It's worth quoting the key part of the phsycian's letter at length (emphasis mine):
'It’s true that EMTALA [the 1986 law requiring that emergency rooms treat you regardless of insurance status] requires a medical screening exam and stabilization of any emergency medical conditions. It does not, however, mandate admission to the hospital for treatment of conditions that are not currently emergent (e.g. cancer, kidney disease, and other more chronic conditions except related to certain complications). For example, if someone were to present to one of our emergency departments with some mild bloating and be found to have an abdominal mass, they may very well be discharged home for outpatient follow-up and treatment. If that person doesn’t have insurance, they will likely have difficulty obtaining that care.'
Unless, of course, they are Mitt Romney.
The Emergency Room mandate (and let's not forget that there are plenty of folks who think even that's an unwarranted imposition on Free Enterprise) is the barest, most minimal cover for obtaining medical treatment in a crisis. It's like a police department that will only do something while the criminal's still there but if the crime is already committed, or not currently recurring, will simply shrug and suggest you get some private security or a private investigator or bounty hunter to take care of the matter on your own nickel. We would (and, when it happens, do) consider that outrageous, but the GOP's talking point that the same approach is a panacea for medical care is just as outrageous.
Embedded Link
Ways the Uninsured Die
Grim notes from a physician.
Google+: View post on Google+
Also, I understand that a call to 911 will get the paramedics sent out to you for free, but if they have to transport you to the hospital, you will get a hefty bill for that service. Just take a look at the anecdotes here.