In keeping with my complete disdain for the US health care system, I thought I would bring you this very recent story about the death off a teenage leukemia patient.
It's so easy to surmise from this story, that the sick and infirmed have no place in the US. For if that weren't the case, then what other possible reason could there be for US citizens continuing to support, and even praise, a system that not only condones the actions of insurance companies, in denying health care to individuals, but actually rewards them for doing just that.
This the most recent example (one of many) involves Cigna Health Care, but it certainly shouldn't be construed as unique to this company. It is the mission of all health insurers to deny and delay care as long as possible in order to increase profits.
Eventually Cigna did relent, but it took significant protests by 150 people outside the offices of Cigna, and an internet campaign orchestrated by the DailyKos website and other blogs.
Unfortunately it didn't come in time to save the patient.
And the case was not rare or unusual, nor experimental or unproven, as Cigna claimed,
Cigna just didn't want to pay for the procedure, because it would effect profits.
But as I indicated before, the patient died, before any money was paid, which ultimately was the intent of the policy. Delay approving care as long as possible, and hope the patient dies. And in this case, it worked to perfection.
That's good for Cigna profits, and shareholders, it's just not that good for the patient.
So think you have great insurance, and this can't happen to you?
If you remain healthy, and never go to the doctor except for routine physical examinations, you're probably right. But should you get sick, well...... Just how else do you think those insurance companies will be able to maintain those record breaking profits?
It's so easy to surmise from this story, that the sick and infirmed have no place in the US. For if that weren't the case, then what other possible reason could there be for US citizens continuing to support, and even praise, a system that not only condones the actions of insurance companies, in denying health care to individuals, but actually rewards them for doing just that.
This the most recent example (one of many) involves Cigna Health Care, but it certainly shouldn't be construed as unique to this company. It is the mission of all health insurers to deny and delay care as long as possible in order to increase profits.
Eventually Cigna did relent, but it took significant protests by 150 people outside the offices of Cigna, and an internet campaign orchestrated by the DailyKos website and other blogs.
In the middle of the rally, a note was handed to Mrs Sarkisyan [the mother] saying that Cigna had decided to reverse its decision.
"Cigna HealthCare has decided to make an exception in this rare and unusual case and we will provide coverage should she proceed with the requested liver transplant," it said in a statement.
Unfortunately it didn't come in time to save the patient.
And the case was not rare or unusual, nor experimental or unproven, as Cigna claimed,
Sarkisyan's doctors at UCLA medical centre, including the head of its transplant unit, [wrote] a letter to protest that the treatment which they proposed was neither experimental nor unproven.
Cigna just didn't want to pay for the procedure, because it would effect profits.
But as I indicated before, the patient died, before any money was paid, which ultimately was the intent of the policy. Delay approving care as long as possible, and hope the patient dies. And in this case, it worked to perfection.
That's good for Cigna profits, and shareholders, it's just not that good for the patient.
So think you have great insurance, and this can't happen to you?
If you remain healthy, and never go to the doctor except for routine physical examinations, you're probably right. But should you get sick, well...... Just how else do you think those insurance companies will be able to maintain those record breaking profits?
[CIGNA] recently posted figures for its third-quarter performance this year, which showed profits up 22%. Next year it expects to earn an income of up to $1.2bn.
Comments
Ehrlichman: “Edgar Kaiser is running his Permanente deal for profit. And the reason that he can … the reason he can do it … I had Edgar Kaiser come in … talk to me about this and I went into it in some depth. All the incentives are toward less medical care, because …â€
Ehrlichman: “… the less care they give them, the more money they make.â€
Because of the distorted manner in which health care is financed in this country, excess unnecessary care is being provided at the expense of necessary care, and health insurers seem to only look at the cost of the care, and how it effects their bottom line.
Ultimately it is the patients that suffer, while the pharmaceutical and health insurance industries, as well as our elected politicians line their pockets with our hard earned money.
And while Kaiser Permanente may have been the initiator of the switch to less care, I believe they are one of the few organizations, that has the ability to differentiate between necessary and unnecessary care, providing some of the highest level of health care in the US.
At least that has been my experience, as a member of Kaiser.