Only those who have worked in the field of prison management truly understand the extensive responsibilities involved in running a correctional facility. First to come to mind might be the obvious challenge of keeping the prisoners inside the facility. This is certainly the most compelling challenge to the American public, as evidenced in our fascination with movies like “Escape from Alcatraz” and “Papillon.” This is that has the most interest for the general public, and has been dramatized in films such as “Escape from Alcatraz”. Then there is the obvious expense of providing food, clothing and shelter for the inmates. Beyond these basic needs, inmates also have medical and health needs that must be addressed through a range of services. Not gym equipment but health care.
As healthcare costs soar throughout the U.S., so too have costs risen for prisons. Some facilities’ health care is provided directly by the state, but it is more and more common that states are contracting to for-profit prison health care providers such as NaphCare. In fact, a decent market has developed for these companies. This seems like a good thing for both parties – the states have one less thing to manage and a new business sector has been created. The problem is, regardless of who manages and provides it, medical care is expensive and prisons are filling up. While the country is not running out of land to house prisoners as is the case in some countries, the U.S. prison system is financially strained, to put it lightly. To combat oversized budgets, certain states have passed legislation requiring prisons to accept the lowest bidder amongst health care providers.
A low bid looks great on paper, but in truth the differences between the qualities of health services provided is substantial. NaphCare, for example, offers efficient methods of distributing on-site dialysis treatment to a large number of patients. The company’s electronic medical records system, known as TechCare, increases efficiency and accuracy of patient care by ensuring that patients receive the proper medications when needed. The antiquated paper record-keeping systems that some prisons still employ make this no easy task. On the other end of the spectrum, some private prison health care providers do not supply efficient record keeping, and refuse to offer in-house treatment for even the most basic health issues, such as a broken finger. In such circumstances budgets initially may look lower, but ambulance fees incurred while transporting patients soon catch up with the initial costs of establishing the infrastructure needed to offer extensive treatment in-house. Another company, Prison Health Services – which is one of the largest private providers – has been lambasted for its poor practices. Perhaps most egregious is the company’s pattern of routinely denying services in order to maintain a profit.
Denying healthcare to someone in need to make a profit is clearly wrong and mean-spirited. However, like any other private company, Prison Health Services needs to clear a profit in order to be viable. Buyers in this market – in this case, states – are being forced to choose to least expensive option. As the demand for prisons rises, states cannot spread their monies to fund the facilities properly and in the current economic climate raising taxes is a nearly impossible proposal. States are turning to NaphCare to find an efficient and professional alternative to providing medical care in prisons themselves. But even the best company may face challenges in meeting prisoners’ needs for access to quality healthcare due to the shortcomings of state contracts.
Related posts:
- Health Insurance and Care Abroad – Get Travel Medical Insurance!
- There’s a lot more to Health Insurance than just Medical Costs!
- Ways of Paying for Medical Aid
- Offer Your Dog The Very Best Health Care With A Pet Insurance Policy
- The High 10 Methods to Decrease Your Well being Care Prices
- UK Health Insurance- From the Cradle to the Queue
- Stay Legal! Avoiding Insurance Fraud