View Story | 135 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
is so accurate and so painful to read.
Imagine doing this while undergoing chemotherapy.
Imagine pleading for an MRI after a cancer diagnosis.
The entire for-profit industry is nothing but a toxic pit of scum-suckers. Perfect description.
Tell your healthcare and insurance horror stories at Guaranteed Healthcare
by nyceve on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 11:02:18 AM PDT
they do not have the resouces available to make all the phone calls, write all the letters, and get the help needed like M & E.
these people are charged with bad debts, collection agencies hassle them, and they pay for what they do NOT owe, and, depending on what else is going on in their lives,
they file bankruptcy, and lose their home.
health care insurance as a cause of homelessness.
Coal Kills: Anniversary 2:48AM Crandall Canyon Mine Disaster
by jlms qkw on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 11:55:34 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
...resigned to paying the inflated anesthesiologist fee? ...or, got the anesthesiologist to reduce (backdoor reimburse to BCBS) its charges? (Maybe we don’t know what happened behind closed doors)
This feels hauntingly akin to the sub-prime scam, where brokers/analysts/bankers bilk unawares consumers with misrepresented "feel-good" contracts that later come back to BITE big-time. THEY make their big-bucks up-front, and most (harried & exhausted) consumers just PAY & lose.
Sadly, the initiators of these policies (and no less the legislators, who are supposed to protect the consumers!) are complicit ... although they can see the embezzlement of these policies. Hmmm. Can’t be because they’re often the members of the corporate boards and/or majority shareholders. (Nahhhhh. Let it not be spoken!)
Smells of ‘ponzi scheme’ ...to me.
~A govt lobbied, campaigned and selected by corporation... is good for corporation. Bad for people.~ -8.88 -8.36
by Orj ozeppi on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 11:58:47 AM PDT
That's important to say.
HMOs are bloodsuckers but medical providers are not very far behind.
In the US, the general rule is that you simply cannot trust your doctor. You are not a patient in his care. You are a source of profit. Your doctor's duty is not to you but to his bank account.
I've seen and been through too many botched diagnosis which, on second or third opinion and on personal cross-checking of the medical literature, turned out to be flat wrong, groundless, potentially crippling for me and, curiously, nearly always in the monetary interest of the doctor who recommended the unnecessary procedure or treatment.
For me, doctors rank in trust somewhere between private bankers and political consultants.
So sorry for the few doctors out there who are honest and dedicated to the welfare of their patients but this is where the profession stands in my mind, out of experience. One of the most corrupt there is.
by Farugia on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:42:23 PM PDT
Doctors have no problem declaring a quadruple bypass on really borderline cases. Just failing a treadmill does not mean the only answer is a bypass. Also the statistics show that poor hospitals in poor areas have better outcomes even not doing so many. Because the ones they do are really needed and prepared for.
by yoduuuh do or do not on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 03:51:16 PM PDT
please explain to me how this is possible. BC/BS in Michigan is non-profit and wonderful. BC/BS in CA apparently sucks and is a for-profit corp. How can they be both? This is certainly anecdotal evidence in support of not doing medical payments in the for-profit sector.
...once you're willing to say whatever it takes to win, you lose. ~~Dean
by dkmich on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 02:05:02 PM PDT
Some of the Blues (as they are known) are for-profit others not-for-profit.
In California, I believe, there is Blue Shield which is separate from Blue Cross.
I'm no expert on the Blues, but as far as I know, they have been separated and operate quite independently of each other.
Here's a link to the BC/BS Assocation.
http://www.bcbs.com/
by nyceve on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 02:16:23 PM PDT
BC and BS are separate entities in CA. Because of BC and BS's incredibly low reimbursement rates, many providers in the higher overhead specialties (ED medicines, anesthesiologists, etc) are forced to be "out of network", which is just BC or BS's way of saying they won't accept their shitty payment rates.
How two insurance carriers (for profit) with generally healthy subscriber populations (working folks in the 22-50 age bracket) can base their payments on Medicare (which provides coverage for an older population with higher acuity services -- which drives costs higher) is border line criminal.
Premiums continue to go up each year for BC or BS members, while the companies' coffers grow richer.
"I do tears." -- George W. Bush
by the holy handgrenade on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 04:10:10 PM PDT
It costs more than the others and pays more with little to no hassle. In MI, when someone says what type of insurance do you have and you say BC, there is a knowing nod that you have good insurance.
by dkmich on Wed Nov 21, 2007 at 03:45:40 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 135 comments