Health Plan Policy Rescission Won’t Go Away, Says NAIRO
| Copyright: | PRWEB.COM Newswire |
| Source: | PR Web |
| Wordcount: | unknown |
Unfortunately over the years, lawsuits and related investigations suggest some health plans have used rescission to invalidate insurance policies for pre-existing conditions, unintentional mistakes, omissions or simply missing checkboxes on complex insurance forms. However, consumers seeking to appeal their insurer’s decision to rescind their healthcare insurance have the right to an external appeal.
Westerville, OH (PRWEB) February 24, 2010 -- Regardless of the outcome of the national health care reform debate, consumers, health plans and state insurance commissioners will struggle over insurance policy rescission, says NAIRO, a national association of IROs.
Guarding Against Fraud
Health plans use insurance policy rescission— declaring an individual’s health plan contract invalid — to combat insurance fraud and intentional consumer misrepresentation. Usually these issues are not discovered by the health plan until an individual files a medical claim.
Unfortunately over the years, lawsuits and related investigations suggest some health plans have used rescission to invalidate insurance policies for pre-existing conditions, unintentional mistakes, omissions or simply missing checkboxes on complex insurance forms. Using a process termed “post-claims underwriting,” the health plan invokes a rescission clause in the contract. The clause claims policyholders have intentionally misrepresented their health status or the health issues “pre-existed” their enrollment allowing the insurer to cancel the policy.
“What is needed to address this issue is an unbiased independent rescission review process that meets both the needs of consumers and health plans,” said Seana Ferris, President of NAIRO.
AHIP Guidelines Support Third-party Reviews
America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) and NAIRO support an unbiased approach to rescission review. Recently AHIP published rescission review guidelines calling for health plans to conduct an “objective and thorough investigation prior to initiating the rescission process” for any claim denied based on a pre-existing medical condition. The AHIP guidelines encourage regulators to screen rescissions to determine their eligibility for external review. They also advocate a third-party reviewer must be independent from both the health plan and the consumer to ensure fairness. The guidelines further suggest health plans create standards to ensure rescission review is consistently applied, and includes specific timeframes for completion and expediting reviews.
Consumer Options for Review
Many health plans are adopting the use of IROs to provide an objective review of a member’s appeal of a rescission determination. However, part of the burden of a rescission review remains on the policyholder. According to most health plans and the AHIP guidelines, consumers should first exhaust their plan’s internal appeal process before requesting a third-party review through their state’s insurance commissioner or office of consumer protection.
Consumers seeking to appeal their insurer’s decision to rescind their healthcare insurance have the right to an external appeal. Some of the steps they must take to request an external review include:
|
|
• Ask the health plan the specific reason for the policy rescission. |
Delivering Unbiased Determinations
As a best practice, many health plans are now enlisting IROs to review rescissions on a case-by-case basis using standardized guidelines and expert review of the medical facts.
“IRO objectivity is the reason state legislators in 45 states and the District of Columbia have mandated the independent review of healthcare appeals,” Ferris said. “Using an independent and unbiased third-party to review rescission is a best practice that preserves the quality and integrity of our healthcare system and the rescission process.”
About NAIRO
NAIRO works to promote the value and integrity of the independent medical review process. Its members embrace an independent, evidence-based approach to medical review to resolve coverage disputes between enrollees and their health plans. For more information, visit www.nairo.org.
###
Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/02/prweb3639074.htm.


Advisor News
- Demonstrating the value of life insurance to Gen Z
- Poor money habits are a dealbreaker in a new relationship
- DC plan sponsors see opportunity in alternatives
- The American Dream: Redefined as financial stability
- Partial annuitization: How advisors can help clients balance income, growth
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- CA judge certifies class action in teachers’ lawsuit over in-plan annuity fees
- Globe Life Inc. (NYSE: GL) Records 52-Week High Thursday Morning
- AM Best Managing Director Joins ‘Target Topics’ Podcast to Discuss State of Delegated Underwriting Authority Enterprises Market
- KBRA Assigns Rating to TruSpire Retirement Insurance Company
- Partial annuitization: How advisors can help clients balance income, growth
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- Digging deep: Who's funding Skagit's 2026 legislative, county races
- Atrium’s WakeMed acquisition faces new hurdle after State Health Plan decision
- New Arizona law provides clarity regarding firefighters’ health insurance
- Mid-year benefits review: What employers miss before renewal
- Downstream effects of federal cuts seen in Kansas budget, access to healthcare, food assistance
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News
- Globe Life Inc. (NYSE: GL) Records 52-Week High Thursday Morning
- AM Best Upgrades Credit Ratings of Sagicor Financial Company Ltd. and Most of Its Subsidiaries
- Trust, technology and the future of claims
- New York Life Launches an Indemnity Benefit for its Asset Flex Long-Term Care Insurance Solution
- AM Best Affirms Credit Ratings of DB Insurance Co., Ltd.
More Life Insurance News