LAT: Sick but Insured? Think Again

[question everything]

latimes.com

Sick but Insured? Think Again

Lawsuits accuse insurance companies of retroactively dumping families that rack up large bills. Firms defend their policies, but the state is investigating.
By Lisa Girion
Times Staff Writer

September 17, 2006

When Steve and Leslie Shaeffer's daughter, Selah, was diagnosed at age 4 with a potentially fatal tumor in her jaw, they figured their health insurance would cover the bulk of her treatment costs. Instead, almost two years later, the Murrieta, Calif., couple face more than $60,000 in medical bills and fear the loss of their dream home. They struggle to stave off creditors as they try to figure out how Selah can keep seeing the physician they credit with saving her life. Shortly after Selah's medical bills hit $20,000, Blue Cross stopped covering them and eventually canceled her coverage retroactively, refusing to pay for treatment, including surgery the insurer had authorized in advance. The company accused the Shaeffers of failing to disclose in their coverage application an undiagnosed bump on Selah's chin and physician visits for croup. Had that been disclosed, the company said in a letter, it would not have insured Selah.

(snip)

Cancellations such as Selah's are fueling a new backlash against health plans. In a series of recent lawsuits, policyholders say they were illegally terminated, causing substantial financial hardship and jeopardizing their healthcare. State regulators are investigating and said they were preparing to take action against Blue Cross.

(snip)

The complaints involve individual policies — the type of coverage sold to people who work for themselves or for employers who don't offer health benefits. Unlike many work-based plans, which are open to qualified employees regardless of health, insurers in California and many other states can reject applicants for individual policies based on their conditions or health histories. After an applicant is accepted, a state law prohibits health plans from canceling unless the policyholder lied to obtain coverage. Aside from appealing to the company that dumped them, subscribers' only recourse is to complain to state regulators or sue. After an insurer yanks coverage, it can be difficult, if not impossible, to get a policy from another carrier. Health plans encourage applicants they reject and policyholders they cancel to apply to a state-subsidized insurance fund for patients with high-cost or chronic conditions. But the wait can be long. Lacking coverage, patients often have to pay cash upfront or go without care.

(snip)

Outside the companies, no one tracks how often insurers cancel policies. Blue Cross, which has the biggest share of the California market, won't say. But an employee said in a deposition last year that a special department considers as many as 1,500 cases for cancellation each week in California alone. A consumer lawyer who saw Blue Cross' cancellation tally sheets described the department as a rescission factory.

(snip)

Late Friday, a spokeswoman for the Department of Managed Health Care said the agency could take action against Blue Cross as early as this week. The agency has concluded that the company systematically violated the law by improperly canceling policies and failing to verify medical information on applications before issuing coverage.

(snip)


http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-fi-revoke17sep17,1,4079353.story?coll=la-headlines-california

[dorktv]

1. This is awful. Why is it that we never listened to Harry Truman?

[fasttense]

2. Because of our so called free market.

A sick and suffering person will pay just about anything to get out of the suffering hence the huge profits by insurance companies, doctors and hospitals. If you were starving you would pay your last cent to buy food, it is the same with medical care. The huge price increases in the cost of medicine and medical care is the free market taking its toll. The price will keep rising and rising because there is no limit to what a sick and suffering person will pay to relieve the pain and threat of death. There is no limit to what a true parent will pay to help their sick and suffering child.

Thanks to Raygun and his deregulation of medical care we have these scavengers feeding off of the suffering. Welcome to the neo-con economy. Soon, you and your children will be kept at near-starvation and constant thirst because suffering people will pay anything.

[sueh]

3. fucking insurance co's..

I hate them..I hate them...I hate them. I have a horror story, too, but not in the mood to post about that right now, but I WILL say this. The problem all stems from the insurance industry itself. They are very happy to take our hard earned money and think of every stinking *reason* they can find to not pay. It's always about profit, NEVER the patient.

[Gloria]

4. Contracts apparently don't count anymore.....because that's

what insurance policies are!

[BlueManDude]

5. Scary - I've always trusted BC/BS. n/t

[KT2000]

6. Individual policy holders

are screwed. When I had an individual policy - for about 25 years, I had to argue over just about every bill. They would pay only a fraction of a doctor visit because they would determine that there was a part of the visit that included something that was not covered - something I believe they made up as they went along.
The stress of dealing with them was unbelieveable (Blue Cross/Blue Shield).

Insurance companies are really just extortionists.

[OzarkDem]

7. Why health care reform that subsidizes premiums is a bad idea

Lots of states and many Dem leaders are jumping on the bandwagon of plans that require individuals to purchase health insurance with states and the federal government helping cover the cost of premiums.

Many of these policies will end up being worthless, with taxpayers picking up the tab.