Who's Your Doctor's Daddy?
Patients in the United States have known for a long time that they are not the decision makers in matters related to their personal health and well-being. Just as for-profit corporate interests control elections, candidates, public officials, policies and enforcement, for-profit health insurance companies control healthcare delivery. So when a recent report came out about insurance companies buying up physician groups and providers in increasing numbers, I wasn't very surprised.
Patients in the United States have known for a long time that they are not the decision makers in matters related to their personal health and well-being. Just as for-profit corporate interests control elections, candidates, public officials, policies and enforcement, for-profit health insurance companies control healthcare delivery. So when a recent report came out about insurance companies buying up physician groups and providers in increasing numbers, I wasn't very surprised.
Left to the for-profit financial services corporations known as health insurance companies, more firmly entrenched market-based healthcare delivery will thrive on doctors doing exactly what shareholders need them to do as direct employees.
See the report here.
A colleague pointed out to me that this really isn't too much of a news flash, and that doctors have been working for their keep from the for-profit insurance companies for some time. I suppose it's just shocking to my sensibilities to now need to ask directly of my doctors and other providers, "Who owns this practice or facility? CIGNA? United Health Care?" Knowing who is signing the paychecks is critical to knowing whose interests are being protected and enhanced.
But drill deeper into this business strategy. From the article: "The model poses a natural threat to providers, particularly hospitals. OptumHealth, UnitedHealth's subsidiary, has said its physician networks serve all players in a health system, including rival health plans with policyholders who use the same physicians... Primary care physicians are already in high-demand, and by acquiring them in certain markets, insurers could potentially wrest control of entire health systems by influencing referrals - whether that is an explicit intention or not."
Exactly how will a Blue Cross covered patient fare at a Humana owned clinic or doctors' group? Will one insurance giant negotiate with another for contracted services offered by the others' doctors? It all seems a tad incestuous to me somehow.
So, there we go. All the fears expressed about government takeover of healthcare if we moved to a progressively financed, single standard of high quality care for all - an improved and enhanced Medicare for all system - can now be released in favor of the takeover actually occurring.
Health insurance giants only make money if high enough premiums come in from enough people, if medical losses/claims payments are kept at a minimum, if investments are offering a strong return and regulatory interference and interruptions of all of these are limited. It's about the money. It's about the profit. It is not about the patients. It is not about the policy holders.
So the next time you get ready to sign those forms at the front desk of your doctor's office or the admissions cubicle at the hospital or clinic - you know, the acceptance of financial responsibility and risk and the assignment of benefits forms that relinquish most of your legal protections - make sure to ask for full disclosure of who is calling the shots for the practice or provider.
Call it your own "Who's My Doctor's Daddy?" form. It is critical to your health and mine that they all know that we know what is going on here. And until we can make this awful system accountable to patient needs and not greed, we'd better beware.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Patients in the United States have known for a long time that they are not the decision makers in matters related to their personal health and well-being. Just as for-profit corporate interests control elections, candidates, public officials, policies and enforcement, for-profit health insurance companies control healthcare delivery. So when a recent report came out about insurance companies buying up physician groups and providers in increasing numbers, I wasn't very surprised.
Left to the for-profit financial services corporations known as health insurance companies, more firmly entrenched market-based healthcare delivery will thrive on doctors doing exactly what shareholders need them to do as direct employees.
See the report here.
A colleague pointed out to me that this really isn't too much of a news flash, and that doctors have been working for their keep from the for-profit insurance companies for some time. I suppose it's just shocking to my sensibilities to now need to ask directly of my doctors and other providers, "Who owns this practice or facility? CIGNA? United Health Care?" Knowing who is signing the paychecks is critical to knowing whose interests are being protected and enhanced.
But drill deeper into this business strategy. From the article: "The model poses a natural threat to providers, particularly hospitals. OptumHealth, UnitedHealth's subsidiary, has said its physician networks serve all players in a health system, including rival health plans with policyholders who use the same physicians... Primary care physicians are already in high-demand, and by acquiring them in certain markets, insurers could potentially wrest control of entire health systems by influencing referrals - whether that is an explicit intention or not."
Exactly how will a Blue Cross covered patient fare at a Humana owned clinic or doctors' group? Will one insurance giant negotiate with another for contracted services offered by the others' doctors? It all seems a tad incestuous to me somehow.
So, there we go. All the fears expressed about government takeover of healthcare if we moved to a progressively financed, single standard of high quality care for all - an improved and enhanced Medicare for all system - can now be released in favor of the takeover actually occurring.
Health insurance giants only make money if high enough premiums come in from enough people, if medical losses/claims payments are kept at a minimum, if investments are offering a strong return and regulatory interference and interruptions of all of these are limited. It's about the money. It's about the profit. It is not about the patients. It is not about the policy holders.
So the next time you get ready to sign those forms at the front desk of your doctor's office or the admissions cubicle at the hospital or clinic - you know, the acceptance of financial responsibility and risk and the assignment of benefits forms that relinquish most of your legal protections - make sure to ask for full disclosure of who is calling the shots for the practice or provider.
Call it your own "Who's My Doctor's Daddy?" form. It is critical to your health and mine that they all know that we know what is going on here. And until we can make this awful system accountable to patient needs and not greed, we'd better beware.
Patients in the United States have known for a long time that they are not the decision makers in matters related to their personal health and well-being. Just as for-profit corporate interests control elections, candidates, public officials, policies and enforcement, for-profit health insurance companies control healthcare delivery. So when a recent report came out about insurance companies buying up physician groups and providers in increasing numbers, I wasn't very surprised.
Left to the for-profit financial services corporations known as health insurance companies, more firmly entrenched market-based healthcare delivery will thrive on doctors doing exactly what shareholders need them to do as direct employees.
See the report here.
A colleague pointed out to me that this really isn't too much of a news flash, and that doctors have been working for their keep from the for-profit insurance companies for some time. I suppose it's just shocking to my sensibilities to now need to ask directly of my doctors and other providers, "Who owns this practice or facility? CIGNA? United Health Care?" Knowing who is signing the paychecks is critical to knowing whose interests are being protected and enhanced.
But drill deeper into this business strategy. From the article: "The model poses a natural threat to providers, particularly hospitals. OptumHealth, UnitedHealth's subsidiary, has said its physician networks serve all players in a health system, including rival health plans with policyholders who use the same physicians... Primary care physicians are already in high-demand, and by acquiring them in certain markets, insurers could potentially wrest control of entire health systems by influencing referrals - whether that is an explicit intention or not."
Exactly how will a Blue Cross covered patient fare at a Humana owned clinic or doctors' group? Will one insurance giant negotiate with another for contracted services offered by the others' doctors? It all seems a tad incestuous to me somehow.
So, there we go. All the fears expressed about government takeover of healthcare if we moved to a progressively financed, single standard of high quality care for all - an improved and enhanced Medicare for all system - can now be released in favor of the takeover actually occurring.
Health insurance giants only make money if high enough premiums come in from enough people, if medical losses/claims payments are kept at a minimum, if investments are offering a strong return and regulatory interference and interruptions of all of these are limited. It's about the money. It's about the profit. It is not about the patients. It is not about the policy holders.
So the next time you get ready to sign those forms at the front desk of your doctor's office or the admissions cubicle at the hospital or clinic - you know, the acceptance of financial responsibility and risk and the assignment of benefits forms that relinquish most of your legal protections - make sure to ask for full disclosure of who is calling the shots for the practice or provider.
Call it your own "Who's My Doctor's Daddy?" form. It is critical to your health and mine that they all know that we know what is going on here. And until we can make this awful system accountable to patient needs and not greed, we'd better beware.