Everything Nurses >> Nursing Politics/Activism >> It should be against the law

+3

It should be against the law

818 Views
21 Replies Flag as inappropriate

0 posts

back to top

Posted over 4 years ago

 

It should be against the law for insurance companies to say “You must go to this clinic” or “you must go to this hospital” I am going to post below an article that has been in the national news and was in this morning’s paper.

0 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Here we go agian. I am having trouble with getting it to post. Bear with me. I will get it on here sooner or later. this happens when I try to copy and paste. I paste it in here, hit submit and get a red box at the top with the message "please enter a reply" anyone else have problems like this?

0 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

aaaaggghhhhh!

0 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

I will keep trying. Just cannot figure out why this thing acts the way it does sometimes. aaaaaagggghhhhh!!!!!!!

0 posts

back to top
-1

Rated: -1 | Posted over 4 years ago

 

what does this damn thing want from me?

-57 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

The times I've had trouble with posting an article on site rather than in the news is when it's had a video in it.  Then I keep getting please post reply.  Darn aggravating

0 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

I am still trying. no video here.

0 posts

back to top
+2

Rated: +2 | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Insurance firm target of lawsuit

Desai clinic patient contracted hepatitis C

By ANNETTE WELLS

REVIEW-JOURNAL

Alynne Griffiths has hepatitis C and believes she was infected at the Endoscopy Center of Southern Nevada.


On Wednesday, the 70-year-old Las Vegan filed a lawsuit against Pacificare of Nevada for "requiring or encouraging" her to seek medical care at the facility where federal and state health officials say staff routinely took part in unsafe medical practices between March 2004 and Jan. 11.

The lawsuit, among many filed as a result of the state's hepatitis C outbreak, is the first against an insurance provider.


"I would like to see a broader referral system where people can get access to different doctors and not be so restricted to these doctors who were involved,'' Griffiths said Wednesday from the office of her attorney, Gerald Gillock. "Unless you're independently wealthy, you have to go where your insurance company sends you.''


Griffiths' complaint seeks damages in excess of $50,000.


It claims Pacificare of Nevada did not "direct, evaluate or monitor the effectiveness of health services provided by" the endoscopy center. It also claims the insurer breached its duty by failing to adopt and implement an appropriate quality assurance program and continuing to contract with the endoscopy center.


"That is one of the primary reasons for the problems being as significant as they are in Las Vegas. We have a limited number of Health Maintenance Organizations that control the medical care available to all of the lives in Clark County,'' Gillock said. "There's a statutory duty under the laws of the state of Nevada that these insurance companies have to maintain a quality control program. They have to inspect and ensure these health care providers are furnishing quality health care to their insured.''


Gillock said patients have no choice when deciding on a physician in such cases involving HMOs.


Cheryl Randolph, spokeswoman for Pacificare, said the company could not comment on the complaint Wednesday because it had not been served.


"We have not had the opportunity to review it; therefore, we cannot comment until we've had a chance to review it,'' she said.


Gillock, who represents 50 former patients of the endoscopy center who have tested positive for hepatitis C, said he doesn't anticipate Griffiths' case turning into a class action lawsuit. He does, however, anticipate filing similar complaints against other insurance providers.


"We anticipate there may be some consolidation, but I don't think these are going to become class actions,'' Gillock said about his clients' cases. "Every person infected has different results.''


Griffiths said she was sent to the Shadow Lane facility in September 2005 for a colonoscopy and in March 2006 for an endoscopy procedure.


Like thousands of other patients, Griffiths received a letter from the Southern Nevada Health District urging her to get tested for hepatitis B and C, and HIV.


She said she did so and tested positive for hepatitis C.


Recently, Griffiths' primary care physician referred her to several physicians for hepatitis C treatment.


None of those physicians is covered under her Pacificare health plan. The physician her health plan is now referring her to was associated with the 700 Shadow Lane facility between March 2004 and Jan. 11., she said.


Once again, Griffiths said Pacificare is forcing her into poor health care.


"The doctors I felt were qualified, and who were highly recommended to me, I cannot go to. This is about access,'' she said.


Neither Griffiths nor Gillock would reveal the name of the physician she is being referred to for hepatitis C treatment. But Gillock said he's not one of the four listed as an owner of the Gastroenterology Center of Nevada.


"He is one of the doctors who worked there,'' he said.


According to city and state health officials, there were 14 physicians who worked within the Gastroenterology Center group, an umbrella organization that ran the Shadow Lane clinic as well as two other surgery centers.


Doctors Dipak Desai, Clifford Carrol, Eladio Carrera and Vishvinder Sharmer, were listed as owners of the Gastroenterology Center of Nevada. Desai and Carrera have had their licenses temporarily suspended by the state's Board of Medical Examiners. The board is currently investigating whether complaints against other doctors are warranted.


In February, the health district announced that six people had contracted hepatitis C and that they had all undergone procedures at the Shadow Lane facility.


Investigations by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and health district investigators revealed that the reuse of syringes in a manner that contaminated vials of medication, and the reuse of those vials, had exposed patients to hepatitis B and C and HIV.


Notifications have been sent to more than 60,000 former patients of the Shadow Lane facility, as well as its Desert Shadow Center affiliate on Burnham Avenue, urging them to get tested for the blood-borne viruses.


Health officials have not linked any HIV or hepatitis B cases to either of the two facilities: eight hepatitis C cases are linked to the Shadow Lane facility and one to the Burnham facility.


About 400 former patients of the Shadow Lane facility have tested positive for hepatitis C. Health officials have said 77 of them are "possibly" linked to that clinic.


Gillock, a well-known Las Vegas medical malpractice attorney, said his office has assembled a team of attorneys from across the country for its fight against the insurance companies.


"We're ready to roll up our sleeves and get into the trenches,'' he said. "We're quite confident that we're going to establish that these organizations have totally neglected their insured.''


Contact reporter Annette Wells at awells@ reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0283.

0 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

At last. See, it does pay to be hard-headed.

0 posts

back to top
+1

Rated: +1 | Posted over 4 years ago

 

This is an example of how insurance copanies are getting by with murder

-57 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

whoohooo success! 


I agree with you and part of the problem is reimbursements, the very extensive paper work involved to become a recipient/contractor or whatever it's called to be on the list of a particular insurance company.  An ortho surgeon I know told me most insurance company applications are very extensive and pages and pages long.

0 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

It is really riduculious that this is even occurring. At the very least it's unethical.

0 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

It makes me ill what the insurance companies get by with

Nsgpic_max50

22 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Ah!  CdNurse (Ginny) ... You made me chuckle this morning with all your posts about not being able to post.  Thanks for the smile!  That was too funny reading!


I have to agree with you about the insurance companies.. For one thing, insurance is way too expensive these days and then you have to go where they tell you.  Unbelievable!


I am in a spot right now where I do not have a job OR insurance.  I can go anywhere I want, BUT I have to pay out of pocket for everything.  I do not wish for socialism, but something has to be done!  Either they lower the prices or we get to choose.... how why not both? 


It doesn't seem fair that something bad has to happen in order for the law to step in and MAYBE change things.


Missy Cox, LPN
Cuyahoga Falls, OH

-3 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Since my episode last year when I was taken ill while on vacation, I have a bad taste in my mouth for insurance companies. They say on thing and then do another. They say they will cover one thing and then they don't and you have to bring the claim to the appeals department. It's all bs!


AETNA sucks!

Photo_user_blank_big

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Unfortunately, insuarance companies have a legal loophole.  It's called "out of network".  They did not force Ms. Griffiths to go to that particular facility, only strongly suggested that she should.  It was her choice to go "in network" (aka affordable) instead of "out of network" (aka we'll take both your firstborn and your eyeteeth in order to pay for this).


Nobody ever said life was fair. 

Picture_021_max50

1306 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Horrible situation for that lady in Nevada.  Is there a nurse out there who actually likes insurance companies?  When my boss has me help our 'insurance coordinator', aka idontlikeher, get 'caught up' with checking for covered rehab services, I feel like I'm being punished.   There really should be a law against that....................if that was a home health contamination the organization could have its doors shut by joint commission. for a sentinal event........but this is a health insurance company issue. Man how awful.


We only have one heart, take care of it!

Angie

Photo_user_blank_big

26 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Believe it or not, you are not locked into the insurance company network! Your doctor can call your insurance company and insist on a waiver, and then you are fine, but you need to get this in writing. My doctor did this for me. He sent me to a specialist that he trusted. I had started treatment, established a rapport with this guy when I got a letter from my insurance that I was "out of network" .  My doctor called them, but you can do it yourself.  You do not want to talk to the person who answers the phone at 1-800-Aetna, because that person has no power.  Ask for a supervisor. Insist. Then ask that person for the name and address of the medical director for your policy. This is the person to give the waiver! In my case, the medical director thought that NYU was better than University of Pennsylvania.  So my doctor stepped up and asked the medical director to put it in writing that I was being forced to interrrupt standard of care in order to satisfy the opinion of the medical director, and he insisted that it be put in writing that he accepted all responsibility for any set backs, side effects or injuries caused by being forced to go to NYU!   I got the waiver for Uof PA in 2 days, and they paid the "in network" price.

-65 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Great post, Ginny. It is about access to health care. Insurance companies do everything they can to avoid responsibility. Sometimes, well o.k. a lot of the time the people answering the phone only know how to say no. In out office, we often have a claim denied because there was no pre-auth, but no pre-auth was required! Just some robot booting a claim to never never land.

0 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

zap! Where have you been??????!!!!!

Photo_user_blank_big

26 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

I do not understand the question??