Lisa Blumberg: The Little Known Issue of Medical Deportations by Hospitals

A 2021 report prepared by the Free Migration Project and University of Pennsylvania Law  Students entitled “Fatal Flights: Medical Deportation in the U.S.”  is eye-opening and shocking.

Photo of Lisa Blumberg, head and shoulders shot of a smiling woman with short gray hair and a dark blue blouse seated with a desk of files and books in the background.
Lisa Blumberg

Usually, when one hears the frightening word “deportation”, one thinks of governmental action, officials dragging people from their homes and sending them out of the country. With medical deportation though, it is a hospital taking the action when faced with an often undocumented and usually uninsured immigrant patient that the hospital does not want to treat.

The report contains citations for all cases referred to in this blog.

According to the report, medical deportation is the physical removal by a non-government entity of an immigrant patient who is critically injured or ill from one country to another without the informed consent of the patient or the patient’s authorized caregiver. This practice is usually not in the patient’s best medical interests and typically results in poorer health outcomes or even death for the removed patient. Hospitals disguise the practice as medical repatriation—when a patient who is traveling or working abroad wants to return to their home country to receive medical care. But this is not medical repatriation. Medical deportations happen all across the U.S. but are rarely reported. To carry out medical deportations, hospitals hire medical transport companies to fly patients to their countries of citizenship. Just one flight can cost as much as $50,000. These deportations typically happen without any involvement by immigration courts or the Department of Homeland Security. Once undocumented immigrants leave the U.S., it may be difficult or impossible to return.

Medical Deportation occurs in the shadows. Hospitals are not subject to reporting requirements and because of their precarious situation, undocumented patients and their families are leery about asking for outside help or resisting a medical “recommendation”. Thus, data is scant.

In December 2012, the Center for Social Justice at Seton Hall Law School and the Health Justice Program at New York Lawyers for the Public Interest documented more than 800 cases of attempted or medical deportations in just six years. The identified cases included deportations from hospitals in fifteen states—Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas—to El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Lithuania, Mexico, the Philippines and South Korea.

As an example of these cases, in 2011, a hospital in Chicago deported a young Mexican laborer in his twenties who fell from a roof and became quadriplegic, without his consent. The hospital in Mexico where he was sent couldn’t afford new filters for his ventilator and would simply clean them daily. The man died just over a year after he was flown from the United States.

In 2016, NPR reported on an undocumented and uninsured man who had suffered a stroke and required months of intensive therapy. After three months of therapy, the hospital described facing “a real financial burden” in continuing to care for the patient, and rehabilitation facilities refused to admit him. A doctor involved in this case described the hospital’s choice as follows:

From the hospital’s point of view, it was easy to see that this large one-time expense [to fly the patient by air ambulance out of the country] would be worthwhile. The transfer to Mexico would put a stop to the indefinite, uncompensated costs of continued hospitalization. Further, the transfer would open up the patient’s bed to a new (and presumably insured) patient.[i]

In 2020, Jefferson Torresdale Hospital attempted to deport a member of the Philadelphia community identified as A.V, after he suffered catastrophic brain injuries from a motorcycle accident. This attempt was fortunately unsuccessful due to the advocacy spearheaded by family.

The report states that medical deportation is an issue that sits at the intersection of healthcare and immigration policy. There is an omission here. Medical deportation is an issue that sits at the intersection of healthcare, disability and immigration policy. The cases mentioned in the report all involve people who will probably have long-term disabilities. A hospital has no incentive to incur the expense of medical transportation for “one and done” patients, patients who can be quickly treated and who then will cause no further issues.

The flaw in the otherwise insightful report is the lack of explicit awareness of the disability dimension to all this. For example, the report calls for effective discharge planning without   recognizing this means more social commitment to in-home support and outpatient services. It mentions the need for language interpreters so the patient will understand what he is being asked to agree to, but ignores a possible need for bilingual sign language interpreter. Significantly, while the report states that more research is needed to  determine if international  human rights laws could be used to stop medical deportation,  it overlooks the possibility that state and federal civil rights protections for people with disabilities could be relevant. (NOTE: I have not studied this issue).

Nonetheless, the report has done a tremendous service in bringing attention to the reprehensible practice of medical deportation. Its recommendations include universal access to healthcare and expanding the breadth of emergency Medicaid in the interim, regulatory efforts to end these deportations and stepped up advocacy.

The Free Migration Project is working on a National Directory of advocates who are available for patients and fellow advocates dealing with the issue of medical deportation.   Instructions on how to join is given in the report. This is an emerging issue.

Endnote:

[i] Fatal Flights: Medical Deportation In the U.S., page 4; And see, John Henning Schumann, When the Cost of Care Triggers a Medical Deportation, NPR (Apr. 9, 2016, 7:00 AM), https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/04/09/473358504/when-the-cost-of-care-triggers-a-medical-deportation

 

ADA31 Lead On – Celebrize! Celebrate & Recognize Non-Apparent Disabilities

Head and shoulders photo of Anita Cameron, an African American woman with long dreadlocks and brown sweater.

My name is Anita Cameron. I am Director of Minority Outreach for Not Dead Yet, a Rochester, NY-based, national disability rights group opposed to medical discrimination against disabled people, medical rationing, euthanasia and doctor assisted suicide.

I’m also a psychiatric survivor. I live with chronic depression and anxiety.

My first experience with the mental health system was at age 19. I was living in rural Western Michigan in a little apartment that I was quite proud of. I’d recently moved there from Chicago, and had been living on my own since age 16, when I entered university.

I was born with multiple disabilities, including low vision and epilepsy, but I was able to live independently in the community.

While living in Michigan, my seizures became uncontrolled and I was hospitalized 30 miles from home, as my tiny town had no hospital. When my seizures were finally controlled with a new medication, I wanted to go home to my apartment.  The hospital stalled, but one day, the sheriff came to pick me up. I assumed that they were taking me home, but no – they took me 300 miles from home – to a psychiatric hospital! I was taken before a judge, and it was explained to me that because I wanted to go home, I was considered a danger to myself, because disabled people shouldn’t live alone. I was committed for up to 60 days, but I wound up fighting for 8 months to get out of there. Finally, with the help of my music therapist, I was able to get out and return home to Chicago.

That experience was so traumatic that it led to decades of a revolving door experience in psychiatric hospitals. I was depressed and suicidal, indeed, I had attempted suicide many times.

After years of therapy, I got to the point where I no longer wanted to die. I fought for my life and for my mental health and I won! It’s been 16 years since my last hospitalization. I’m also a writer, and I use my writing to get my feelings out and clear my head. If not for writing, I don’t know if my recovery would have been fully possible. I’ve written about mental health issues and the discrimination we face.

I then used my writing to create gig opportunities for myself, culminating in my position at Not Dead Yet. I have written persuasively about opposition to a public policy of assisted suicide from the perspective of communities of color who experience disparities in access to healthcare. I was even cited in the 2019 National Council on Disability report on the dangers of assisted suicide as public policy.

One of the reasons I’m so vehemently against assisted suicide is that it turns suicide prevention on it’s head. It makes death an option for medical treatment, which is absolutely terrifying.

Now, in some states where assisted suicide is law, assisted suicide proponents are trying to broaden it by advocating that those dealing with mental health issues should be able to request doctor assisted suicide. This is already law in countries like The Netherlands, Belgium and most recently, Canada, though there will be an 18-month study period before it’s implemented.

We cannot allow this to happen! Those of us with mental health conditions need services and supports, not death! As long as disability discrimination exists in healthcare, as long as mental health conditions and people living with them continue to be stigmatized and ostracized, death should never be a “treatment” option under any circumstances.

If you’d like you learn more about why physician assisted suicide and other forms of disability discrimination in medicine are dangerous public policy, visit Not Dead Yet at www.notdeadyet.org and DREDF at https://dredf.org/public-policy/assisted-suicide/.

NCIL’s Advocacy Priorities Guide Includes Key NDY Policy Issues

As July 26, the 31st Anniversary of the Americans With Disabilities Act, approaches, the National Council on Independent Living is holding its annual conference. NCIL has announced that its annual Advocacy Priorities Guide is now available, containing “specific information on the national legislative and policy priorities identified biannually by the NCIL membership.”

NCIL’s Healthcare priorities include four key areas:

  • Expanding Coverage
  • Prohibiting Healthcare Discrimination
  • Chronic Pain and Opioids
  • Opposing Assisted Suicide

Here’s the section on:

Opposing Assisted Suicide

Assisted suicide laws pose major dangers to people with disabilities. Every national disability organization with a position on assisted suicide opposes it. Many national medical organizations also oppose it. This includes the American Medical Association and the American College of Physicians. Many states have repeatedly refused to pass assisted suicide laws as well. The reasons we oppose it include:

When assisted suicide is legal, it is the cheapest treatment available. This is attractive in our profit-driven healthcare system. This is dangerous.

Terminal diagnoses are often wrong, and it is nearly impossible to know how long someone has left to live. Assisted suicide laws lead people to lose good years of their lives.

If one doctor says “no,” people can “doctor-shop” (go from doctor to doctor) until they find one who will say “yes”.

The “safeguards” do not protect people. There is no independent witness when the lethal drugs are taken. There is no real enforcement, and no one is charged with investigating. Therefore, there is no protection against abuse or coercion.

Many other pressures exist that can cause people with compromised health to hasten their death.

Evidence shows that assisted suicide laws lead to “suicide contagion,” driving up the general suicide rate.

We already have the right to good end-of-life pain relief. This includes palliative sedation, if needed. Palliative sedation uses medication to decrease awareness to relieve suffering.

In 2019, the National Council on Disability released a report on Assisted Suicide. The report examined the effect of the country’s assisted suicide laws on people with disabilities. The report found that the laws’ safeguards are ineffective. It also found that there is no oversight of abuses or mistakes. Many of those abuses have been documented by the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF).

***

NCIL  also included the following critical priorities on discrimination.

Prohibiting Healthcare Discrimination

There is a lot of discrimination against people with disabilities in healthcare. This has serious consequences, like substandard care and less access to needed services. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted this for us. States and hospitals created new rules that discriminated against disabled people. They developed plans for “medical rationing” that determined who does and does not get treatment and care. Some disabled people were denied treatment altogether.

Black, indigenous, and other people of color (BIPOC) have died at alarming rates during the pandemic. LGBTQIA+ people and many other marginalized groups have also faced discrimination. Discrimination in healthcare has always had deadly consequences. During the pandemic, it has meant drastically higher infection and death rates.

NCIL supports strong enforcement of nondiscrimination laws. We also support new laws to address discriminatory practices. Some of our biggest areas of concern include:

  • Medical equipment in clinics, offices, and facilities that is not accessible;
  • Failure to communicate or provide information in accessible formats;
  • Discrimination involving pressure to refuse life-sustaining treatment;
  • Discriminatory “futile care” policies allowing healthcare providers to decide not to give life-saving treatment to someone even if they want it;
  • Discrimination in organ transplants; and
  • Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Insurance companies use QALYs to decide how much – or whether – to pay for certain treatments and services. Different disabilities and health conditions are given different number values. These are used to calculate the “value” of the treatment or service.

 

Not Dead Yet UK: Evidence of a Slippery Slope?

Evidence of a Slippery Slope?

By Not Dead Yet UK

June 14, 2021

Supporters of our campaign to resist a law change on assisted suicide have continually expressed real concerns about the concept of  “a slippery slope”. The idea that once assisted suicide is permitted for one group it isn’t long before it’s extended to include other groups and that this is a bad thing. Our opponents have argued that this is simply not true, that a slippery slope does not exist.

Let’s briefly examine what has been happening in Canada.

In December 2015 – the Quebec Province in Canada (a regional government) passed the Act Respecting End of Life Care, which permits Medical Aid In Dying (MAID).

June 2016 – The law was extended to other Provinces and Territories, making Quebec’s law legal across the whole of Canada. It prioritises mentally ill and vulnerable people and those who have a grievous or irremediable medical condition, including people with an incurable illness or disease, and disabled people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia_in_Canada

In March 2020 – the Canadian courts (nationwide) extended the law to include the following:

  • Removal of the requirement that death should be reasonably foreseeable
  • Only one independent witness to request for MAID
  • A personal or health care worker may be a witness
  • Removal of 10-day period for reflection
  • The waiver should be given in advance

On 17 March 2021 – the Canadian legislature expanded MAID to a broader group of people:

  • A person does not need to have a fatal or terminal condition to be eligible for MAID.
  • Mentally ill patients can give an advanced waiver to sign off for MAID before they are compromised by their condition.

https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/medical-assistance-dying.html

The numbers of people assisted to end their lives in Canada are consistently growing year on year:

https://bit.ly/3glUlmp

The Canadian Government now propose that in March 2023 it plans to give patients with mental illness alone and no other underlying issues the option for a MAID.

Within six years the scope of the assisted suicide legislation in Canada has been amended twice with further amendments planned. More people are now eligible, the death rate is increasing and the protections have been weakened we’d call that a “slippery slope”.

Carol Cleigh Sutton: Ableism Is Violence

Image of Carol Cleigh Sutton, a fair skinned woman with white hair, pulled back, wire rimmed glasses, and a white turtle neck top with a silver necklace featuring two connected silver handcuffs with small white stones.
Carol Cleigh Sutton

Listening to the other presenters, many of whom  mentioned ableism, but most especially to the names being read – for more than an hour – during the Disability Day of Mourning, something I’ve known for years snapped into focus and demanded to be written: Ableism is Violence.

The problem is Abled Chauvinism. Like men vis á vis women, the severely abled are deeply, violently, wholly convinced, indoctrinated, certain of their superiority over us in all things, at all times and in all places. It goes beyond privilege and leaves microaggression in the dust. Early feminists said things like, “I may be a woman, but that doesn’t make me disabled.” Well, these wheels upon which I sit make me disabled. That doesn’t mean that anyone is superior to me in any meaningful way. I would concede that many people are my superior in, for example, athletics. Athletics, though, is not a meaningful area of pursuit for me. But most severely abled people would come off far behind Marcel Hug, for example, so even that is not an area of unequivocal abled superiority.

A lot of people think of ableism, if they think of it at all, as a softer, gentler form of discrimination. Some believe that it is in some ways beneficial to disabled people. I’ve even been told that it is not really like racism or sexism because, “no one would actually harm a disabled person.” No,  just murder us and then sympathize with our murderers. Ableism is violence. It is real violence done to real people. It harms and it kills.

As I write this, I can hear them saying, “yes, but it comes from a place of love.” I explain about the leavings of a male bovine. They say, “yes, but it’s really for the best, they were suffering.” I cry bullshit. “Yes, but their lives were a burden.” BULLSHIT! All of these attempts at rationalization are the violence of ableism trying to hide its ugliness inside the trappings of compassion. Their ‘compassion’ is poorly disguised contempt. It is ableism. Ableism is violence.

There is jingoism, chauvinism in the severely abled’s attitudes towards us. I remember an interview I saw with Ed Roberts. Ed recalls being told by everyone around him that he couldn’t have a life, an education, a family or a career and how he tried to kill himself. Then he got some control back and it all changed. He decided to live and he got all of those things and created structures to help others get them as well. Yet, he recounts being met with frank disbelief when talking about having a rich, full life. There is pervasive, pernicious, ableist belief that life with disability is unremitting suffering, sadness and pain. This belief that our lives are horrific and any sane person should rather die, this is the core of the BDTD (better dead than disabled) movement. The very fact that there are large, multi-million dollar organizations promoting this filth, this violence is an affront. It is hate. It is ableism. It is violence. It needs to stop.

ABLEISM IS VIOLENCE.