Health insurance, not health care, in need of overhaul
The following is the opinion and analysis of the writer:
A family member became seriously ill last year. After some initial tests, a malignancy was diagnosed. Surgery was scheduled, followed by chemotherapy. Everything proceeded mostly as planned, with no medical hiccups. We are both well-educated, with backgrounds in medicine, health economics and risk analysis, which should have prepared us to maneuver the requirements of our health insurance provider and ensure that copays and pre-authorizations were handled as necessary.
We were gravely mistaken.
We chose the providers, surgeon and facility so that they were all in-network. The problem is that some of these facilities use radiologists, pathologists and anesthesiologists who choose to be out-of-network.
Why is this done? These specialists receive higher payments when they are out-of-network than if they become in-network, where the reimbursement rates are lower. This means that patients are then liable for any charges for such services, even though they have no choice of such providers.
In
Even with the facility-based provider benefit, insurance companies may add rules and limitations on such coverage that they do not communicate. For example, they may require that the pathology be billed on the same date as the in-network procedures. So if a pathologist bills for their work one day after the care was provided at an in-network facility, the insurance company may deny the charge, effectively moving the pathologist to bill you directly.
Another example occurs when a pathologist must use a specified number of units for the tissue analysis, yet the insurance company places an arbitrary limit on how many units can be billed per day. If this limit is exceeded, the insurance company denies all charges rather than paying up to their arbitrary limit.
The other problem with these unwritten rules is that the patient is responsible for figuring them out and communicating them to physicians’ billing offices. Otherwise, billing offices assume that the charges are denied, without determining why, and bill the patient directly.
Effective in 2022, the No Surprise Act provides blanket protection against such billing practices nationwide, offering patients financial protections that move beyond facility-based provider benefits.
The lessons learned from my family member’s illness is that there are a triumvirate of players that are out of sync with each other.
First, there are the in-network medical providers who deliver care and want to be paid for their services. Second, there are the insurance companies who have a vested interest to provide the minimum payments for services and keep a veil of uncertainty around their rules and policies.
Finally, there are the patients who work to stay in-network, yet find themselves liable for legitimate charges that are coverable by their health insurance policy, but require finesse and communication to facilitate their payment.
The best one can say about health insurance is that it is great when you do not need to use it. But once a major medical event demands extensive and complicated care and services, patients become innocent bystanders, stuck between the medical care provided and the insurance company that should be paying for it.
What is the solution?
A system that creates a seamless network of providers covered by all insurance companies. Without such a simple set of transparent rules for insurance companies and providers, patients will continue to fall through the cracks, with uncovered medical expenses dropping to them.
Whether this means a single-payer system or multiple payers abiding by a uniform set of rules, changes are needed.
The current system is unsustainable. COVID-19 has further exposed the problems. Health care providers are overwhelmed by more patients than they have resources to treat.
My family member’s illness opened our eyes to the state of health care in our nation. Both patients and physicians deserve to be respected and treated fairly by the health insurance industry, so patients can receive the medical care they need and physicians can remain in charge of the medical care that they deliver.


Financial situation changed due to COVID? Professional advice can help
Transcription de la webdiffusion*
Advisor News
- I started using AI, but what now?
- How to support an entrepreneur client with multiple businesses
- Could a narrower focus help grow your practice?
- U.S. debt hits $40 trillion: how to support concerned clients
- Flourish brings private-bank-like cash solution to MassMutual’s network
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- MassMutual Expands Lending Options With New Secured Credit Line
- Corebridge Financial Introduces Progressive Trigger, a First-of-Its-Kind Index Annuity Strategy Designed to Turn Missed Years into Future Opportunity
- Insurer proposes $1.1M deal to resolve CA teachers’ annuity fee lawsuit
- IMOs get frustrated with slow carrier adoption of faster technology
- New class-action lawsuit targets Delaware Life over annuity disclosures
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- Legislators hear report on thin hospital margins, advance prior authorization reform
- Hawthorne School Budget Faces New Pressure As Health Insurance Costs Jump Nearly 34%
- Half the Coverage: What the TLC's Rideshare Insurance Cut Means for Queens Riders
- Answering questions on Medicare open enrollment
Terry Savage: Your questions answered on Medicare open enrollment
- Make sure your Medicare coverage makes sense
Jill On Money: Medicare on my mind
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News