‘Death panels’ operate now
The “Free-market death panels” described by op-ed columnist Froma Harrop (Aug. 20) are not unusual. My wife endured a similar calamity when we moved to Florida. She was denied authorization for an expensive drug therapy for her liver disease by Blue Cross of Florida, even though the Maryland branch of Blue Cross had approved of and paid for the same treatment. We appealed the decision and were told that no appeal was allowed. Her physician appealed with the same result.
We requested an explanation of the decision and were advised that a panel of doctors had determined that the proposed treatment was inappropriate for her disease.
We asked for a transcript of the panel’s deliberations and a list of its members’ qualifications. We were denied. Finally, we asked for a contact in the national Blue Cross organization which could resolve the discrepancy between the two Blue Cross policies. The answer was that no national policy oversight existed.
In the meantime, my wife’s physician was forced to prescribe a less effective and more intrusive treatment. I can’t say that the cost-reducing medical decision by the bureaucrats of Blue Cross of Florida caused, or even hastened, my wife’s death, but it certainly made the last months of her life more uncomfortable than they had to be.
Those who are afraid that health reform will result in end-of-life care rationing should be aware that for-profit insurers are already implementing such control. The “free-market death panels” affecting a terminal patient’s quality of life are a reality.
As printed in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune August 23, 2009
The “Free-market death panels” described by op-ed columnist Froma Harrop (Aug. 20) are not unusual. My wife endured a similar calamity when we moved to Florida. She was denied authorization for an expensive drug therapy for her liver disease by Blue Cross of Florida, even though the Maryland branch of Blue Cross had approved of and paid for the same treatment. We appealed the decision and were told that no appeal was allowed. Her physician appealed with the same result.
We requested an explanation of the decision and were advised that a panel of doctors had determined that the proposed treatment was inappropriate for her disease.
We asked for a transcript of the panel’s deliberations and a list of its members’ qualifications. We were denied. Finally, we asked for a contact in the national Blue Cross organization which could resolve the discrepancy between the two Blue Cross policies. The answer was that no national policy oversight existed.
In the meantime, my wife’s physician was forced to prescribe a less effective and more intrusive treatment. I can’t say that the cost-reducing medical decision by the bureaucrats of Blue Cross of Florida caused, or even hastened, my wife’s death, but it certainly made the last months of her life more uncomfortable than they had to be.
Those who are afraid that health reform will result in end-of-life care rationing should be aware that for-profit insurers are already implementing such control. The “free-market death panels” affecting a terminal patient’s quality of life are a reality.
As printed in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune August 23, 2009
