charlie555, Life is full of unknowns, without a doubt. What I hoped would be informative to people is that in each case, it was an insurance call center that interfered with patient care. As I’m sure you know, one of claims from the opposition to healthcare reform is that it will put government between you and your doctor. But the reality today is that a for-profit insurer sits smack dab in the middle between you and your doctor, frequently, and for no good medical reason. The primary priority for a private health insurer is to return profits to shareholders, to please Wall St. with its medical loss ratios so its stock prices will do well. I’m not ranting, that is their #1 goal.
Of course my sister could have opted to have and pay for surgery out of pocket (or any other patient whose insurer denies care) but I would assert that very few, if any, people do that. They’ve been paying for health insurance, why should they have to now pay for the actual medical care their insurance was supposed to cover?
I don’t consider my sister’s case rationing of care, to me, it was an abuse of my sister’s rights by the insurer. Rationing, to me, means that not every person is going to be entitled to a liver transplant, or a heart transplant, or undergoing intrusive extraordinary measures when their condition is terminal. (Just a personal aside, if I reach that point myself, I will not opt for continuing extraordinary measures.)
If I leave with you any information learned from these posts, I hope it is that private insurers frequently become the deciding factor, rather than the doctor, or even the patient, about the course and quality of care we receive. They are insurers, they are not clinicians, but they substitute their policies and protocols for the judgment of physicians who know the patient and the patient’s history.
Do I think insurers are evil? I think I’d say they are now occupying an improper role in the health of the American people. Thanks for responding.
charlie555, Life is full of unknowns, without a doubt. What I hoped would be informative to people is that in each case, it was an insurance call center that interfered with patient care. As I’m sure you know, one of claims from the opposition to healthcare reform is that it will put government between you and your doctor. But the reality today is that a for-profit insurer sits smack dab in the middle between you and your doctor, frequently, and for no good medical reason. The primary priority for a private health insurer is to return profits to shareholders, to please Wall St. with its medical loss ratios so its stock prices will do well. I’m not ranting, that is their #1 goal.
Of course my sister could have opted to have and pay for surgery out of pocket (or any other patient whose insurer denies care) but I would assert that very few, if any, people do that. They’ve been paying for health insurance, why should they have to now pay for the actual medical care their insurance was supposed to cover?
I don’t consider my sister’s case rationing of care, to me, it was an abuse of my sister’s rights by the insurer. Rationing, to me, means that not every person is going to be entitled to a liver transplant, or a heart transplant, or undergoing intrusive extraordinary measures when their condition is terminal. (Just a personal aside, if I reach that point myself, I will not opt for continuing extraordinary measures.)
If I leave with you any information learned from these posts, I hope it is that private insurers frequently become the deciding factor, rather than the doctor, or even the patient, about the course and quality of care we receive. They are insurers, they are not clinicians, but they substitute their policies and protocols for the judgment of physicians who know the patient and the patient’s history.
Do I think insurers are evil? I think I’d say they are now occupying an improper role in the health of the American people. Thanks for responding.