Hmmm.

Maybe they'll build a seven-hundred-mile wall to keep out the preggo immigrants.

I mean, isn't that what any sensible country would do?

:P

ok i am confused. would you want people crossing our borders to even further drive up the cost of our health care? clearly better health care is the option but protecting the people who live in your area should absolutely be a priority. whether its right or not of the government, not paying your bills is not cool, and it negatively affects other people.

doctors and the medical profession drive up the cost of health care.

Actually, I think HMOs and Big Pharma drive up the costs of health care. Doctors make lots of money, sure, but the ones who do the actual important day-in, day-out work (usually Family or General Practitioners) don't even make as much as law partners. The ones making the real money are brain surgeons (which is legitimate) and plastic surgeons (which in most cases is not).

As for letting people take advantage of health care, my comment was mostly meant flippantly, but sure, I'll talk about it. It's incredibly selfish and arrogant of us, as Americans (and similarly selfish and arrogant of Hong Kong residents), to think we've somehow "earned" the right to superior medical care simply by virtue of having been born here. I didn't do anything to deserve citizenship in a country that affords me access to greater wealth than 99% of the world. I think it's wrong of us to pretend that there's something noble about "protecting our own" when our own don't deserve special treatment any more than we do.

When push comes to shove, I care more about my family than people in my area. Immigration is absolutely irrelevant to the well-being of my family specifically, so the next question is who I ought to "value" the highest when looking at this from a macro-social perspective. The clear answer is, no one. I have absolutely no reason to value the lives of my fellow Californians over the lives of innocent poor immigrants who simply want a shot at a life one-twentieth as good as mine. Who the hell am I to deny that to them, just because it might drive up my copay? I mean, I'm as selfish as the next American, but at some point I have to realize how ridiculous it is that I have so much more than everyone else in the world, simply because of the accident of birth.

I agree that not paying bills isn't cool, but that's no reason to uniformly deny health care to people who need it.

i agree with that it doesnt make it right, but until that law is changed i really dont think its right to go in and not pay health care bills. the article did state that some people bc of this have to give birth in very unprivate places. i dont know, personally, while i would be perfectly happy and i think its definitly needed to help other places have adequate healthcare (um or hello the many people who dont have health care in the US), i dont think its right to allow anyone in to use our healthcare and leave without paying for it. for me that is the issue. clearly, the underlying issue needs to be addressed, but in the mean time, like you law fairy, my family comes first and if they couldnt get health care bc for whatever reason someone who came into this country to use it (this would never happen but giving you an idea) and then left without paying i would be pissed. i would like to think i would be compassionate but i know for sure my emotions would take over.

I completely agree with you, TLF, and would also add that since, when was it, 1997?, Hong Kong is a part of China--this is not a situation involving immigrants from another country trying to take advantage of a neighbor's resources. This is a situation of residents of one part of a country going to another part. The fact that the two parts of the PRC seem to have widely differing standards of care is a serious problem--and so is the fact that we in the US have similar extremes.

Hong Kong is a Special Administrative Region, which means that it sets its own immigration policies, but the situation is really not perfectly analogous to that between two unaffiliated countries.

"It's incredibly selfish and arrogant of us, as Americans (and similarly selfish and arrogant of Hong Kong residents), to think we've somehow "earned" the right to superior medical care simply by virtue of having been born here." - The Law Fairy

Is it selfish and arrogant to think that paying taxes and contributing to the economy, making this superior medical care possible in the first place, earns one the right to said medical care?

Please forget the above post. I don't know enough about how Hong Kong is seperated from the rest of China (taxes, economy, ect.) to comment on this.

i sort of agree that we do contribute to the economy as citizens which therefore contributes to our healthcare. that in addition to great medical schools etc etc. really when it comes to this stuff i am very libertarian so i dont think i will agree with many people here which is fine.

the problem no name is that many people in our own country dont have healthcare cause of the high price, and that isnt cool bc they contribute just as much as the next person.

Hong Kong's health care situation is not the same as the USA's. The USA has HMOs and administrative blubber that drive up health spending to $6,000 per capita per year, or 15% of GDP. In Hong Kong, it was about 5.7% in 2001-2.

That said, the $40 million figure is a joke. Hong Kong's tax levels are so low that there's plenty of room for even a 1% hike, which will recover a lot more than $40 million a year.

You also have to ask what exactly they will be doing to prevent pregnant women from crossing the border. Who are these women, what is their immigration status, what are their rights under the laws of China and Hong Kong, and what exactly will happen to them? How far are they from home? Will they be imprisoned? Will they have health care in detention? How long does deportation take? What is the immigration status of a child born in Hong Kong? Of course it is preferable that hospital bills are paid than not paid, Katie. The question is what we do with people who cannot pay, and who are using every resource at their disposal to preserve their life and the life of their child. You can say "we shouldn't let those people come here," or something, but that doesn't really answer the question. Armed guards at the border allowing husbands but not their preganant wives? It may cost more to "keep them out" than to just treat them.

To be honest, I don't think the issue is to do with women, per se. It is, however, a "racist" issue: despite being the same race, and the same country since 1997 ("one country, two systems"), Hong Kongers see mainland Chinese as being quite inferior. The mainlanders are viewed as "country bumpkins": poor, smelly, stupid etc. And are often blamed for crime, social problems etc. Of course the quality of life of most mainland Chinese differs vastly from that enjoyed by most Hong Kongers. So the medical tourism thing is an extension of those attitudes.

Hong Kong has a free healthcare service, and it's good quality. HK also has a very low tax base – yes with room to grow, but the political inertia is heavy. Just recently the government stepped back from a proposal to introduce a goods and service tax (GST –sales tax). So government spending is viewed as a real problem.

In addition, mainland Chinese children born in HK are then entitled to an ID card here. This means they can get free schooling, medical etc, and eventually work here. This is an issue for the economists in the government who are unable to plan, for example, for the number of school teachers needed in future. (The babies born in HK are often taken back to China once the have their ID card, then will return when they are 5 years old to start school: that influx of kids could be very damaging in terms of school places etc.)

And I know that HK and China are "one country": but Hong Kongers don't quite see it that way.

(I am a Brit living in HK.)

40 million in HK is not alot. it's expensive for westerners or anybody to live there. they should be able to have their babies there. it is china, after all, and there is a snob factor in hk.

so the insurance and drug industries drive up american medical costs? that's right, i saw my gyn recently and the secretary requested a 15 dollar donation (which i did not give) because malpractice suits are out the window.

My main question is, where does it stop? Do Hong Kong residents have to pay for the healthcare of 1 billion mainland Chinese because to emphasize the welfare of their own tax-paying residents is mean? $40 million isn't enough to break the bank, but I don't blame Hong Kong's government for being concerned.