![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
:agree: I have noticed the big change in the way insurance companies do business over many years. When my friend tells me what he pays for insurance for a family of four in a corporate structured environment, (we worked for the same company). I fondly think of the day when we paid almost nothing, for the same coverage. I lament TVH doesn't take original Medicare with a supplement, as they say they won't be able to spend the extra time with patients and it's not economically feasible, as they need to make a profit. Wouldn't it be nice to complain and have it heard, "from our lips to GOD's ears". As the kids today says, "it is, what it is". |
Quote:
1) How do YOU know what UHC knew and when they knew it??? 2) You were told by whom??? COO of TVH?? CEO of UHC??? More than likely it was from someone nowhere near that high on the food chain. I would agree that once the decision was made, whenever that was, TVH should have informed all its employees not to give out any misinformation and inform the patients ASAP. But not knowing the TRUE timeline, I have no idea whether or not this happened. |
I am most definitely not a Medicare expert but I can certainly understand why they are doing what they are doing. As I understand it, and someone correct me if I am wrong, if you enroll in an MA plan then the plan gets up to $18K/year from Medicare plus your $122/month (??) plus what would be the approximate monthly cost of a supplemental plan and then the plan doesn't have to deal with Medicare anymore. They can attempt to "manage" your benefits by restricting the pool of providers. So, if you have minimal health issues, the MA plan can make money since they keep the $18K and monthly charges. Obviously they are also accepting the risk of unhealthy patients since they now "own" all the costs.
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'm not sure about the dollar amounts, but your description of how it works is sound. The government, many years ago, realized they could not easily control how many tests and specialty referrals doctors made. So, they developed the concept of "risk sharing". In essence, they pay the insurance company a certain amount per year, and then let them manage utilization. Of course, they had to add safeguards to make sure there was no "cherry-picking" of healthy patients, and also some guards against catastrophic costs. The problem is that the insurance company now puts obstacles in the way of appropriate care to avoid unnecessary care. The number one cause of unnecessary care is lawyers. The number two cause is weak providers. The most common "trick" is to deny approval for a test or referral until the physician PERSONALLY speaks to the medical director at the insurer. They know that just the time constraints alone will cause 20-30% of the requests to "disappear". I never had a request denied after speaking to them, but I abhorred the complete waste of time. Yet, I have to believe that this policy saved $$$, otherwise the cost of these "administrators" could not be justified. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Some history on The Villages Health and how USF took a big hit. Then, the guy who engineered the failed plan gets hired by Morse. Why would anybody hire someone with such a large failure on his resume? You'll find Lowenkrons name on your letter
After USF failure in the Villages, top official finds job there | Tampa Bay Times So then, Lowenkron sued USF for his salary. Doubt he took a pay cut to come to The Villages. Classy guy! Ex-USF Physicians Group boss sues USF for $600,000 pay | TBO.com |
Quote:
On the plus side, I found a primary care provider at another clinic and I'm perfectly satisfied with my decision. And, Tricare for Life is far superior to anything United Healthcare has to offer. |
Quote:
Lowenkron's sued for money that his contract said was his according to your link. That was a year's salary at USF. He must be a smart fellow. |
Quote:
|
Indeed things do change, and often not for the better. In ancient times when I became a physician, many of the arrangements and relationships so common today would have been considered gross violations of medical ethics. Upon graduation, I took an oath to always put the health needs of my patients first; before personal comfort and convenience, before any financial considerations, and even before the needs of family and spouse. I can recall over the years many a time Thanksgiving or Christmas festivities were interrupted because I was called in to care for someone needing urgent surgery. I was not allowed to know what type of insurance plan they had, or whether they had any insurance coverage at all. I just went in and took care of the situation whatever it might have involved.
So back to the present. As a retired physician I know the difference between good medical care and not so good. Over the past several years I was quite satisfied with the care rendered by my primary care MDs at The Villages Health. But last year when my wife required serious back surgery, I wanted it to be done by the best back surgeon I could find. I did not want my choices to be limited to those having some sort of contractual or network connection to TVH. Because we had original Medicare plus a BC/BS supplement, I was able to choose practically whomever I wanted. So I did. And the operation was a great success. For this reason we desire to keep our current insurance status and so will be forced to seek new primary care doctors. And I'm not too happy about it. Hoping the whole United Healthcare arrangement goes belly up and the Morse family is stuck with many fancy, new, but empty medical office buildings. |
Quote:
You seem to have lived the 'Marcus Welby, M.D.' creed...instead of just spouting it. Good for you. :coolsmiley: |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by
DragonByte SEO v2.0.32 (Pro) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.