At Mind Over Mayday, we focus on understanding the complex challenges that contribute to the stress and mental health struggles faced by first responders and healthcare providers. One of the greatest sources of this stress comes from the overwhelming demand placed on emergency services by patients seeking care that could often be addressed at lower levels of the healthcare system. In this post, I aim to explore this issue with sensitivity and balance. This is not intended to create division or foster unhealthy dialogue between healthcare providers and consumers. Instead, I seek to validate the shared frustrations of both groups and offer a starting point for solutions—grounded in education, collaboration, and greater transparency. By addressing these challenges together, we can move toward a system that alleviates stress for providers while ensuring patients receive the right care at the right time.
From my experiences on both sides of the healthcare system—as an EMT in the field and as a technician in the emergency department of one of Maine’s largest hospitals—I’ve noticed a troubling pattern in how healthcare is sought and utilized. It’s a pattern that contributes to the overburdening of emergency services, and if we want a system that works efficiently for everyone, I believe it’s time for an important dialogue.
Let me begin by assuring you that my observations come not from a place of judgment but from a perspective of both healthcare provider and healthcare consumer. I’ve been on both sides of the insurance spectrum: at one point covered by state-funded insurance (Mainecare) and now with private insurance. Both systems serve critical roles, but they shape the way we approach healthcare very differently.
When I was on Mainecare, I had no out-of-pocket costs for any medical services. In theory, this should have been a great thing—it meant access to care without financial barriers. However, this also influenced how I accessed care. I often sought immediate and high-level care because, in practical terms, all options were “equal.” There was no financial incentive to weigh whether I should visit primary care, urgent care, or the emergency department; they all seemed like valid options in a moment of need.
Now, with private insurance, I experience healthcare differently. I have to weigh costs carefully because I face varying copays: $25 for a primary care visit, $75 for urgent care, and $150 for an emergency room visit. This naturally makes me more selective. For non-emergent issues, I’m inclined to start with home remedies, over-the-counter options, or seek advice from lower-cost providers. The recent itemized bill from a minor surgery—$16,000, of which I had to cover $566—reminded me how costly healthcare can be. It’s a level of transparency and accountability that isn’t part of the experience for those covered fully by state insurance.
This isn’t a criticism of those on state-funded insurance. In many ways, the system unintentionally disempowers patients by shielding them from the financial realities of healthcare. Without a full understanding of how services are billed and prioritized, people may not realize the strain that frequent emergency department visits place on the system. They may also not understand that arriving by ambulance doesn’t guarantee faster care—emergency rooms prioritize patients based on acuity, not arrival time or method.
This lack of understanding often leads to frustration and dissatisfaction. Emergency departments are overwhelmed by non-urgent cases—patients seeking COVID-19 or flu testing, treatment for minor infections, or management of chronic conditions. These cases could often be handled more efficiently at primary care or urgent care centers, but many people either don’t realize this or face barriers to accessing these alternatives.
So where do we go from here? The solution isn’t as simple as reducing access to care by adding copays for state-funded insurance. That would only create new barriers for people who already struggle to access care. Instead, we need a twofold approach:
- Enhanced public health education: We must teach people how to navigate the healthcare system effectively—what services to seek and when. This includes explaining how emergency departments operate and promoting the role of primary care and prevention.
- Systemic transparency: Patients, regardless of insurance type, should have access to clearer information about the costs and processes involved in their care. An informed patient is an empowered patient, better equipped to make thoughtful decisions about their health.
The conversation around healthcare access and emergency service use needs to shift toward collaboration and education. Healthcare workers, public health officials, policymakers, and community leaders must come together to create a more efficient, compassionate, and sustainable system.
To my readers who are healthcare consumers and providers alike: What are your thoughts on this? What changes would you like to see in how we educate and empower patients? Let’s open this dialogue and work toward solutions that benefit us all.
Mind Over Mayday 