Imagine taking a loved one to the hospital for an emergency only to be turned away because you cannot afford the treatment. You know that without immediate medical care he or she may not survive. Can a hospital refuse to treat a patient simply based on that person’s ability to pay? Luckily, federal law known as “EMTALA” prohibits hospitals from doing so. This article provides an overview of EMTALA in Florida.
What is EMTALA?
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, EMTALA, is known as the "anti-dumping" statute for its ban on patient dumping. Congress passed EMTALA in 1986 in response to a number of widely reported horror stories about emergency rooms turning away seriously ill or injured patients who had no insurance and no money to pay for treatment. Prior to EMTALA, there was no requirement that hospitals treat everyone who came to the emergency room and, in many states, hospitals were not held responsible for damages caused by their refusal to treat patients. A hospital could choose not to treat a patient who lacked insurance or enough money to pay for the required medical treatment. In some cases, patients died or suffered serious injuries because of a transfer or delay in treatment.
Does EMTALA Apply to All Hospitals?
EMTALA applies to all hospitals that have emergency rooms and participate in the Medicare program. Since almost all hospitals, public and private, receive Medicare funds, nearly all hospitals are covered by EMTALA.
What Actions Must a Hospital Take Under EMTALA?
EMTALA imposes two essential obligations on hospitals:
What If a Hospital Does Not Follow EMTALA?
If a person is injured because a hospital did not provide an MSE or because it did not stabilize the patient before release or transfer, the patient may sue the hospital for money damages based on a violation of EMTALA. Suing a hospital under EMTALA is different than suing for state medical malpractice. EMTALA is not a substitute for suing for a wrong diagnosis or improper performance of a medical procedure.
Generally, if a patient is properly given a MSE but misdiagnosed, the hospital has followed EMTALA but may be responsible for damages under state malpractice law. However, an inadequate MSE may still violate EMTALA. Many courts have concluded that an appropriate MSE is one that the hospital would have offered to any other patient with the same symptoms, regardless of whether the patient was insured or could pay for the medical screening. Therefore, a hospital violates the MSE requirement of EMTALA only when individuals who are perceived to have the same medical condition receive different treatment.
Similarly, EMTALA’s stabilization requirement is intended only to regulate a hospital’s care of a patient immediately after admitting the patient for emergency care. Once a patient is admitted to the hospital and placed under the care of physicians, state medical malpractice law, not EMTALA, covers the actions of hospital and doctors.
What Does a Patient Have to Prove in a Lawsuit?
In a lawsuit, the patient must establish that the hospital treated him or her differently from other patients. Some courts have determined that in order to prove he or she did not receive an appropriate MSE, the patient must show there was an improper motive on the part of the hospital. That means, the decision as to what type of screening to provide was motivated by improper factors such as the inability to pay, race, or the sex of the patient. The majority of courts, however, no longer apply the "bad motive" requirement. The United States Supreme Court has ruled there is no such bad-motive requirement to establish that a hospital failed to adequately stabilize a patient before transferring or discharging.
Is There a Penalty for Violating EMTALA?
Depending on the facts of the case, hospitals or physicians that violate EMTALA are subject to fines and may lose Medicare provider agreements.
If you are concerned about how you were screened or treated at a hospital emergency room, you should seek the advice of an experienced attorney.
Contact a qualified attorney.