The problem I have with this story and with the health care debate in general is I think political agenda is blocking people from rationally looking at the problem.

In the United States it is already illegal for a hospital to deny someone medical care. Whether they can pay or not they have to be given care. The problem here is the same isn't true of medication and dental work.

An insanely stupid flaw but an insanely easy one to fix.

By fixing that one flaw everyone in this article would have lived. The problem is the American public is fixated on Universal Health Care. Democrats want it, Republicans want to block it and no one is looking at other solutions to the problem.

That's really a problem because the debates take time. It is very likely ObamaCare is going to be defunded (the odds of the Republicans taking the Senate in 2012 are very good statistically). Once that happens we're going to be right back where we started AGAIN.

But there are plenty of solutions that would (or at least should) appease both sides that could be implemented almost instantly.

My personal opinion has always been that Health Care should be dealt with through low to no interest borrowing. The government was willing to subsidize 30 year loans to people with no credit if it meant buying a house so why shouldn't the same be true for medical care. That way this 24 year old can get anything he needs for under $10 a month (and we can offer deferred payment to those in bad circumstances like unemployment).

That solution could literally be implemented tomorrow. Just tell banks "the government will back these loans in the same way we used to back Student Loans when they were done through private banks". Then BOOM! Problem solved in the interim and and we can continue to debate Universal Health Care for years safely knowing no one will die while the debate was going on.

Dental care isn't cheap, but a non-surgical extraction is one of the cheapest things you can do. It'd probably make sense for the hospital to pay for it instead of getting stuck with their ER bill.

(My brother and I have been self-employed for years, and we both just self-insure for dental and visit the dentist for regular checkups. If you have good teeth, it seems to be cheaper than buying dental insurance even if you have to pay for a $1200 procedure once a decade. But, see, we are willing and able to pay that when it happens; a guy who can't afford a $100 extraction cannot, let alone regular exams!)

What I really don't understand is why the body doesn't auto-extract these teeth. I mean, it seems like it would be in the genetic interest for that to happen.

It should've been explained to them the consequences of not having their tooth problems taken care of. The boy's parents chose to wait and rack up a $280,000 hospital bill, but did no one explain to them that a simple $80 procedure can prevent serious complications? Paying $80 for that one procedure would have saved them their son, and it would've been cheaper than paying health insurance anyway since it's a one-time payment. Cut back on something, anything, just don't risk your or your son's life when the solution really wasn't too expensive.

Things like this would be better served by microloans anyway. Patient financing should be looked to as a way of controlling costs rather than forcing everyone to buy health insurance. If the boy's parents had been given the option of paying, say $10 a month over a year for the dental procedure, it would've been much easier on them than paying $80 up front. They could pay less if they make all their payments early.

Just give them an option, an option they can understand and afford.