Medical debt is a significant burden for many adults in the United States, with up to 40% of them owing over $200 billion collectively. Various debt relief programs have been established by private organizations, philanthropies, and governments at different levels to address this issue. These programs are well-intentioned and seem positive, but a recent study revealed that they may not be as effective as they appear and could potentially harm the mental health of those receiving assistance.
Katherine Hempstead, a senior policy adviser at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, discussed the study findings in a First Opinion essay and on the “First Opinion Podcast” with STAT’s Pat Skerrett. They were joined by Allison Sesso, the CEO of Undue Medical Debt, a national nonprofit organization that helped sponsor the study. Sesso pointed out that medical debt is particularly stressful because it can deter individuals from seeking necessary medical care, unlike other types of debt.
Sesso also highlighted that the current system may be setting people up for failure by focusing on consumerism in healthcare decisions. She expressed concerns about individuals having to navigate healthcare costs and make decisions based on affordability rather than healthcare needs. The conversation on the podcast shed light on the complexities of addressing medical debt and the implications of different approaches.
Listeners are encouraged to subscribe to the “First Opinion Podcast” on various platforms and sign up for the First Opinion newsletter to stay informed about the latest essays and discussions on important healthcare topics. The episode emphasized the importance of understanding the challenges of medical debt and the need for thoughtful solutions that prioritize individuals’ well-being.