560
US health system ranks last compared with peer nations, report finds
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
560 points (99.1% liked)
News
23268 readers
2961 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
My wife broke her ankle and insurance denied the entire claim for being "not medically necessary". The "medical professional" (not doctor) who denied the claim had experience in OBGYN, not orthopedics.
100% going to win the appeal because like, we have x-rays of the shattered bones in her leg, but seriously wtf. People seriously believe this is the ideal medical system?
Cigna doctors spend an average of 1.2 seconds per case. Their whole system is to deny everything right off the bat, and then they only have to potentially pay out for patients who have the resources to appeal.
When I was in the insurance industry, for a company who administered various policies from Aetna, BCBS, Cigna, United and Medicare, that was the SOP. Deny anything that took more than a few seconds of brain power, put clients through endless rounds of appeals. The medical director was amoral AF too, because well, the insurance company exists for profit, and bonuses are dependent on paying out as little as possible. It got pretty bad, too, enough that my immediate supervisor started signing off a bunch of approvals, circumventing the medical director, where any shred of plausibility was available.
Now, there is automated software. HIPAA has it's pros and cons.
Oh, I read this John Grisham book.
I'm on appeal #3 right now with my insurance for something they told me would be 100% covered. I'm getting my doctor in on it to do a peer to peer. He sounded so fed up with everything he was like "it's probably some retired pediatrician who doesn't know anything about what you need" when talking about who he'd need to talk with. If this one doesn't work then I'm on to the "threaten to sue" stage which I'm not excited about. The whole thing is a mess and the process and money that's gone into it would have easily bankrupted or put me homeless at most previous times in my life
I'm not a lawyer, but a piece of legal advice I've seen repeated many times is "Never threaten to sue. Just sue."
As soon as you threaten to sue, you'll never be able to talk to anybody except the legal team, and they'll do nothing to help your case.
It's honestly infuriating that these companies are essentially diagnosing and treating patients without doctor-patient relationship (required by federal law). And like LITERALLY determining and dictating treatment. That's illegal if ANYONE else does it. Even if your own medical provider doesn't see you per new condition, that can be considered a violation of that law. And these insurance guys have never seen us in real life.
I also think that it's a really strangely allowed violation of HIPPA. Why should everyone at the insurance company, or ANYONE at an insurance company, have the right to my medical information? Why are they able to communicate with my doctor's office? I absolutely hate the privacy aspect of insurance so much.