Skip to main content

Medical Insurance Companies: Heroes or Villains?

Physicians are expected to be hostile to insurance companies.  Indeed, a prior Whistleblower post directed arrows in their direction.  They are an easy target, often vilified for their greed and perceived indifference toward those they insure.  Ask most of us if we think insurance companies favor profits over patients, and most of us will respond that profits prevail.

Insurance companies are businesses, not charitable undertakings.  Sure, we all like free stuff.  Or, if it’s not free, we prefer that someone else pays for it.  We are outraged at the costs of chemotherapy, hepatitis C treatment and biologic treatments such as Humira and Remicade, leaving aside the zillions of dollars it takes to research, develop, manufacture, market and monitor innovative new drugs. 

We want to drive a Cadillac, but only pay for a Chevy.

We want to pay for this...

...and drive this.

No person, business or organization is wrong all of the time.  Consider the following practices.  Who’s side are you on here? 

A patient has chronic back pain and ran out of his pain medications on the weekend.  He calls the doctor and is connected to a weekend covering physician who declines to refill the medicine.  The patient then proceeds to an emergency room, where he is evaluated and given the desired prescription.  Who should pay for the ER care?

A patient is seen in the office and prescribed a 2 week course of antibiotics for diverticulitis.  The medicine nauseates him and he stops them in 3 days.  He does not contact his physician.  Ten days later, he develops severe abdominal pain and fever and needs to be hospitalized for severe diverticulitis.  He is in the hospital for 5 days and is seen by numerous medical specialists.  Who should pay the costs of this hospitalization?

A 55-year-old individual has never had a colonoscopy performed.  His primary care physician advises him to proceed, but the patient declines.  A decade later he is discovered to have colon cancer and needs to be hospitalized for surgery and evaluation by an oncologist.  Who should pay for the costs of his care?

If a patient with high blood pressure, skips appointments and his medications, and a complication develops…

I’m not carrying water for the insurance companies.  I am pointing out, however, that we often expect them to pay for medical care that is either inappropriate or should not have been necessary.  That’s not reasonable or fair.   Don’t we have a responsibility to be personally responsible?


  1. While I agree with personal responsibility your scenarios imply that medical science can foresee or forestall all medical conditions. Treatments and screenings are not perfect and can often do harm themselves (who should pay for that?). Insurance can and should pay for major medical expenses but those expenses should be priced at affordable levels, not at the high levels seen today. Let's face it, today's pricing includes costs that have nothing to do with medical care (administrative costs, bigger fancier hospitals, and yes, profits).

  2. I think an earlier blog I wrote this year is relevant to this discussion ( It highlights the concept that health care is not delivered by physicians of health systems alone, it is co-produced by "providers" and patient together. It may be best to view this not as a personal responsibility issue but as a co-producer competency issue. Without a competent and engaged patient (and perhaps family) partner in creation of health care outcomes, the outcomes will always be suboptimal. Whether specific investments in optimizing this (?patient education) or changes in incentive structures can improve engagement is an open question. There may be specific individuals where no amount of investment will help.

  3. Appreciate comments above. @anonymous quickly drifted away from my primary point - the primacy of personal responsibility. @MC, uncertain I grasp your point that personal responsibility should be morphed into a 'partnership' between patients and professionals. I think in medical care and in life we need to accept the consequences and enjoy the benefits of our decisions. If a physicians advised a screening colonoscopy to an informed pt, and the procedure is declined, then future (or present) unwanted growths in the colon are solely the patient's responsibility. If a financial advisor recommends an investment, and I decline to invest, is it both our responsiblities of the investment's return soars and I have missed out? I think across society there are ongoing attempts to blame others for adverse events.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Most Doctors Choose Employment

Increasingly, physicians today are employed and most of them willingly so.  The advantages of this employment model, which I will highlight below, appeal to the current and emerging generations of physicians and medical professionals.  In addition, the alternatives to direct employment are scarce, although they do exist.  Private practice gastroenterology practices in Cleveland, for example, are increasingly rare sightings.  Another practice model is gaining ground rapidly on the medical landscape.   Private equity (PE) firms have   been purchasing medical practices who are in need of capital and management oversight.   PE can provide services efficiently as they may be serving multiple practices and have economies of scale.   While these physicians technically have authority over all medical decisions, the PE partners can exert behavioral influences on physicians which can be ethically problematic. For example, if the PE folks reduce non-medical overhead, this may very directly affe

Why This Doctor Gave Up Telemedicine

During the pandemic, I engaged in telemedicine with my patients out of necessity.  This platform was already destined to become part of the medical landscape even prior to the pandemic.  COVID-19 accelerated the process.  The appeal is obvious.  Patients can have medical visits from their own homes without driving to the office, parking, checking in, finding their way to the office, biding time in the waiting room and then driving out afterwards.  And patients could consult physicians from far distances, even across state lines.  Most of the time invested in traditional office visits occurs before and after the actual visits.  So much time wasted! Indeed, telemedicine has answered the prayers of time management enthusiasts. At first, I was also intoxicated treating patients via cyberspace, or telemedically, if I may invent a term.   I could comfortably sink into my own couch in sweatpants as I guided patients through the heartbreak of hemorrhoids and the distress of diarrhea.   Clear

Solutions for Medical Burnout

Over the past few months, I’ve written enough posts on Medical Burnout that I have created a new category to house them.  Readers will find there posts detailing the causes and consequences of burnout in the medical profession. The profession has been long on the causes but short on solutions.   What must be done to loosen the burnout shackles from medical professionals? It will be a huge undertaking for caregivers and society at large to turn this ocean liner around.  And it will take time.  The first step must be to obtain a commitment to the overall mission from as many constituents as possible.   Support will be needed from medical professionals, hospital leadership and administrators, physician employers, insurance companies and the public.   As with many reform efforts, many of the players must be willing to sacrifice some of their own interests in order to server the greater good – a worthy and rare event.   Without adequate buy-in from stakeholders, the effort will never ge