Most often, hospitals are traditionally seen as sanctuaries of care, places where clinical decisions are supposedly guided by patient needs. However, this ideal contrasts with what is actually happening across the country, most notably in Florida.
As the healthcare system grows, many medical facilities have begun operating less like public-serving institutions and more like competing businesses. Instead of cooperating to ensure patients receive the most appropriate treatment, other hospitals prioritize retaining patients within their networks even when better or faster care is available elsewhere.
This rivalry typically leads to fragmented services, delayed interventions, and compromised health outcomes. Patients may also be redirected or denied timely care in critical situations simply because the necessary specialists or resources belong to a competing healthcare institution. This issue is not just a lapse in ethics; it is an alarming medical practice that threatens patient safety and jeopardizes the integrity of medical care.
In most industries, competition is perceived as a force that drives innovation, improves product and service quality, and even lowers customer costs. Yet, in healthcare, especially hospital systems, the dynamic usually works differently. Rather than competing to provide better care, several medical facilities focus on keeping patients within their networks to maximize revenue, sometimes at the expense of clinical outcomes.
The truth is that healthcare consolidation has rapidly accelerated over the past decades, meaning many hospitals and health groups have already merged under one entity and structure to be dominant in their field. As of 2022, the entire market for inpatient hospital care in roughly 47%—almost half—of the US metro areas, including in Florida, has already been controlled by one or two health systems. Yet, instead of extending patient benefits, evidence suggests that this union has led to higher prices without any significant enhancements in service quality. Even worse, ill individuals would frequently suffer as hospitals become reluctant to cooperate and respond to their needs during emergencies and other serious situations. This is particularly true in the context of intensive care.
Since the 1950s, the demand for intensive care units (ICUs) has grown significantly. Yet this would often exceed the bed capacity designated for this specialized area, which makes patient transfers necessary to accommodate those in critical conditions. The same action is also commonly required when a medical facility lacks the resources or expertise to provide appropriate treatments. Unfortunately, interhospital transfers are frequently delayed or blocked due to internal policies that treat rival hospitals as competitors rather than healthcare partners.
These incidents are not isolated—they reflect a deeper problem in a system where business priorities can override clinical judgment. This only shows that when preserving market share comes before saving lives, patients pay the ultimate price.
To tackle this dangerous trend, the federal government must really take decisive action. Robust legislation must be ratified to legally require hospitals to transfer patients to the nearest facility capable of providing appropriate care without regard to network boundaries. This legal mandate would eliminate excuses for delays, mainly caused by competitive considerations. In addition, payment structures that financially reward hospitals for retaining patients within their networks must be banned, especially in urgent cases. This is because incentivizing patient retention over optimal care directly threatens lives and thus must end.
Government agencies must likewise be granted the authority and resources to review hospital transfer decisions in real-time so they can step in when evidence suggests that business interests are delaying care. It is important to hold medical facilities accountable if they commit neglect to ensure that patient welfare is prioritized. In addition, emergency preparedness plans must include explicit legal requirements for cooperation between all nearby hospitals, notwithstanding ownership or affiliations. After all, hospitals must not act like corporate rivals—they must collaborate seamlessly to save lives.
Sean M. Cleary is the owner and founder of The Law Offices of Sean M. Cleary. His legal team is committed to providing services to victims of catastrophic injuries and complex wrongful death cases throughout Florida and many other states.
1 comment on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.
rayfusco68
Clearly is correct in his analysis, however, the problem with our Health Caste system is much larger. The focus on corporate profits over healthcare delivery is the main issue. The following reforms can change this.
Remove the cap on earnings for social security FICA which is currently 12.4% half from individual paychecks and half from the employer. This would increase Social Security revenue by over 1 Trillion dollars. This amount would not be needed so the FICA should be reduced putting more take home pay in workers paychecks and revenue in the employers’ business. The increased earnings would be subject to federal taxing adding revenue to the general fund but there is still a net gain for the employee and business.
Eliminate Medicare advantage plans. Medicare advantage plans are for profit insurance companies that cost Medicare more than traditional Medicare while lowering the quality of care.
Move Medicaid eligible people into Medicare and close that program. This will reduce both a State and Federal government expense. Medicaid is paid for 50% by the Federal government and 50% by the State.
Make all Medicare recipients eligible for the federal government's 340-B pharmacy program. This would dramatically reduce the cost of medications for Medicare recipients. This would eliminate for profit part d Medicare plans.
Move part B Medicare into part A, have one plan. This eliminates the cost of for profit part B supplemental plans.
Allow individuals and businesses to purchase Medicare plans directly from the government. The plans would be purchased with a 3% margin that would be used to offset FICA rates.
Make every bill passed by congress stand alone, eliminating the practice of tacking on irrelevant bills that would not pass on their own. Good bills should not be held hostage by bad bills.
Wednesday, May 28 Report this