A Doctor's Perspective

This is not a single payer diary, but it does provide insight into some of the problems Doctors face and is worth clicking over to read the entire piece:

When the insurance company is the middle man there is a drastic decrease in what the physician is paid. For example, in a former HMO contract I was getting 18 cents on the dollar. I have since negotiated better contracts and now receive almost 60 cents on the dollar in my highest paid contracts. However, In order to make up the short fall, the pressure has been to either see more patients or raise my prices. If you contrast this with a specialty that does not take insurance it is easy to see what has happened to the cost of care for the patient without insurance. For example, in plastic surgery - the price for a rhinoplasty or a face lift has essentially remained unchanged over the years because they are strictly fee for service. I had two choices to keep my doors open. Either see 50-60 patients per day, hire a physican assistant or a nurse practitioner and become a 'mill' or adopt electronic medica records, electronic precribing system, practice wellness and prevention. I chose to do the latter.

In short, the cost of medicine has risen because of the insurance companies and their effect on the cost of medical malpractice. The increase in premiums paid by patients have not gone to pay for medical care, but instead has gone to the insurance company in CEO bonuses and investments in software and/or gatekeeper physicians and nurses who get bonuses for rationing healthcare by denying necessary procedures and tests. I can give you plenty of examples of necessary medical care denied to my patients by a nurse making clinical decisions. The insurance companies have developed an elaborate system designed to pay as little and as late as possible (over 1 year after service in some cases). There is little oversight or regulation of this industry and physicians have little recourse. For example.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I wonder...

... if the malpractice issue has the same sort of function as the ratings agencies. The effect of both was to raise rents, in the case of insurance companies and financiers, respectively. I could be off base, but we do need to think systemically.

Because: "When the insurance company is the middle man there is a drastic decrease in what the physician is paid."

It's all about the rents, baby! And that's the problem with the "nudge" ideas the Obama administrations economists are pushing (those who aren't just in the tank for Big Money). All the nudges leave the rents, and the rent seeking behavior, firmly in place.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi

A single payer system

would solve the malpractice issues.

Since the service is a government one they can cap payouts in suits (say they cap monetary penalties at $100,000.00) and then they would stiffen the medical board penalties.

Brings down costs for doctors, government and patients. Also weeds out the incompetent practitioners so there is less malpractice.

One of those "for the greater good" things that will drive far right wingnuts batshit loopy... While removing their talking point fallacy about lawsuits being the biggest reason for the crazy increases.

If that is what you are talkin' about in "rents"?

not sure that necessarily follows

if we went to pure socialized medicine, the government could [and would] cap payouts for malpractice, but canada has larger average payouts than we do, though it appears they have fewer suits.

france [not-quite-single-payer] has few suits, and low payouts [iirc], by law [also iirc].

we should probably consider nationalizing the malpractice insurance for doctors as part of healthcare reform, because from what i've been reading, the malpractice insurers are charging doctors pretty much whatever they want to, the premiums are apparently not really based on actual risk, but more on how much they can scare the doctors into worrying about being sued.

but the best way to reduce malpractice suits is to (1) let doctors get back to doctoring, instead of wasting their time fighting insurance companies, (b) get insurance companies out of the business of practicing medicine [i'm still looking for good estimates of how much of our ill health and malpractice is a direct result of denial of care by insurers], and (c) removing the profit motive from the provider side [hospitals etc] should cu down on the number of procedures they do [thus cutting down on the chances of something going wrong].

Another one at the orange place

Is there perhaps another place to read it? I don't go to the orange place any more.

Last link to it had other places to read the same diary, which was great!

"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. So is a lot." - Albert Einstein