Here Accident and Emergency treatment is free at point of entry (i.e. I suppose non-citizens might be billed afterwards). Other treatment is supposed to be free (at point of entry) to citizens (+other legal residents) only. There are though stories, some documented, of people from the US, and others, coming here for treatment. My GPs now have a poster saying people may be required to show proof of entitlement to treatment. > Doctors know what an extreme burden the illegals are putting > on the system, How great is the "burden" as a total of health spending? To what extent is it offset by the work the immigrants carry out? Does it include health services to illegal immigrants who pay taxes? Judy Evans, Cardiff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Yost" <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 10:36 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Medscape Poll > Medscape polled physicians: > > According to the March 3 edition of The New York Times, last > year, 20 states proposed about 80 bills that would cut > noncitizens' access to healthcare or other services or would > compel benefit agencies to report applicants with > immigration violations. Do you approve or disapprove of this > type of immigration policy? > > > > Over 61% of the physicians polled approved of such > legislation. What my physician friend found so unusual was > that the majority supported *reporting* illegal immigrant > applicants. > > Doctors know what an extreme burden the illegals are putting > on the system, so it's not surprising they would support the > legislation denying access. But that extra step of reporting > the illegals is something physicians have previously avoided. ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html