In the USA, hospitals are denying care to single people:

Hospitals are denying necessary care to single people, requiring that a spouse or close family member, not a taxi driver, pick them up after surgery, and last minute cancelling surgeries for people without this.

www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-29/colonoscopy-cancelled-no-social-network-to-look-after/100576598

www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/living-single/201603/how-hospitals-do-us-wrong

Do you know people who would take a day off from work without much notice to sit in a hospital waiting room for your 10 minute ride home?

Might be worth asking about your hospital's policies and spreading the word. They should be legally required to provide the transport survice and bill it to insurance.

I believe the reason for this policy is to cull unmarried men. They are seen by some as undesireables needing to die, just as during drafts when men could escape by getting married. And every hospital and doctor's office asks whether you are married or not.

Suppose someone agrees to be there, and then they oversleep or don't answer their phone? You surgery will then be cancelled last minute. Why should a hospital put the fate of events in the hands of a 3rd party?

I agree that the American health system is horrible.
But why is your first link about Australian medical services? (Or their lack of service?)

And why they hell, do Australian trained medical staff use general anesthesia for a simple check-up?
A local sedative is enough, and the most common procedure.
I admit it's an uncomfortable experience, but not something people, normally would need to be asleep to endure.

That's like saying bartenders should be required to hire a fleet of designated drivers.

@clousems said in #4:
>
Bartenders are not liable for drunk drivers crashing unless they served them WAY over the legal limit.

@Chesserroo2 said in #5:
> Bartenders are not liable for drunk drivers crashing unless they served them WAY over the legal limit.
Does that really matter?
Or are you saying that we should reduce the liability for hospitals instead of increasing their responsibility?

you've described a legitimate problem, but you should reconsider what you think the cause of it is

www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/jaha.117.005890

Your odds of dying of heart disease are 50% high if not married even after accounting for condition severity and how much money you have. How is that possible? My guess is the hospital is discriminating somehow.

@clousems said in #6:
> Does that really matter?
> Or are you saying that we should reduce the liability for hospitals instead of increasing their responsibility?

I'm saying we should reduce their liability, as long as they warn partients and require they at least call a taxi. I'm also saying they should provide medical transport to people who seem more likely to need it.

@ Chesserroo2 said in #8:
>
> Your odds of dying of heart disease are 50% high if not married even after accounting for condition severity and how much money you have. How is that possible? My guess is the hospital is discriminating somehow.
Well, maybe this has also soemthing to do with the fact that your "better half" can call an ambulance or, you know, care for you when you come home.