Frankly, it comes as no surprise that California takes care of its working poor better than most states, especially when it comes to health care debt.

If only this were more widespread, I think we would see crime go down, our economy improve and a happier population all around.

As of a few years ago when I did more detailed research, chapter 7 in California would allow you to retain enough of your possessions (ie, if you were broke you’d keep what little you had) to maintain a middle-class lifestyle. Credit card debts were hard to discharge because it was assumed that you could see this coming and had therefore bought things in bad faith. Medical debts were immune to that and were easier to completely discharge. Chapter 13 would be much tougher on them as you discussed above.

I think prevention is a very good thing. I’m trying to steer you away from the weak arguments for it so you can concentrate on the strong ones.

I appreciate that, but then I Googled my own state’s laws and found no mention of forgiving this debt. In fact, you have to file Chapter 13 bankruptcy in order to lessen it. But this is only for sole propeitors who own their own business (usually farmers) True, you can get it down to 10 cents on the dollar, but what about people who have $100,000 in medical debt because they don’t have insurance. Sure, $10,000 is a better number, but I think you can see what Gladwell is pointing to here, since that $10,000 is a still a substantial mountain to climb for most who can’t even afford health insurance.

Here’s a bit more about it:

Chapter 13 is entitled “Adjustment of Debts of An Individual With Regular Income”. It allows a debtor to keep assets he would otherwise lose in a Chapter 7 liquidation by paying creditors, generally over a three year period, at least as much as they would receive in a Chapter 7 liquidation. Under Chapter 13, the debtor proposes a plan for paying (primarily with future income): (1) all debt secured by property he wants to retain; (2) all “priority” debts (primarily past due income taxes); and (3) some or all unsecured debt (debts not backed by collateral or liens on property, such as most utility bills, medical bills and feed bills). The plan must be filed with the debtor’s petition or within 10 days thereafter, and it must be approved by the bankruptcy court. If the plan is approved and the debtor carries out the plan, the court will grant the debtor a discharge for any unpaid portions of debt scheduled in the plan.

I also found this page with some useful links, but they still provide pretty vague advice like “haggling with your doctor.”

How about this…just point me to your state’s laws so I can see a sample of what you’re talking about. If I don’t have any documentation on this specific thing, it’s hard to understand exactly what you’re talking about.

Again, remember my point. I can Google this and find some slightly useful information, but I’m stumped as to find the specifics. Now imagine somebody who is at the bottom of the ladder and may not have the access or the skills to find even the information I found. That’s a BIG problem and it shouldn’t be discounted as a weak argument. I agree that personal responsibility is important, but we can’t turn a blind eye to the reality of the situation.

Google is your friend. One of the things you want to put in the search is the name of your state since laws vary so widely.

The point I was trying to make “cause of bankruptcy” is not the same as “cause of financial distress”, since the law regards some causes much more favorably than others.

I think prevention is a very good thing. I’m trying to steer you away from the weak arguments for it so you can concentrate on the strong ones.

Medical bills are one of the easiest debts to get rid of in a bankruptcy. Other debts you’ll still be stuck with, so there’s no point in declaring, but if your problem is a hospital bill you can completely solve it.

Respectfully, that doesn’t mean that this still isn’t the leading cause of personal bankruptcy.

But please, detail the process of getting rid of that debt so I can share it with our readers. I’m sure we’d all like to have this information and our fingertips if disaster strikes.

However, I’m sure you can also imagine that the working poor have less knowledge at their fingertips, and therefore, less opportunity to work the system so they can get these bills relieved. Most of them only have computer access at libraries, so the internet is not the pervasive knowledge stream it is in our life.

And let’s just say for argument’s sake, that they did have that information AND the means to follow through. Now imagine if there was even a 10% swing is debt relief for these people towards the positive. What would that do the health care industry? I haven’t look at the numbers, but it seems that the economic results would be crippling to an industry that is already crying foul over insurance premiums.

My point is, prevention seems to be the only method by which we can fix this problem, and if that means we at least just consider the option of providing dental care for the working poor and their children, I think it’s worth exploring.

Medical bills are one of the easiest debts to get rid of in a bankruptcy. Other debts you’ll still be stuck with, so there’s no point in declaring, but if your problem is a hospital bill you can completely solve it.

My advice: don’t get government or the insurance industry more involved in the dental health business more than they already are.

So you’re saying that quality of care is more important than more people getting it. My question to you is does it have to be one or the other? People are hurting as a result of not having this insurance. In fact, it’s leading to more serious health problems. Investing in dental insurance now could help lessen the need for health insurance later on down the road when people usually need it, saving us trillions.

We’re also talking about preventative medicine too, something that isn’t mentioned very often in the US health care industry. If people have healthy teeth they’re happier, and they’re less likely to abuse their children, those children are less likely to act out in school and more likely to learn, and then everybody is less likely to committ crimes and we may be able to stop that vicious cycle. If extending something as simple as dental care to everybody in the nation could help start that trend, why would you be against it? Is it still for the reasons you’ve given above?

Dentists view their work differently than doctors do, take a more businesslike approach, and don’t guard their prerogatives as jealously as docs do.
Dental insurance is not nearly as widespread as medical insurance.
The government is not nearly as involved in dental health care as it is in medical health care.

My advice: don’t get government or the insurance industry more involved in the dental health business more than they already are.