U.S. hospitals unprepared for attack

Administrators at 34 hospitals in big cities throughout the country could address homeland security-related criticism easily — providing someone is willing to supply the mountain of money required to do so.

An investigation ordered by the House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has disclosed that hospital trauma centers in seven cities do not have the capability of dealing with even a minor terrorist attack. The cities are New York, Washington, D.C.; Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Denver and Minneapolis.

If that shocks you, it shouldn’t. It’s a matter of supply and demand.

Hospitals, including those serving our area, are highly conscious of the need to hold down health care costs. So, as accurately as they can, they provide only the services and facilities normally required of them. That includes trauma centers intended to serve only the normal flow of patients.

Of course most hospitals aren’t prepared to handle victims of a terrorist attack. Providing the facilities necessary for that would cost an enormous amount of money — which would have to be covered by patients, insurance companies, or taxpayers.

Some members of Congress were upset in the extreme about the report. “If a terrorist attack had occurred on March 25 when we did our survey, the consequences would have been catastrophic,” said U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif.

Fortunately, some lawmakers took the more realistic view. “We cannot afford to build and maintain idle trauma facilities, waiting for the tragic day we pray never comes,” commented Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn.

Precisely.

While contingency plans for catastrophes need to be maintained — and most hospitals have them — attempting to make every health care facility in every town and city ready for every eventuality would bankrupt the country.

Health care already is expensive enough without having to deal with new government mandates regarding homeland security.