “,” by Christina Jewett and Benjamin Mueller.

Joanne Kenen: ProPublica’s “,” by Anna Clark.

Rachel Roubein: ��ϳԹ�� News’ “Big Companies Position Themselves for Payday from $50B Federal Rural Health Fund,” by Sarah Jane Tribble.

Shefali Luthra: The Atlantic and ��ϳԹ�� News’ “,” by Elisabeth Rosenthal.

Also mentioned in this week’s podcast:

KFF’s “,” by Audrey Kearney, Mardet Mulugeta, Alex Montero, Isabelle Valdes, Lunna Lopes, and Ashley Kirzinger.
KFF’s “,” by Drew Altman.
JAMA’s “,” by Vishal R. Patel; Michael Liu; and Anupam B. Jena.
JAMA Pediatrics’ “,” by Eric W. Hall; Prabhu Gounder, Heather Bradley, and Noele P. Nelson.
JAMA Pediatrics’ “,” by Margaret L. Lind, Matt D.T. Hitchings, Roshni P. Singh, Benjamin P. Linas, Derek A.T. Cummings, and Rachel L. Epstein.

Credits

Francis Ying Audio producer

Stephanie Stapleton Editor

Click here to find all our podcasts.

And subscribe to “What the Health? From ��ϳԹ�� News” on , , , , , or wherever you listen to podcasts.

��ϳԹ�� News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article/podcast/what-the-health-444-hospital-pricing-congress-988-suicide-april-30-2026/">article; first appeared on KFF" rel="nofollow">">KFF Health News and is republished here under a

/?republication-pixel=true&post=2232481&ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

States Rush To Figure Out How To Enforce Trump’s Medicaid Work Requirements

Rachel Spears — Thu, 30 Apr 2026 09:00:00 +0000

State officials remain uncertain on how to enforce a requirement that many adult Medicaid enrollees show they’re working — even as one state launches its program this week — and they’re taking a variety of approaches to the job, including, in a handful of states, using artificial intelligence.

A from 42 states and the District of Columbia offers insights into key policy decisions state officials face as the Jan. 1, 2027, deadline for implementing the work requirement nears. Lingering questions include which diseases and illnesses will qualify Medicaid beneficiaries for exemptions and how to automate compliance verification.

Federal guidance is not expected to be released until June. But some states are moving forward with their own definitions of “medical frailty,” which under congressional Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act will allow Medicaid enrollees to escape the requirement.

The law, President Donald Trump’s signature domestic achievement, revamps Medicaid in more than 40 states that, along with Washington, D.C., fully or partially expanded the program for low-income people to cover adults without children who don’t get insurance through a job. While most adult Medicaid beneficiaries already work or are disabled, caregivers for other people, or in school, many Republicans contend that people enrolled in the program who don’t work sap resources that ought to support low-income children, pregnant women, and disabled people.

gained Medicaid coverage from the expansion, created by the Affordable Care Act — a law that most Republicans still oppose.

The new work rules require that a person be a student at least part-time or work or participate in other qualifying activities, such as community service, for at least 80 hours each month. The requirement could potentially reshape who is eligible for Medicaid and applies to people who are already enrolled.

The Congressional Budget Office will reduce federal Medicaid spending by about $326 billion over 10 years. The agency also estimates that 4.8 million more people will be uninsured in 2034 because of the work requirement.

“A lot of states are working on a super-condensed timeline,” said Amaya Diana, a policy analyst at KFF who worked on the survey. They are “still making these big decisions with less than a year before implementation.”

KFF is a health information nonprofit that includes ��ϳԹ�� News.

The law permits short exemptions from work requirements for enrollees experiencing certain hardships — natural disasters, residing in a county with a high unemployment rate, admission to a hospital or nursing home, or having to travel for an extended period to obtain medical care.

While 28 states and Washington, D.C., will offer hardship exemptions, three of those states won’t adopt all four exemptions allowed by the law and two — Iowa and Indiana — don’t plan to adopt any.

People can also be exempted from the work requirements if they are “medically frail.” But the federal government has not told states how to define that term or how to determine whether an enrollee falls into the category.

The survey showed that 21 states, as of March, had not defined medical frailty. Nebraska, which is implementing its work requirement May 1, recently issued a list of thousands of health conditions that could qualify enrollees as “frail” and exempt them from working.

Some states plan to allow patients to self-attest to medical frailty, while others will require confirmation by a medical professional. The most common way of verifying medical frailty, which will be used in just over 30 states, is by examining Medicaid claims data.

Mehmet Oz, administrator for the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, told ��ϳԹ�� News in an interview this week that “we don’t like self-attesting” and that “documentation is critical.”

Many beneficiaries and their advocates have expressed concerns about losing coverage for administrative reasons. When Arkansas briefly implemented Medicaid work rules, for instance, most lost coverage not because they did not meet the requirements but for failing to correctly submit paperwork in time.

Six states plan to use AI to assist with the work requirement implementation in some way, such as for document processing or comparing beneficiary data from different sources, KFF found. Two states, Maryland and New Mexico, plan to use AI to analyze claims data.

Three states — Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma — plan to use AI to interact directly with people on Medicaid and assist them with identifying and uploading verification documents and data.

Adults on Medicaid will have to reverify that they’re working, or that they’re exempt from the requirement, at least every six months. Some states plan to check quarterly.

When possible, states must use available data sources to verify exemptions or compliance with work requirements.

For example, data from the National Student Clearinghouse will be used by about 10 states to verify school attendance. Some states also plan to tap sources including the Department of Veterans Affairs, AmeriCorps, and service commissions.

But more than half of states told KFF’s researchers that they have insufficient time to add new data sources and cited ongoing costs as a challenge.

This article/medicaid/medicaid-work-requirements-kff-survey-state-implementation-strategies/">article; first appeared on KFF" rel="nofollow">">KFF Health News and is republished here under a

/?republication-pixel=true&post=2232959&ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

An Urgent Care Treated Her Allergic Reaction. An ER Monitored Her — For $6,700.

Andrew Jones — Tue, 28 Apr 2026 09:00:00 +0000

Silvana Toska was playing in a grass field with her daughters late last fall when she felt a sting on her ankle. The family had come to listen for barred and great horned owls as the sun set on a large park near their Davidson, North Carolina, home.

It was “just like a mosquito bite, nothing major, and I just scratched it,” said Toska, a political science professor.

Then she began to itch everywhere. She couldn’t see anything in the dark, so her husband shined his phone light on her.

She was covered in hives.

Because she also felt pressure in her chest, the family quickly went to an urgent care clinic. A doctor there recognized she was experiencing , a life-threatening, fast-moving allergic reaction.

The doctor rushed her to a room without checking her in, saw her blood pressure was low, and administered two epinephrine injections and IV fluids, Toska said. The itching stopped, and the tightness in her chest went away.

But the doctor said she needed to be monitored in an emergency room for at least two hours in case the reaction flared up again. Toska said the doctor insisted she take an ambulance to a nearby hospital, Atrium Health Lake Norman.

Minutes later, she found herself lying on a stretcher in the ER.

A doctor she described as “lovely” came in and spoke to her for no more than five minutes, Toska said. A nurse administered medicine through the IV line inserted at the urgent care clinic.

Toska was exhausted, but her mind was on her daughters. “I had two little kids who were scared, so I was playing with them and trying to distract them.”

After about an hour and a half, the doctor returned briefly, then the family went home, she said.

“That’s it,” Toska said. “Nothing happened at the ER.”

Then the bill came.

Last fall, Toska felt a sting on her ankle while playing in a field with her children. It seemed like “nothing major,” she says. But then Toska began to itch everywhere and discovered she was covered in hives. She also felt pressure in her chest. (A.M. Stewart for ��ϳԹ�� News)

The Medical Service

Toska said the ER doctor reviewed her vitals and discussed her allergic reaction and what to watch for when she got home. She also received a dose of famotidine, a drug often used to treat an upset stomach that is also administered for allergic reactions.

The Bill

The in-network hospital system charged Toska’s insurer, Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina, $6,746.50 for the ER visit, including $20.60 for the famotidine and $6,445.60 in “critical care” charges. Toska, who had not met her insurance deductible, was responsible for a $150 copay and $3,100.24 of the charges.

The Billing Problem: Critical Care

“Paying $3,100.24 for literally sitting in the ER entertaining my kids for an hour and a half feels kind of incredible,” Toska said.

Medical providers in the United States use a uniform coding system to bill for procedures and services. Most of Toska’s ER charges stemmed from Atrium Health’s use of two billing codes for “critical care” — one for 30 to 74 minutes of care, at $5,617.85 (code 99291), and another for an additional 30 minutes (code 99292), at $827.75.

According to the coding system, critical care is when a doctor “directly” provides at least 30 minutes of care to a patient with “a probability of imminent or life-threatening deterioration.”

According to the ER’s visit notes, which Toska shared with ��ϳԹ�� News, Toska told the doctor there she was feeling “significantly better” when she arrived, and the doctor reported providing 90 minutes of personal critical care.

Anaphylactic shock is treated under code 99291, according to the . Though Toska’s symptoms may have indicated she was no longer in shock, treatment guidelines require at least two hours of monitoring, said Arjun Venkatesh, the chair of emergency medicine at the Yale School of Medicine.

With anaphylaxis, “some people are going to progress and require admission to the ICU, and some won’t,” Venkatesh said.

Toska was under critical care because of what could have happened, not what did happen, Venkatesh said. Hospitals use the same billing codes for the ER visit, whether a patient’s condition deteriorates or not.

“The billing rules are not built around this,” Venkatesh said.

Laura Eberhard, a spokesperson for Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina, said Toska’s claims “were submitted by the provider using critical care codes, which represent a higher level of severity and reimbursement, and were processed in-network under the terms of the member’s plan.” She did not answer questions about whether Blue Cross Blue Shield negotiated the charges.

A spokesperson for Atrium Health did not answer questions from ��ϳԹ�� News about Toska’s visit.

The hospital coded Toska’s ER visit as “critical care” and charged her insurer more than $6,700. She had to pay more than $3,000. (A.M. Stewart for ��ϳԹ�� News)

The Resolution

Toska said she called Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina, trying to get a better explanation for why the bill for so little hands-on care was so high.

“The doctor determines the severity of the situation, and that’s the code we have,” the insurance representative said, according to Toska’s recollection. “This is critical care, and that’s what it costs.”

After Toska contacted the hospital, Atrium Health’s Audit and Appeals Department replied in a letter that the critical care designation was “based on the presenting problem that brought you to the emergency room, the treatment provided, and the nursing staff that took care of you.”

“It also includes the room, supplies, and equipment utilized during the visit,” the letter continued. “The charge is not based on time spent in the facility or with clinicians.”

Asking why the ER visit cost so much was more a matter of principle than necessity, she said, though she thought back a few years to a time when it would have been much harder for her to pay.

“The system is so broken,” Toska said.

The Takeaway

“Her experience is, sadly, very typical,” said Barak Richman, a professor of business law and co-director of the Health Law and Policy program at George Washington University. “Once you are brought onto the train of health care delivery, you have no control over where the stops are.”

Emergency rooms — for many the for medical care — are notorious for high costs, he said, adding that insurance companies should always try to negotiate critical care codes.

Toska was fortunate to dodge another problem common in emergencies: The bill for taking an ambulance to the ER was about $275, she said, notable since ambulance rides frequently result in bigger bills that may not be covered by insurance.

Patients can dispute charges with their insurance and the hospital. Like Toska, they should come to the phone with an itemized bill, medical records, and any other relevant documents, such as explanation-of-benefits statements.

Regardless of whether that’s a fight they can win, some who see one ER bill , especially if it might put them in .

In early March, Toska had a second allergic reaction. “OK,” she recalled thinking, “Do I go get the EpiPen? Do I go to the ER and get another massive bill?”

She decided against the trip and took Benadryl instead.

Bill of the Month is a crowdsourced investigation by ��ϳԹ�� News and that dissects and explains medical bills. Since 2018, this series has helped many patients and readers get their medical bills reduced, and it has been cited in statehouses, at the U.S. Capitol, and at the White House. Do you have a confusing or outrageous medical bill you want to share? Tell us about it!

This article/health-industry/er-monitoring-anaphylactic-shock-allergic-reaction-bill-of-the-month-april-2026/">article; first appeared on KFF" rel="nofollow">">KFF Health News and is republished here under a

/?republication-pixel=true&post=2183825&ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

Big Companies Position Themselves for Payday From $50B Federal Rural Health Fund

Sarah Jane Tribble — Tue, 28 Apr 2026 09:00:00 +0000

Tory Starr is worried about the people who get medical care at Open Door Community Health Centers along California’s North Coast.

“They’re the folks that work at restaurants. They’re the teacher’s aides,” said Starr, a registered nurse who became Open Door’s chief executive more than six years ago. Those patients, he said, are “really the heart and soul of rural America.”

He said if his remote health centers don’t get a share of the billions of dollars Congress earmarked to transform health care in rural America, patients may soon lose services. About 50% of Open Door’s 60,000 patients are on Medicaid, the joint state and federal insurance program that, together with the related Children’s Health Insurance Program, covers with low incomes or disabilities.

When Congress approved the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last summer, it cut nearly $1 trillion from Medicaid over the next decade. Now, Starr hopes the $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Program, which was part of the same bill, will help keep his patients covered.

Yet, small community health care providers, such as Open Door, may find they are sharing the billions with an army of corporate giants before it reaches their patients.

Months after federal leaders announced that all 50 states won first-year awards, ranging from $147 million for New Jersey to $281 million for Texas, state plans reveal that a heavy dose of prescribed spending will go to companies that can increase the use of electronic health records, strengthen cybersecurity, and improve state and health system technology platforms.

And at least four large-scale coalitions of companies are now pitching multipronged services to the states. Many of the companies already work with regional health systems and states through Medicaid contracting or mobile and telehealth operations.

How those services will help improve the health care of rural Americans at places such as Open Door remains an open question.

States Stare Down Reporting Deadlines

Federal regulators were “really interested in seeing digital health investments” when they crafted the five-year rural health program rules last year, said Maya Sandalow, an associate director at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a think tank based in Washington, D.C. She co-authored a recent report on how the 50 states plan to invest in technology, including modernizing health care infrastructure and expanding virtual care options such as telehealth and remote patient monitoring.

“The rural health fund isn’t really designed to directly replace or offset the lost Medicaid funding,” Sandalow said, noting that the federal staffers in charge of the program — money that could help rural hospitals and clinics pay for patient care — at 15% of the total funding awarded to a state.

Federal regulators also established tight reporting deadlines, forcing states to move quickly.

States must file progress reports and obligate all first-year funding , according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the federal agency overseeing the program. States could see their awards decreased or terminated at any time if they fail to follow federal requirements, according to the .

As of early April, CMS had not approved or had only partially approved some state budgets, including those of Wyoming, Colorado, and Vermont, according to state officials. CMS spokesperson Catherine Howden, who declined to say which states still needed revised budgets approved, said the agency does not provide “state-by-state updates.”

In Alaska, the budget is approved but the state has not announced when it will release full grant proposals and awards, said Tricia Franklin, program coordinator for Alaska’s rural health transformation.

“Early summer was the target,” Franklin said. But the response from vendors and applicants has been “much greater than expected, so it may take us a little longer.”

Working with consulting companies is an established way for states to “quickly and effectively” meet federal deadlines and roll out grant money, said , national director for population health at the Milbank Memorial Fund, a nonprofit focused on state health policy work.

Upgrading Technology, Modernizing Rural Health

Science Applications International Corp., a Fortune 500 government contractor, pulled together the . SAIC does a variety of technology work such as cybersecurity and engineering support. The alliance also includes Walgreens and Mission Mobile Medical, which turns RVs into primary care clinics. A data analytics company, a telemedicine and software company, and a company that helps place medical graduates in health systems are also part of the coalition.

The SAIC alliance offers “an ecosystem” of companies that can coordinate the work states have promised, said , SAIC’s Rural Health Transformation Program lead and a former chief information officer for the Virginia Department of Health. Each of the companies has representatives focused on the rural program, he said.

A lack of digital infrastructure — such as electronic health records at different clinics and hospitals that can talk to one another — has been a consistent barrier for rural medical care teams, said the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Sandalow.

“The funding hasn’t always been there in order for rural areas to create the infrastructure that’s needed to fully adopt remote patient monitoring, telehealth, artificial intelligence in ways that will really be supportive,” Sandalow said. “It takes things like updating infrastructure, changing workflows.”

Sandalow’s found that Maine and Utah are investing in cybersecurity; Indiana, Missouri, and New Mexico plan to modernize their electronic health records; Oklahoma plans to buy hardware and software, subsidize subscriptions, and give technical support to rural providers; and states such as Arizona and South Carolina will use funds to create telehealth hubs or buy remote patient monitoring equipment.

Federal regulators, when creating the rural program’s spending rules, also said no more than 5% of a state’s total funding awarded could be used to replace electronic medical records systems that already meet federal standards. Sandalow said that means states will focus on enhancements and upgrades to their current systems.

Gainwell Technologies, which operates the systems for dozens of state Medicaid programs, is spearheading . Rushil Desai, a Gainwell senior vice president, said states’ detailed spending plans are “changing in real time.”

Maine’s Medicaid plan contracts with Gainwell, and the state’s initial application listed four contracts worth more than $16 million over five years for the company. The state confirmed it has received federal approval for only its first year of spending, which includes a to implement changes to the state’s Medicaid claims system.

James Lomastro, a senior-care advocate in rural Massachusetts with the nonprofit , said he worries that large vendors and health systems will get the state’s transformation dollars.

Clinics, home care agencies, and nursing homes that “actually provide day-to-day support in the community are mostly on the margins” of state discussions about how to spend the money, he said. A spokesperson for Massachusetts’ Executive Office of Health and Human Services, Olivia James, said state officials would “ensure that everyone has a seat at the table” with training, financial incentives, and direct investments.

Arizona’s rural fund budget, which is $167 million for the first year, allocates for medical diagnostic equipment and technology upgrades, including to electronic health records, specifically for rural health care facilities.

But it also for county public health departments, said Pima County Public Health Director Theresa Cullen. The approved budget includes up to $4 million for grants to support community health workers.

Tory Starr is a registered nurse and the chief executive officer of Open Door Community Health Centers.

“In these rural communities, you need to be present,” Cullen said.

Alina Czekai, director of the CMS rural health transformation office, said her team plans to visit all 50 states. She spoke at the National Rural Health Association’s policy conference in Washington, D.C., in February and told the audience that her team wants “the money to go to rural communities, rural providers, rural patients.” The association’s members include rural hospitals and clinics, which are expected to suffer big losses under the Medicaid cuts.

In California, Open Door’s Starr said he provided input on his state’s initial application, which won $234 million in first-year funding, but he is not clear on what the next steps will be for getting money from the program.

For his patients, Starr said, money is needed for technology upgrades. After all, he said, updated electronic health systems could operate seamlessly and store the documentation needed to keep a patient enrolled in Medicaid.

Updated technology could be exactly what Open Door and other area clinics need to “help keep people covered,” Starr said.

��ϳԹ�� News senior correspondent Phil Galewitz and rural health care correspondent Arielle Zionts contributed to this report.

This article/rural-health/rural-health-transformation-program-cms-state-contractors-ehr-patients/">article; first appeared on KFF" rel="nofollow">">KFF Health News and is republished here under a

/?republication-pixel=true&post=2228223&ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

In Connecticut, Doctors and Dentists Are More Likely Than Hospitals To Sue Patients

Noam N. Levey — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 18:30:00 +0000

How often do hospitals, physicians, and other providers sue patients over unpaid bills?

That’s a question we’ve asked a lot over the last several years at ��ϳԹ�� News. Since 2022, we’ve been working with newsrooms around the country, such as the Connecticut Mirror, to explore the scale and impact of America’s medical debt crisis. It’s part of a project we call “Diagnosis: Debt.”

We know that this type of debt burdens many people — about 100 million adults, according to a nationwide survey we did. But in most states, it’s almost impossible to gauge how many patients are getting taken to court over health care debt.

Connecticut’s court data is different.

It offered an opportunity to explore just how many people are being sued over medical and dental bills, who is suing patients, and for how much. Over the past year, I’ve collaborated with CT Mirror reporters Katy Golvala and Jenna Carlesso to learn more about the people facing legal actions.

What we found was surprising … and sad. This week, we shared the first of our articles, which explores how hospitals have been supplanted by physician groups and other medical and dental providers as the most aggressive bill collectors.

That’s a major reversal from five years earlier, when hospital system lawsuits made up three-quarters of health-related collection cases in the state’s courts.

The shift is moving medical debt collections into a less regulated realm. Most hospitals, because they are tax-exempt nonprofits, must make financial aid available to low-income patients and follow federal regulations that limit aggressive collection activities. Other medical providers, such as private medical groups, are generally exempt from these rules.

Lawsuits can lead to garnished wages, liens on homes, and hundreds of dollars of added debt from interest and court fees. They also pile additional financial strains on struggling families, prevent patients from getting needed care, and sap trust in medical providers.

“It’s really messed up,” said Allie Cass-Wilson, a nurse in Bristol, Connecticut, who was sued over a $1,972 debt by an OB-GYN practice where she’d been a patient years earlier. She did not contest the lawsuit, court records show. Still, she asked: “How can they do that to people?”

Diagnosis: Debt

In Connecticut, Doctors Now Sue Patients Most Over Medical Bills, Surpassing Hospitals

Physicians, dentists, and other nonhospital providers account for more than 80% of health care debt collection cases in Connecticut courts, a CT Mirror-��ϳԹ�� News investigation finds.

By Noam N. Levey, Katy Golvala, CT Mirror, and Jenna Carlesso, CT Mirror April 20, 2026

This article/health-care-costs/the-week-in-brief-connecticut-doctors-dentists-medical-debt/">article; first appeared on KFF" rel="nofollow">">KFF Health News and is republished here under a

/?republication-pixel=true&post=2230134&ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

A ‘Barbaric’ Problem in American Hospitals Is Only Getting Bigger

Elisabeth Rosenthal — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 09:00:00 +0000

In the last months, weeks, and days of his life, “I will not go to the emergency room” became my husband’s mantra. Andrej had esophageal cancer that had spread throughout his body (but not to his ever-willful brain), and, having trained as a doctor, I had jury-rigged a hospital at home, aided by specialists who got me pills to boost blood pressure; to dampen the effects of liver failure; to stem his cough; to help him swallow, wake up, fall asleep.

“I will not go to the emergency room” — emphasis on not — were his first words after passing out, having a seizure, or regurgitating the protein smoothies I made to pass his narrowed esophagus. He said it again and again, even as fluid built up in his lungs, rendering him short of breath and prone to agonizing coughing spells. He had been a big, athletic guy, but now, in the ugly process of dying, he was looking gaunt. Ours was a precarious existence, but I understood his adamant rejection of the emergency department. Most prior visits had morphed into extended trips into a terrifying medical underworld — to a purgatory known as emergency department boarding.

I managed to keep Andrej at home while we planned for hospice, until one dreadful night at 2 a.m., when I ran out of hacks. We got into an ambulance and together headed to the hospital.

* * *

We had already learned the hard way that if you need admission to the hospital, you can remain in the emergency department — in the hallway or a curtained bay on a hard stretcher or in a makeshift holding area — for more than 24 hours, even for days, while waiting for a real hospital bed. In this limbo state, you’re technically admitted to the hospital, but still located in the physical domain of the ER. And the rules governing acceptable care and safety measures become much less clear.

In the summer of 2024, still being treated to keep his cancer at bay, Andrej had suddenly become somewhat delirious, requiring hospital admission to rule out the possibility of infection or, worse, of the cancer having spread to his brain. After we went to an emergency department near our home, in New York City, he lay trapped on a hard stretcher, with its rails up, for more than 36 hours, amid the alarms and calls for the code team, without any clues of whether it was day or night, and with access only to the few toilets shared by the dozens of patients and visitors in the emergency room. None of this helped his mental state. By the end of Day 2, he knew me — kind of — but had become convinced that the doctors were “the enemy” and that I was their paid accomplice.

After I pressed to move him to a bed “upstairs” — I meant to an inpatient ward — he was transported to a bed five floors higher. I realized too late that this was an “ED overflow area,” according to the paper sign attached to the entrance’s swinging door. A plaque in the hall identified it as a former labor and delivery floor. It had been kitted out with some of the trappings of an actual ward, such as real beds and bathrooms, but not the most important one: adequate personnel.

The space was by turns eerily quiet and wildly cacophonous. Although patients there were undergoing intimate, embarrassing procedures, rooms were gender-neutral. That first night, Andrej’s roommates were a man in a coma and an elderly French woman in a diaper and boots (no pants), who marched around her bed singing like a chanteuse. In the morning, I pestered a harried nurse and got Andrej moved to a quieter room with three beds, where two people died in three days.

The overworked staff did the best they could, but that was far from good care. My husband — who needed protein and calories but could consume only soft foods — was served chicken cutlets. When I noted to one nurse that Andrej’s soiled sheets hadn’t been changed for several days, she directed me to a linen cart so I could change them myself.

* * *

That first time, one of several extended ER stays Andrej made as a boarder, I thought perhaps we had just hit a busy time at a busy hospital. When I worked as an emergency medicine doctor a few decades ago, the ED was mostly empty at the beginning of my 7 a.m. shift. A few patients might be lingering from the day before: alcoholics who would sober up and leave, patients with a severe burn or a bad case of pneumonia who were waiting for a bed in intensive care.

In the decades since, EDs have doubled or even tripled in size. Even so, patients are piling up. When I started asking around, I quickly discovered ED boarding has become commonplace in the past five or so years and is getting worse, more or less omnipresent in hospitals. “Everyone knows about this problem, and no one cares enough to do anything about it,” Adrian Haimovich, an ED doctor at Boston’s Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center who studies ED boarding, told me. “It’s barbaric.”

Measuring the problem has been challenging because data on ED boarding time is limited. Only this past November did the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services finalize a rule that would require hospitals to collect data on ED boarding times. Using what other data he could find, Haimovich has shown that boarding for more than 24 hours has increased dramatically for people 65 and older since the pandemic.

Once they enter ED boarding, patients exist in a gray zone. There has been a national push to establish “safe staffing” in EDs. Even with that, if an ED boarder has a medical complaint that needs quick attention, it’s easy for them to fall through the cracks, Haimovich said: In some hospitals, an admitting team of doctors from upstairs is responsible for the boarders stuck in the ED (but not the associated floor nurses); in others, overstretched ED medical staff must take full responsibility to care for boarders until a bed opens — and that in addition to seeing new patients. Some EDs now routinely hold more boarders — many of them quite ill — than patients being actively evaluated.

Doctors and nurses have complained bitterly about the situation, which forces them to provide inadequate care. Gabe Kelen, the director of emergency medicine at Johns Hopkins University, told me it’s creating a for emergency department staff. But doctors and department heads such as Kelen are not in control of admissions. Generally, a hospital’s administration parcels out inpatient beds, and emergency department boarding is in many ways a result of today’s business models and pressures.

* * *

When I worked as a doctor, if an ED was overwhelmed beyond capacity, the attending (that was me) typically called in to ambulance dispatch to request “diversion” — ambulances should take patients to another hospital. If a hospital got too full, the admitting office canceled elective admissions. Today, hospitals run like airlines and intentionally overbook, Kelen said. They also have fewer beds than they did a few years ago — in part because nurse (and executive) salaries have risen since the pandemic. An empty, staffed bed is a money loser, so the institution has an incentive to keep beds full and make new patients wait.

“The problem isn’t inefficiency — it’s the way health care finance is structured,” Kelen said. “Hospitals typically run on thin margins. Elective admissions are prioritized because they tend to be for lucrative procedures like heart catheterizations and joint replacements.”

Admitting patients through the emergency room has business advantages, too, even if it means they wait for a bed. The evaluation generates charges that typically run many thousands of dollars; once admitted, my husband was still billed the inpatient rate even for a stretcher in the hall. Old, sick, and dying patients are more likely to linger there in part because, after they’re in a real bed, they may take up that spot for days or weeks at a time while waiting for a bed in rehab or hospice, requiring nursing time but not the types of interventions that generate revenue.

Hospitals have tried band-aid fixes, such as bed-tracking software and discharge lounges where patients can wait for paperwork or transport home. Many do hire more doctors and nurses and orderlies in the ER to confront the overflow. But “long ED wait times and boarding have root causes that extend far beyond EDs and hospitals themselves,” Chris DeRienzo, the chief physician executive at the American Hospital Association, told me in an email. He listed the high cost of opening beds and the shortage of rehabilitation facilities, and emphasized the precarious financial situation of many hospitals.

But while Andrej waited in the overflow area, we were not thinking of any larger picture: He was sick, desperate, and still waiting for care. He lingered in boarding for four days before he got a bed. Each time he had to return to the ED, each time he faced a painful wait, he hardened his resolve to never go back.

* * *

Thunk. Crash. “Elisabeth, help!” Those were the sounds that woke me at 2 a.m.

I had fallen asleep on our bed, next to Andrej, his head raised with a foam wedge to ease his breathing and make sure food would not come up. Before I dozed off, I listened to his breathing — 30 times a minute, two times faster than normal — a sign he was struggling to get sufficient oxygen. And that racking cough. This was not good.

Now his bruised body was twisted, lying on the floor with his head against the bed frame. He’d attempted to use his walker to go to the bathroom. He was complaining of chest pain, coughing and short of breath. But he managed to get out those words: “I will not go to the ER.”

I knelt by his side in tears, telling him that I loved him but that I could not do anything more right now at home. Carlos, our super, helped me get him into bed and called EMS. I promised Andrej (against hope) that, given his condition, he would surely be quickly assigned to a real room and bed.

What happened next was a blur. I have a vague memory of paramedics arriving, putting him on the stretcher, sliding him into the ambulance, giving him oxygen. I mechanically grabbed his “do not resuscitate” form from under the refrigerator magnet and buckled myself in beside him.

Then he was in the ED, which was thrumming with activity, under the fluorescent lights, with oxygen in his nose, wearing a hospital gown, and looking gray and sick. The staff asked what was, for them, the operative question about a guy with widespread cancer: “Does he have a DNR?” Andrej asked me what was, for him, the operative question: “Did you bring my shoes?” He already wanted to leave.

An X-ray showed possible pneumonia, more tumors, and a buildup of fluid in his lungs. A medical team that covers oncology patients wrote an admitting note — he was now a boarder, again — and then retreated upstairs. They started antibiotics and gave him something to help him sleep amid the alarms and shouting. He didn’t.

When I came back the next morning — and two mornings after that — I was alarmed to see him still there on a hard stretcher, his feet dangling off the end, exhausted and in pain. “When will he be admitted to a bed?” I implored. If some of the stuff in his lungs was infectious, maybe he could be treated and get home.

Likely soon and I hear your frustration — I came to detest those two phrases.

Neighboring patients came and went 24 hours a day. Some were pleasant; some were screaming in pain or just screaming mad. Pulmonary doctors came and, in this semipublic space, used a large needle to remove three liters of fluid from Andrej’s right lung cavity.

* * *

Near the end of the Biden administration, in response to a bipartisan congressional request, the Department of Health and Human Services convened a meeting on emergency department boarding. Its report, from HHS’ Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, came out the same month that the Trump administration took office, not long before Andrej’s fall — the last night he spent at home.

“Emergency department (ED) boarding is a public health crisis in the United States,” the report concluded. “Patients who are sick enough to require inpatient care can wait in the ED for hours, days, or even weeks.”

“Boarding contributes to increased mortality, medical errors, prolonged hospital stays, and greater dissatisfaction with care,” the report said.

The meeting proposal called for the formation of an expert panel to recommend solutions. In theory, a panel could have weighed in on key questions: Should hospitals — some of which are rich institutions — get paid an inpatient rate for boarding in the ED? Should they have to report boarding times and face penalties for excess? Should they be required to open more real beds, and should requirements for licensing be lessened? How can the country create more rehabilitation beds?

But since then, the Trump administration has dramatically cut that HHS agency’s staffing, as well as its grant programs. (Congress is still pushing to fund the agency.) The expert panel never formed, let alone offered solutions. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services this year did initiate that will include voluntary reporting of boarding times in 2027, becoming mandatory in 2028. Bad marks will eventually affect Medicare reimbursement.

In an emailed statement, the Joint Commission, which certifies the nation’s hospitals, called boarding a “serious public health crisis” and “one of the most incredibly complex challenges in healthcare.” Although the organization does indirectly look at hospitals’ “ED throughput” from charts, such data is not comprehensive. Little information exists, for instance, about how many people’s last days are spent on stretchers, in hospital limbo.

None of this knowledge would have helped my dying husband. So I did what I’d promised myself I’d never do: I called a doctor friend, who called the hospital’s VIP office.

Suddenly Andrej was whisked to a real hospital room, with a bed that he could adjust to keep his head elevated, a tray he could eat from, a morphine pump, a TV, a bathroom, and a nurse call button at his side. A room with extra chairs, so his stepkids and friends could visit with gifts and mementos one last time. A room where the caring staff placed a chaise longue, where I could sleep over. That way, when he woke scared and coughing and yelling for me, I was there to hold his hand, adjust the oxygen, and push the button for an extra dose of narcotic.

Until, six days after we got in the ambulance and three days after we’d moved to this room, he woke early one morning, agitated and coughing, calling out, “Elisabeth?” I was there. But then, in a blink, he wasn’t.

This article/health-industry/emergency-room-ed-boarding-hospital-beds-long-waits-crisis/">article; first appeared on KFF" rel="nofollow">">KFF Health News and is republished here under a

/?republication-pixel=true&post=2230362&ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

Watch: Acknowledging Health Care’s Great Divide

Thu, 23 Apr 2026 19:00:58 +0000

In this “How Would You Fix It?” interview, Julie Rovner, ��ϳԹ�� News’ chief Washington correspondent and host of the What the Health? podcast, sat down with David Blumenthal — a physician, health policy expert, former Obama administration official, and author — to explore the dynamics that make fixing the nation’s health care system so difficult.

They discussed the pivotal role the president of the United States plays in health policy — whether it is building support for or opposition to new plans and proposals. “Presidents have a level of authority which is often underappreciated, especially in health care,” Blumenthal said.

Blumenthal and Rovner also discussed the historical reasons the U.S. has been unable to enact universal health care, incrementalism versus sweeping change, and what he described as “the dance” between proponents and opponents — usually a clear party-line split between Democrats and Republicans — of major health care reforms.

Today, the split seems to have come to a head, as public health, science, and expertise are being viewed by one end of the political spectrum as “the opposition,” Blumenthal said, which will complicate efforts. Still, he outlined ideas for moving forward.

An abbreviated version of this interview aired April 23 on Episode 443 of What the Health? From ��ϳԹ�� News: “RFK Jr. vs. Congress.”

Blumenthal’s latest book, Whiplash: From the Battle for Obamacare to the War on Science, co-written with James A. Morone, offers a behind-the-scenes look at how three presidential administrations pursued very different health policy goals.

This article/health-industry/health-care-policy-political-divide-david-blumenthal-interview/">article; first appeared on KFF" rel="nofollow">">KFF Health News and is republished here under a

/?republication-pixel=true&post=2230749&ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

Medigap Premiums Leap, and Consumers Have Few Alternatives

Julie Appleby — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 09:00:00 +0000

After decades of selling insurance, Illinois-based broker John Jaggi had never seen anything like it.

More than 80 of his customers who were enrolled in the same Medicare supplemental plan from the insurer Chubb got hit last August with a 45% increase.

“In my 49 years of doing biz as a broker, I’ve never seen a premium increase be effective immediately on everyone, instead of on their policy anniversary,” said Jaggi, whose brokerage scrambled to find more affordable options for clients. The policies pick up deductibles and other costs not covered in traditional Medicare, and without one there is no upper limit on how much a consumer might owe each year.

While 45% was an unusually big jump, Jaggi and other brokers say double-digit premium increases for Medicare supplemental, or Medigap, policies are becoming the norm.

A Chubb spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment on the increase.

More than 12 million people — of those in traditional Medicare — buy a Medigap policy. Others rely on some sort of retiree employer coverage or a different backup. About 13% of people in traditional Medicare don’t have supplemental coverage, according to KFF, meaning they could be vulnerable to large costs if they have a serious illness.

In the supplemental market, following big increases last year, rates appear to be rising again. In early 2026 filings with state insurance commissioners from Aetna, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Cigna, Humana, Mutual of Omaha, and UnitedHealthcare, rate increases for Plan G policies — the most commonly purchased supplement type — ranged from just in the first quarter, according to Nebraska-based consulting firm Telos Actuarial.

“While this is a small dataset across a select number of states, it’s an indication that carriers are looking to correct their premium rates in light of upward pressure on their claims experience,” said Brett Mushett, a consulting actuary with Telos.

Climbing Numbers

Premium rates vary based on the type of coverage chosen, where a beneficiary lives, and their age. For Plan G coverage, beneficiaries paid an in 2023, according to KFF. That amount has likely risen since.

“In some states, like Ohio, Medicare supplements for years would have a 3% to 5% year-over-year increase. Now it’s 10% to 15%,” said Amanda Brewton, owner of Medicare Answers Now, a marketing organization whose clients are sales agents.

In Alaska, Premera Blue Cross raised the premiums on its Plan G policies by nearly 12% for this year, according to rate sheets provided to ��ϳԹ�� News by insurance agent Patricia Mack, who said another insurer raised rates by nearly 13%.

For example, a 65-year-old woman who last year would have been charged $172 a month for a Plan G policy would now face a monthly rate of $192, said Mack, who owns Alaska Insurance Benefits in Wasilla.

Premera spokesperson Courtney Wallace said in an email that Medicare makes changes to deductible and copayment rates each year, which affects supplemental plans that cover those increasing amounts.

Wallace also noted that the insurer saw higher medical service use among its members, “which further drove claims costs and ultimately impacted premiums.”

Agents and policy experts blame a range of factors for rising premiums: an increase in the use of medical services by beneficiaries; the aging of the population; increases in labor and medical costs; rules in some states governing Medigap plans; and people’s enrolling in — or getting out of — private Medicare Advantage plans.

“Five years ago, it was exceedingly uncommon to have a carrier with a rate increase of more than 10%. Now it’s very uncommon to see a rate increase below 10%, and it’s not uncommon to see it over 20%,” said Chalen Jackson, vice president for government affairs at Integrity, a Dallas-based company that sells life and health insurance.

Jaggi, who co-owns Jaggi Petry Insurance & Investments in Forsyth, Illinois, along with his daughter, said he eventually found other options for many of those 80-plus clients with the large increase, which came from an insurer that had previously been the lowest-cost option. But it wasn’t easy — and continuing increases are expected.

“These are unbelievable increases,” said Jaggi, who said he is seeing premium hikes exceeding 15% this year across a range of insurers.

Policy experts have outlined possible solutions, including for Congress to cap out-of-pocket costs for Medicare beneficiaries or subsidize the purchase of Medigap coverage.

“Traditional Medicare is the only federal health insurance program without an out-of-pocket cap,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) wrote in an email, adding that the program “needs to be updated and strengthened to protect the Medicare guarantee for American seniors.”

But making changes to Medicare that require congressional approval is unlikely in the current legislative environment, especially because adding an out-of-pocket cap would add costs to the federal budget.

How This Plays Out

People generally qualify for Medicare when they turn 65. Beneficiaries after they initially enroll in the traditional fee-for-service program to purchase a Medigap plan at standard rates without having to answer health-related questions.

Strict rules then kick in around when beneficiaries can enroll in or switch Medigap coverage and options become much more limited, with each one generally involving trade-offs or tough choices.

have what’s known as a “birthday rule,” which requires insurers once a year to allow people enrolled in a Medigap plan to change to different supplemental coverage — usually around their birthdays — without being medically underwritten. Those rules can help consumers, including those with health conditions, to switch.

An additional — Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, and New York — require insurers to offer at least one Medigap policy to all applicants either year-round or during an annual enrollment period, depending on the state. Changes are allowed no matter the person’s health.

Another option for those facing high Medigap costs is to leave traditional Medicare and enroll in a private-sector Medicare Advantage plan, which have out-of-pocket caps. But joining one means beneficiaries must generally rely on a set of in-network doctors and hospitals. And if they change their mind and want to go back to traditional Medicare, they have only a 12-month window in which to purchase a Medigap plan without passing health questions. After that, it can be more difficult.

“A lot of people don’t know that if they are in Medicare Advantage for a year, they can get turned down by a Medigap plan or charged really high premiums because of a preexisting condition, which for many people effectively traps them in MA plans,” said , a research associate at the liberal Center for American Progress and co-author of a on the issue.

There are some exceptions. For example, if a Medicare Advantage plan withdraws from a market or leaves the Medicare program, its enrollees can qualify for a supplemental plan without being asked health questions or charged more for having preexisting conditions.

For this year alone, about 2.6 million people when their insurer pulled out of their markets, according to KFF, and more than a million lost coverage for 2025. Many switched to other MA plans, but “somewhere around 440,000 of those people did go to a Medicare supplement policy,” sometimes because there was no other MA plan in their area, said George Dippel, president of Deft Research, a Minneapolis-based market research organization focused on insurance for older people. Deft is part of Integrity, the Dallas company.

Some Medicare experts note that anytime insurers enroll people whose health status they can’t consider — whether because of birthday rules or because their Medicare Advantage plan left the market and thus qualified them for an exemption from medical underwriting — it potentially exposes them to more health care utilization and higher costs, making them more likely to increase premiums across the board to offset the possible financial hit.

Another option mentioned by brokers for people looking to lower their costs is to consider one of the two types of Medigap plans that come with a deductible, which is currently just under $3,000 for a year. Those plans charge far lower monthly premiums than Medigap plans that pick up a much larger portion of annual amounts people must pay toward their Medicare services.

Still, “a lot of people are not comfortable with a $3,000 deductible,” Mack said.

This article/medicare/medigap-medicare-advantage-premiums-rate-increase-few-alternatives/">article; first appeared on KFF" rel="nofollow">">KFF Health News and is republished here under a

/?republication-pixel=true&post=2228699&ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

California Lawmakers Seek Protections for Patients in ICE Custody

Claudia Boyd-Barrett — Wed, 22 Apr 2026 12:40:00 +0000

California lawmakers alarmed by the treatment of people brought to hospitals by federal immigration agents want to strengthen protections for detained patients receiving care at medical facilities, including by making it easier for their families and attorneys to find them.

Two bills moving through the state Senate seek to prevent immigration enforcement officers from isolating patients from their loved ones and interfering with their ability to get legal help. Analyses for both bills cite reporting by ��ϳԹ�� News that found family members and attorneys have faced extreme difficulty locating and supporting patients hospitalized while in immigration custody.

��ϳԹ�� News found that some hospitals have facilitated patient isolation through what are known as blackout policies, which can include registering people under pseudonyms, withholding their names from the hospital directory, and preventing staff from contacting patients’ relatives to let them know their location and condition.

A bill by Democratic state Sen. Caroline Menjivar of the San Fernando Valley, , would largely prohibit the use of blackout policies for patients in immigration custody and ensure they retain the right to have their families and others notified of their whereabouts and condition. Blackout policies would be allowed when the health care provider determines the patient is a credible risk to themself or others and the risk is documented in the patient’s medical record. Patients would also be allowed to receive visitors.

It seeks to address reports of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents guarding patients in their hospital rooms while they undergo medical exams or talk with doctors, interfering with medical decisions, and pushing for patients to be discharged prematurely to detention facilities ill-equipped to provide follow-up care.

“These are actions that have no place in health care, and it is a clear violation of the patients’ rights,” Menjivar said.

Under Menjivar’s proposal, agents would not be allowed into the rooms of patients they bring in for care unless they can show legal authorization to be there. If agents remain in the room, staff would be required to ask them to leave during medical exams and patient care discussions. If agents refuse, health care facility staff would need to document it.

, authored by state Sen. Susan Rubio, a Democrat from the San Gabriel Valley, would require health care providers to inform staff and relevant volunteers to respond when patients want their families to know where they are, and to post a notice at facility entrances with information about visitation and access policies. The law already says patients can agree to have loved ones notified they’re in the hospital, and Rubio’s bill seeks to make sure staff and others know they can do that for patients in immigration custody.

The federal Department of Homeland Security, which oversees immigration enforcement, did not respond to a request for comment.

Both bills were passed by the Senate Health and Judiciary committees along party lines and will be heard next by the Senate Appropriations Committee.

More than 20 immigrant rights advocates and health care workers voiced support for strengthened protections for patients at a hearing last week.

“This state must do everything in its power to protect against these abuses and ensure detainees have the right to contact their loved ones when they are hospitalized and in critical conditions,” said Hector Pereyra, political manager with the Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice.

However, representatives from the California Hospital Association and California Medical Association told lawmakers last week they had concerns that directing health care workers to document agents’ badge numbers and ask them to leave patients’ rooms could create conflict and pose a safety risk.

“While we understand that this is an important issue, we want to ensure the bill strikes the right balance and does not create conflicting or unclear obligations for hospitals and their staff and clinicians, particularly in real-time interactions with federal officers,” said Vanessa Gonzalez, a vice president of state advocacy for the hospital association.

��ϳԹ�� News reported that one man, 43-year-old Julio César Peña, was held at a hospital in Victorville for almost two weeks before his attorney and family found out where he was. Peña, who had terminal kidney disease, was shackled to his hospital bed, guarded by immigration agents, and told he wasn’t allowed to disclose his location, according to his wife. He then suffered a seizure that left him intubated and unconscious, but no one notified his family. Peña died Feb. 25, less than two months after he was released to go home.

Advocates for immigrants and health care workers, as well as lawmakers, fear similar incidents are happening around the state.

Menjivar said her bill “seeks to close the gap between existing law and practice by empowering health care provider entities with the tools to uphold the privacy, health, and visitation rights of a patient brought in under immigration custody.”

SB 915 would prohibit hospitals and clinics from allowing immigration officers to make medical decisions for the patient or provide interpretation. Health care facilities would be required to document and verify, “to the extent possible,” the identities of immigration officers; provide patients access to communication tools; and inform patients of their rights. They would also need to complete discharge planning that includes attempts to coordinate with any receiving facility, such as a detention center, to ensure patients receive follow-up care.

The bills come on the heels of legislation passed last year that sought to limit immigration enforcement at health care facilities, including by prohibiting medical establishments from allowing federal agents without a valid search warrant or court order into private areas. However, that bill did not address situations in which patients are already in immigration custody.

“ICE has instilled fear in our hospitals and has kept us from doing our job,” said SatKartar Khalsa, an emergency medicine resident at a safety net hospital in San Francisco who has treated detained patients and testified in support of SB 915. “This has all led to worse care for our patients and has added another layer of fear among health care workers.”

This article/health-industry/ice-custody-immigrant-patient-protection-california-legislation/">article; first appeared on KFF" rel="nofollow">">KFF Health News and is republished here under a

/?republication-pixel=true&post=2229421&ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

Montana Moves Ahead With Doula Pay but Warns Medicaid Cuts Still May Come

Katheryn Houghton — Wed, 22 Apr 2026 09:00:00 +0000

Montana officials said they are moving forward with plans to allow Medicaid to pay doulas, reversing a previous statement that budget problems had prompted them to pause the effort to reimburse the birth workers.

But officials warned that all optional Medicaid services are still under review as the state health department looks for cuts to offset a shortfall driven by higher-than-expected Medicaid costs.

Jon Ebelt, a spokesperson with the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services, said the agency is preparing a request to the federal government to add doula care to the state’s Medicaid program. It would cost the state about $118,000 in its first year to provide doula Medicaid reimbursements, according to .

His April 15 comments came three weeks after department officials told ��ϳԹ�� News that the state budget deficit had put those plans on hold. Ebelt denied that a final decision had been made in March to scrap the doula Medicaid payments, which state lawmakers approved in a bill last year. The coverage is “now proceeding as planned,” he said.

“At the time of your initial inquiry, we were still in the process of analyzing the appropriation,” Ebelt said.

Federal health officials must approve any amendments to the state’s Medicaid program before payments can begin. reimburse doulas through Medicaid.

Doulas are trained, nonmedical workers who support people through pregnancy and after they give birth. The care they provide is in health complications, which has prompted more states to cover doula services in recent years.

Montana lawmakers who supported expanding Medicaid to cover doula care in 2025 cited scarce maternity services, especially in rural and Indigenous communities. But this year, the state has a Medicaid budget deficit of more than and is expecting a similar shortfall next year. Plus, federal policy changes slated to take effect later this year are expected to increase costs.

“ There’s a need and a desire for doula services, but a lot of people can’t afford it,” said Sheri Walker, a Helena-based doula and president of the . “So that means many of us have other jobs that we have to juggle.”

Walker is a part-time labor and delivery nurse outside of her doula work.

On March 25, health department spokesperson Holly Matkin said in an email to ��ϳԹ�� News that the agency “will not be moving forward with the implementation of doula services in the Montana Medicaid benefit package at this time.” She had added that it was unclear whether state law gives the department the authority to authorize coverage during the budget shortfall.

State Sen. , a Democrat who sponsored last year’s bipartisan doula reimbursement bill, said she didn’t know about the department’s plans until she saw ��ϳԹ�� News’ reporting. Neumann said she and groups that had backed the legislation began calling health officials, making the case for doula services as a low-cost way to provide critical care.

After about a week, Neumann said, state officials told her the agency was moving ahead with doula services after all.

“They were on the chopping block,” Neumann said. “This is a story of how important it is for all Montanans to pay attention and stay connected to what’s happening.”

Ebelt did not clarify what led the department to change its position. However, he warned that optional Medicaid services, such as doula services, may still be cut.

“All optional services, including this service, are being reviewed,” Ebelt said, referring to doula care. He did not respond to a follow-up query as to whether the department might still decide to postpone the program following federal approval.

are types of care that states choose to cover through their Medicaid programs but aren’t required by federal law. That can include covering eyeglasses, prescription drugs, and prosthetics, and more specialized care such as physical therapy, or inpatient psychiatric services for people under 21.

Those services may not sound optional, said , who studies Medicaid financing at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes ��ϳԹ�� News. But she said they’re one of the few avenues states have to make adjustments when budgets get tight.

Congressional Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the spending measure President Donald Trump signed into law last July, is expected to put more states in a budget crunch as its provisions start to take effect by the end of the year. The federal government has estimated that the law will reduce federal Medicaid spending by nearly $1 trillion over 10 years. The law also left states with a higher share of the costs to provide food assistance.

Williams said many states expanded services in recent years by boosting optional Medicaid benefits and provider pay.

“We could see them walk those back,” Williams said.

Montana’s financial problems preceded federal changes. Last year, state lawmakers cut some of the health department’s funding and underestimated Medicaid use. The state also overestimated what the federal government would pay toward Montana’s Medicaid costs.

Health officials must outline a plan to cut costs before the state’s 2027 budget year begins on July 1. Simultaneously, the agency is trying to hire more staffers to begin vetting whether Medicaid enrollees meet or are exempt from new work requirements that also go in place July 1. The new rules, mandated through long-delayed state legislation and the federal spending law, will have a three-month grace period.

Stephanie Morton, executive director of , said she’s grateful the state is back on track to pay for doula services through Medicaid. But she said she’s worried about potential health care cuts to come.

“We know that doulas are a critical piece of that infrastructure, but standing alone and losing other sources of care really isn’t optimal,” Morton said. “These are not robust systems as it stands.”

This article/medicaid/doula-care-pregnancy-medicaid-montana-budget-cuts/">article; first appeared on KFF" rel="nofollow">">KFF Health News and is republished here under a

/?republication-pixel=true&post=2229052&ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

Health Industry Archives - ���ϳԹ��� News

The Peculiar Politics of Hospitals

The Host

Panelists

Credits

States Rush To Figure Out How To Enforce Trump’s Medicaid Work Requirements

An Urgent Care Treated Her Allergic Reaction. An ER Monitored Her — For $6,700.

Big Companies Position Themselves for Payday From $50B Federal Rural Health Fund

In Connecticut, Doctors and Dentists Are More Likely Than Hospitals To Sue Patients

In Connecticut, Doctors Now Sue Patients Most Over Medical Bills, Surpassing Hospitals

A ‘Barbaric’ Problem in American Hospitals Is Only Getting Bigger

Watch: Acknowledging Health Care’s Great Divide

Medigap Premiums Leap, and Consumers Have Few Alternatives

California Lawmakers Seek Protections for Patients in ICE Custody

Montana Moves Ahead With Doula Pay but Warns Medicaid Cuts Still May Come

Health Industry Archives - ��ϳԹ�� News