Healthcare CEOs Shoot Themselves in the Foot

padthaiforlunch

Guru
1000 Post Club
1,641
Health insurers refuse to limit rescission of coverage - Los Angeles Times


A Texas nurse said she lost her coverage, after she was diagnosed with aggressive breast cancer, for failing to disclose a visit to a dermatologist for acne.


The sister of an Illinois man who died of lymphoma said his policy was rescinded for the failure to report a possible aneurysm and gallstones that his physician noted in his chart but did not discuss with him.


....Late in the hearing, [Bart] Stupak, the committee chairman, put the executives on the spot. Stupak asked each of them whether he would at least commit his company to immediately stop rescissions except where they could show "intentional fraud."


The answer from all three executives: "No."

Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) said that a public insurance plan should be a part of any overhaul because it would force private companies to treat consumers fairly or risk losing them.

"This is precisely why we need a public option," Dingell said.
 
I read a rather different version of that yesterday. Leave it to the LA times to "edit" out a portion of that exchange!

Asked if they would commit to never rescinding a policy unless it was intentionally fraudulent, all of the CEOs said no, noting that a commitment like that does not coincide with the state laws and regulations they follow.

"Doesn't it bother you that people are going to die because you insist on reviewing a policy that somebody took out in good faith and forgot to tell you that they were being treated for acne?" Barton asked the panel of CEOs.

"Yes sir, it does, and we regret the necessity that that has to occur even a single time, and we've made suggestions that would reform the system such that that would no longer be needed," Hamm replied.

Cancer patient tells of rips in health insurance safety net - CNN.com
 
As we all know, though, there is a difference between lying on the application (fraud) and not knowing the doctor had put down certain things in the medical record which he forgot to tell the patient about (which I believe was another example in the story).

So, for those whose medical/clerical errors were unknowingly made, I agree they shouldn't be held to task.

However, for those who flat out lie, misrepresent, fib-just-a-bit or whatever, what exactly should we do with them? Why don't we just threaten them with what is currently our Medicare system, without an option for any form of supplement or extra insurance. When they find out how at-risk they will be with the same plan our seniors are currently given, and have to go bankrupt because of their own deceit, well, perhaps they'll set an example for everyone.

Ya know, just a thought...
 
Guaranteed issue would probably solve more problems than it causes, assuming coverage is mandatory.

Public plan proposals are a poison pill.
 
I listened to a different story regarding the lady with breast cancer, her had in his notes that some of the cells from a screening of skin scrapings were pre cancerous that wasn't disclosed. Not that it should have caused a termination, but I have witnessed doctor notes that were never told to the patient.
 
Back
Top