The History of EMTALA: Anyone, Anything, Anytime.
Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images
The three A’s. Anyone, anything, anytime. This is important because it’s supported by the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). The law includes three main sections: a medical screening exam, stabilization, and criteria for transfer, this is all included in a large portion of emergency medical practice.
On April 7, 1986, EMTALA was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan. This law was part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) of 1985. The reason why this law was passed was because of the problem of “patient dumping.” Patient dumping is either when a hospital refuses to treat them or sends them to another hospital because of their financial status. Hospitals can get into big trouble when doing this. In 1986, this was a big problem especially in private community hospitals sending many patients to county hospitals. During this time, 250,000 people a year were “dumped” to other hospitals because of their inability to pay for the hospital bills. This targets many socio-economic backgrounds. A statistic came out for Cook County, which concluded that 89% of patient transfers were minorities, 87% were unemployed, and 24% of patients transferred had unstable conditions.
Now EMTALA has three main rules for hospitals. If anyone comes into the emergency room, the hospitals are obligated to do a proper medical screening to check the severity of the medical condition. Next, if there is an emergency, the hospital must treat the patient or take them to a place where they can receive the correct treatment. Lastly, hospitals with specialized capabilities need to accept patient transfers if they are able to.
Regardless of of one's insurance status, EMTALA ensures them to an MSE (medical screening examination) if they are on a “hospital campus.” This includes any hospital within 250 yards of a hospital building. All vehicles are included in the patient's needs as well. However, if a patient is found to not have any EMCs, EMTALA no longer applies.
In the case of Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States, some Idaho politicians appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to ignore the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) and wanted permission to put doctors in jail for giving pregnant patients the emergency medical care they need.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed this lawsuit against Idaho in August 2022, seeking an injunction to allow patients to receive emergency abortions, as required under this federal law.
The Supreme Court on June 27 dismissed a case about whether an Idaho law can coexist with the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). In so doing, the Court did not rule on the merits of the joined cases, Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States.
AHA General Counsel Chad Golder said in a statement. “Caregivers must be able to exercise their professional judgment about a patient’s care as federal law requires under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) without the fear of criminal prosecution. We continue to urge courts to protect clinicians as they seek to provide emergency care to their patients.”
The American Hospital Association's General Counsel, Chad Golder, stated that caregivers must be able to exercise their professional judgment about a patient’s care as required by EMTALA without fearing criminal prosecution. This case highlights the ongoing conversation and controversy around abortion, especially after the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Even though the Supreme Court dismissed the case, the debate over abortion rights and access to emergency medical care continues to be a contentious issue.
