This is what I want to see.
Beat them back at their own game.
It is like when police say they wish that policing was like in The Andy Griffith Show. Tell them that everyone knew where sheriff Andy Taylor lived. Why don't you tell everyone where you live, sheriff ?
There are also advocates who can help you navigate the insurance nightmare. We had to do it when I needed surgery a few years ago.
No idea how effective this would be, I think the doctor would have to request this themselves. When I worked for an insurance company, member services didn't even have access to authorization details.
Usually this is a tactic some doctors do for a peer to peer, but generally you ain't getting a peer to peer as a patient. Peer to peers use unqualified doctors to question treatment at a time convenient to the insurance company in the hope that your doctor decides "this isn't worth my time, the patient needs to figure their own shit out." Importantly, you can't bill for the time spent on this shit. If they made it legally required to allow billing, it would disappear.
This is advice for doctors, not patients.
Usually doctors do the peer to peer and then the patient can appeal once services are denied (which is almost always the case if you've reached the peer to peer stage).
I've used this before with mild succees. It's far from reliably effective. You're more likely to get the decision over turned at the appeal stage, the problem being that precious time is lost while going through that process.
I do like to schedule an appointment so that patients are part of the peer to peer call. That way they can tell the doctor, nurse, PA, NP or whichever other service reimbursement bouncer the insurance company has hired that they're putting a curse on them and their family.
Its only illegal once you are prosecuted for it. That is how businesses operate. Its not just regulation we need but a justice system that has some teeth
So the Hippocratic oath is essentially meaningless in America?
It was always meaningless. It never had any legal repercussions if it was broken, just like ethics agreements politicians get to waiver.
This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.
This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?
Just post some stuff and don't spam.
