Pros and Cons of Non-Emergency Medical Transport - TransMedCare

26 May.,2025

 

Pros and Cons of Non-Emergency Medical Transport - TransMedCare

Whether your elderly parent or loved one needs to go to a nursing home or move closer to you, you don’t have to do it on your own. In fact, non-emergency medical transportation is an incredible service to keep in mind when it comes to your loved ones. Understanding the pros and cons of non-emergency medical transport will help you decide whether or not it’s the right choice for your family.

Link to Juma

The Pros of NEMT

Non-emergency medical transport is a great service, especially if your loved one can’t ride in a traditional car for long periods. Take a look at the undeniable advantages of hiring a professional crew to transport your loved ones where they need to go.

Comfortable Ride

Because the transport vans provide more space and a comfortable atmosphere, your loved one will be able to remain comfortable during the trip. While many people expect the vehicle to be like a luxury RV, the vans have enough space and amenities for a relaxing and secure drive.

Takes Stress Off of You

When it comes to transporting your loved ones, you may have immense stress over it. Believe it or not, driving with someone who requires medical care can actually make for an unsafe and overwhelming trip for both of you. With that in mind, using NEMT can remove the stress from your shoulders.

Excellent Care and Safety

The professional crews have extensive experience transporting people while providing excellent care and safety. Most NEMT companies send teams of three people to transport and care for your loved one during their travels; this way, the crew can rotate between driving, caring, and resting to ensure a high level of comfort and safety for your family members.

The Cons of NEMT

Almost everything has downsides, but NEMT doesn’t have many. Continue reading to learn whether these disadvantages are deal breakers for you and your family.

Insurance Doesn’t Always Cover It

Unfortunately, Medicare and private insurance companies don’t always cover NEMT. While they may cover it in specific circumstances, it’s never a guarantee. If you’re unsure whether your medical insurance will cover long-distance non-emergency medical transport, be sure to ask in advance to avoid the surprise of paying out of pocket.

Ride Quality Depends on Roads

Even though the vehicle is comfortable and well-equipped, you should know that the ride quality depends on road conditions. In other words, the ride may not be smooth if the roads are bumpy and rough.

Making the Right Choice

NEMT is a convenient service to keep in mind for your loved ones. Almost everything has pros and cons, but our team at TransMedCare will do everything in our power to ensure your loved one has a comfortable and positive experience on the road. Unless the downsides are deal breakers for you, you should consider hiring professionals to transport your family members who need extra care.

After learning the pros and cons of non-emergency medical transport, you can make the best decision when it comes to care, comfort, and safety. Your loved one deserves the best, and our team at TransMedCare knows how to provide it.

Ride-Sharing | Pros, Cons, Debate, Arguments, Gig Economy ...

Ride-Sharing

Are Ride-Sharing Apps a Benefit to Society?

ARCHIVED TOPIC: This topic was archived on Dec. 10, , and will no longer be updated.

The first Uber ride was on July 5, , in San Francisco, California. The app launched internationally in and reached one billion rides on Dec. 30, , quickly followed by five billion on May 20, , and 10 billion on June 10, . [40]

On May 22, , Lyft launched in San Francisco as a part of Zimride and expanded to 60 cities in and to 100 more in , at which point Lyft claimed more than one million rides a day. On Nov. 13, , Lyft went international, allowing the company to reach one billion rides on Sep. 18, . [41]

Other ride-sharing apps include Gett (which partners with Lyft in the U.S.), Curb, Wingz, Via, Scoop, and Bridj. [42]

36% of Americans said they used ride-sharing services such as Uber or Lyft, according to a Jan. 4, Pew Research Center Survey. Use is up significantly from when just 15% had used the apps. [38]

But use varies among populations. 45% of urban residents, 51% of people who were 18 to 29, 53% of people who earned $75,000 or more per year, and 55% of people with college degrees used the apps, compared to 19% of rural residents, 24% of people aged 50 or older, 24% of people who earn $30,000 or less per year, and 20% of people with a high school diploma or less. [38]

In , 70% of Uber and Lyft trips occurred in nine big metropolitan areas: Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington, DC. [3]

Uber officially overtook yellow cabs in New York City in July , when it reported an average of 289,000 trips per day, compared to 277,000 taxi rides. More than 2.61 billion ride-sharing trips were taken in , a 37% increase over the 1.90 billion trips in . Ride-sharing trips were down significantly in and due to the COVID-19 pandemic. [3][4][39]

(This article first appeared on ProCon.org and was last updated on Aug. 17, .)

Want more information on Family Rides? Feel free to contact us.

Pros and Cons at a Glance

PROSCONSPro 1: Ride-sharing apps are convenient, affordable, and safe for riders and other drivers. Read More.Con 1: Ride-sharing services increase traffic congestion, emissions, and total vehicle miles traveled. Read More.Pro 2: Ride-sharing companies create jobs and boost the economy. Read More.Con 2: Ride-sharing drivers earn low pay that is often below minimum wage. Read More.Pro 3: Ride-sharing increases mobility for seniors, people with disabilities, and low-income populations and decreases discrimination experienced with taxis. Read More.Con 3: Ride-sharing services have a history of poor driver screening that puts passengers at risk. Read More.

Pro Arguments

 (Go to Con Arguments)

Pro 1: Ride-sharing apps are convenient, affordable, and safe for riders and other drivers.

The technology used by ride-sharing companies increases reliability and decreases wait times for consumers, and can offer a 20% to 30% discount over the cost of a taxi. [2][7]

These apps have built-in safety features, such as displaying the license plate and car model to ensure that riders get into the correct vehicle, the ability to share the route with friends and family, GPS tracking, cash-free transactions, and driver ratings. [8]

A full third of ride-sharing passengers who own vehicles (33%) said the main reason they use the service is to avoid driving while they are drunk. [5]

Fatal alcohol-related car accidents dropped between 10% and 11.4% after the introduction of ride-sharing services and DUI (driving under the influence) citations went down as much as 9.2% in some cities. Researchers estimate that if ride-sharing were fully implemented across the country, the resulting drop in DUI-related accidents could save 500 lives and $1.3 billion in American taxpayer money annually. [6][7]

Pro 2: Ride-sharing companies create jobs and boost the economy.

In there were more than two million Uber and Lyft drivers in the United States. Uber reported $12.9 billion in take-home gross revenue for its American drivers. Drivers have flexibility to set their own hours (a benefit that 80% cite as important to them), and 23% were unemployed prior to becoming a driver. 63% of drivers work behind the wheel fewer than 20 hours per week, using the job to supplement other incomes and pay bills. [11][12][13]

The Economic Development Research Group found that Uber contributed $17 billion in gross domestic product to the U.S. economy, as well as $580 million in added business productivity and $11 million in additional spending by international visitors who use ride-sharing to travel to more locations than they otherwise would have. [13]

Lyft reported that its drivers earned more than $3.6 billion in , and that passengers contributed an additional $2 billion of spending in their communities. 54% of riders say they explore their cities more, and 45% spend more at local businesses because of ride-sharing. [14]

Pro 3: Ride-sharing increases mobility for seniors, people with disabilities, and low-income populations and decreases discrimination experienced with taxis.

Ride-sharing initiatives such as Uber Assist, which offers door-to-door assistance, serve the estimated 26 million seniors in the U.S. who rely on others for transportation. Uber and Lyft partner with senior organizations, retirement homes, and healthcare providers to arrange rides for seniors who aren’t comfortable using technology. Some ride-sharing companies, such as Mobility 4 All and Lift Hero, have specially trained drivers and exist specifically to offer transportation options for seniors and people with disabilities. [22][23][24][25][26]

Lyft offers discounted rides to grocery stores for low-income households to increase access to healthy food options, such as fresh fruits and vegetables, and also pledged $1.5 million to transport veterans and people with low incomes to medical appointments and job interviews. [27][28]

Researchers noted high levels of discrimination in taxi service towards Black riders, who have a 73% higher chance of having their taxi canceled and wait 6–15 minutes longer than white riders. Anne Brown, Ph.D., assistant professor of planning, public policy, and management at the University of Oregon, found that “ridehail services nearly eliminate the racial-ethnic differences in service quality.” [29]

Con Arguments

 (Go to Pro Arguments)

Con 1: Ride-sharing services increase traffic congestion, emissions, and total vehicle miles traveled.

Ride-sharing adds a total of 5.7 billion miles of driving each year in the nine metropolitan areas (Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Seattle, and D.C.) that account for 70% of such trips in the U.S. At least 40% of the time, drivers are traveling without passengers in the car, adding more miles and vehicle emissions that wouldn’t exist without ride-sharing. As many as 60% of riders would have used public transit, walked, biked, or not taken a trip at all if ride-sharing weren’t an option. That means that nearly two-thirds of ride-sharing trips added additional cars to the roads. [2][3][9][10]

Studies show that ride-sharing makes traffic worse during already congested rush hours because of the extra cars on the road, and drivers look at their phones more for passenger pick ups and directions. Researchers found that ride-sharing contributes to a net increase in greenhouse gas emissions. [2][9][10]

Con 2: Ride-sharing drivers earn low pay that is often below minimum wage.

The Economic Policy Institute stated, “Uber drivers earn less than what 90 percent of workers earn,” and their hourly compensation “falls below the mandated minimum wage in nine of 20 major markets.” [15]

A report from economists at the University of California, Berkeley, and the New School found that 40% of ride-sharing drivers “have incomes so low they qualify for Medicaid and another 16 percent have no health insurance; 18 percent qualify for federal supplemental nutrition assistance (nearly twice the rate for New York City workers overall).” [18]

Half of ride-sharing drivers are the main earners for their families and are supporting children. Given a median hourly pay of $14.73 for Uber drivers, a 40-hour work week would result in an annual salary of close to $31,000 before vehicle expenses and about $20,000 after accounting for costs incurred by drivers—right at the poverty threshold for a family of three. Wages for drivers dropped 53% from to . [18][19][20][21]

As contract workers, drivers don’t receive employee benefits such as health insurance. They also pay for gas and car maintenance, something 44% of drivers say they have a hard time affording. [15][16][17]

Con 3: Ride-sharing services have a history of poor driver screening that puts passengers at risk.

While taxi drivers are subject to rigorous security screening involving fingerprint checks through the Federal Bureau of Investigation database, ride-sharing drivers are only subject to limited background checks. A lawsuit brought by the cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco revealed that 25 drivers with serious criminal records, such as murder and kidnapping, had passed Uber’s background checks. [30][31][32]

San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon, who sued Uber for allegedly failing to protect consumers from fraud and harm, said of the company’s security screening process, which does not include fingerprinting, “It is completely worthless.” [33][34]

A Dec. report from Uber stated that, among riders and drivers, there had been 10 murders in and nine in and 2,936 sexual assaults ranging from nonconsensual touching to rape in and 3,045 in . One woman wrote in an open letter from 14 victims of sexual harassment and rape by Uber drivers, “Although I immediately reported what happened to Uber, shockingly, this predator continues to drive for Uber to this day. I am 21 years old and will have to live with this the rest of my life.” [35][36]

For more information, please visit Flying Chair.

Discussion Questions

  1. Are ride-sharing apps a benefit to society? Explain your answer(s).
  2. Consider how the “gig” employee model impacts society. Explain your answer(s).
  3. What are your thoughts on the ride-sharing app template being used for other services? Explain your answer(s).

Take Action

  1. Analyze how ride-sharing apps have bred a new type of start-up according to Paul Sawers.
  2. Explore this survey of ride-sharing apps with CNET.
  3. Consider how ride-sharing failed to reduce traffic congestion according to Eliot Brown.
  4. Consider how you felt about the issue before reading this article. After reading the pros and cons on this topic, has your thinking changed? If so, how? List two to three ways. If your thoughts have not changed, list two to three ways your better understanding of the “other side of the issue” now helps you better argue your position.
  5. Push for the position and policies you support by writing U.S. senators and representatives.

Sources

  1. Aaron Smith, “Shared, Collaborative and On Demand: The New Digital Economy,” pewinternet.org, May 19,
  2. Caroline Rodier, “The Effects of RideHailing Services on Travel and Associated Greenhouse Gas Emissions,” ncst.ucdavis.edu, Apr.
  3. Bruce Schaller, “The New Automobility: Lyft, Uber and the Future of American Cities,” schallerconsult.com, July 15,
  4. Winnie Hu, “Uber, Surging Outside Manhattan, Tops Taxis in New York City,” nytimes.com, Oct. 12,
  5. Regina R. Clewlow and Gouri Shankar Mishra, “Disruptive Transportation: The Adoption, Utilization, and Impacts of Ride-Hailing in the United States,” ucdavis.edu, Oct.
  6. Frank Martin-Buck, “Driving Safety: An Empirical Analysis of Ridesharing’s Impact on Drunk Driving and Alcohol-Related Crime,” frankmartinbuck.com, Nov. 17,
  7. Brad N. Greenwood and Sunil Wattal, “Show Me the Way to Go Home: An Empirical Investigation of Ride-Sharing and Alcohol Related Motor Vehicle Fatalities,” MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, Mar. 1,
  8. Johnny Jet, “Do Uber’s New Safety Features Make Ridesharing Safer?,” forbes.com, June 15,
  9. David Schaper, “Ride-Hailing Services Add to Traffic Congestion, Study Says,” npr.org, Aug. 1,
  10. Steven R. Gehrke, Alison Felix, and Timothy Reardon, “Fare Choices: A Survey of Ride-Hailing Passengers in Metro Boston,” mapc.org, Feb.
  11. Patrick Sisson, “The Rideshare Guy on Uber, Lyft, and What Their Drivers Really Want,” curbed.com, May 22,
  12. Uber, “Uber in the Economy,” uber.com, July 28,
  13. Economic Development Research Group, “Uber’s Economic Impacts in the United States,” edrgroup.com, July 26,
  14. Lyft, “ Economic Impact Report,” lyft.com,
  15. Lawrence Mishel, “Uber and the Labor Market,” epi.org, May 15,
  16. Kate Gibson, “About Half of Uber, Lyft Drivers Make Less Than Minimum Wage: Revised Estimate,” thedrive.com, Mar. 6,
  17. Erik Sherman, “Uber and Lyft Drivers Are in a World of Trouble If This New Study Is Right,” inc.com, June 1,
  18. James A. Parrott and Michael Reich, “An Earnings Standard for New York City’s App-based Drivers: Economic Analysis and Policy Assessment,” centernyc.org, July
  19. Rani Molla, “Half of U.S. Uber Drivers Make Less Than $10 an Hour after Vehicle Expenses, According to a New Study,” recode.net, Oct. 2,
  20. Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, “Poverty Guidelines,” aspe.hhs.gov (accessed Dec. 17, )
  21. Steve LeVine, “The 53% Ride-Hailing Pay Cut,” axios.com, Sep. 24,
  22. Mark Edelen, “The New Senior Transportation: Uber and Lyft Ride-Sharing,” after55.com, Jan. 9,
  23. National Aging and Disability Transportation Center, “ Transportation Trends: A Look at the Year’s Top Mobility Challenges & Opportunities,” nadtc.org, Feb.
  24. Marco della Cava, “Lyft Deal with Allscripts Lets 180,000 Doctors Call Rides for Their Patients,” usatoday.com, Mar. 5,
  25. Taryn Phaneuf, “Ride-Hailing Service Aims to Go the Extra Mile for Seniors, People With Disabilities,” americaninno.com, Sep. 26,
  26. Cassandra Dowell, “Brookdale Turns to Uber-Like Service to Transport Residents,” innovation.seniorhousingnews.com (accessed Dec. 17, )
  27. Jeanette Settembre, “Lyft Is Offering $2.50 Rides to Grocery Stores for People Living in ‘Food Deserts’,” marketwatch.com, Dec. 12,
  28. Lyft, “Expanding Lyft Relief Rides to Help Those in Need,” blog.lyft.com, May 2,
  29. Anne E. Brown, “Ridehail Revolution: Ridehail Travel and Equity in Los Angeles,” its.ucla.edu, Jan. 1,
  30. Bob Egelko, “Lyft, Uber Drivers Won’t Need Fingerprint Checks, California Rules,” sfchronicle.com, Nov. 9,
  31. Marrian Zhou, “Uber, Lyft Reportedly Skimp on Background Checks,” cnet.com, Aug. 31,
  32. Nick Statt, “Uber Will Pay $10 Million to Settle Lawsuit over Driver Background Checks,” theverge.com, Apr. 7,
  33. Dara Kerr, “California DAs Sue Ride-Sharing App Uber, Settle with Rival Lyft,” cnet.com, Dec. 9,
  34. Ellen Huet, “SF, LA District Attorneys Sue Uber, Settle with Lyft over ‘Misleading’ Business Violations,” forbes.com, Dec. 9,
  35. Kate Conger, “Uber Says 3,045 Sexual Assaults Were Reported in U.S. Rides Last Year,” nytimes.com, Dec. 5,
  36. Katherine et al., “Open Letter to the Board of Directors of Uber Technologies, Inc.,” wigdorlaw.com, Apr. 26,
  37. Kari Paul, “Pamela Anderson Claims Uber Is Not Safe for Women,” marketwatch.com, Jan. 8,
  38. Jingjing Jiang, “More Americans Are Using Ride-Hailing Apps,” pewresearch.org, Jan. 4,
  39. Levi Sumagaysay, “Uber and Lyft Expect Ride-Hailing to Make a Sharp Recovery, but There Are Some Potential Roadblocks,” marketwatch.com, Apr. 28,
  40. Uber, “The History of Uber,” uber.com (accessed Aug. 17, )
  41. Andrew Greiner et al., “A History of Lyft, from Fuzzy Pink Mustaches to Global Ride Share Giant,” cnn.com, Apr. 2,
  42. Kailla Coomes and Andre Revilla, “The Best Ridesharing Apps for ,” digitaltrends.com, Mar. 30,