this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2024
237 points (99.6% liked)

politics

19232 readers
3777 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

How UnitedHealth’s Playbook for Limiting Mental Health Coverage Puts Countless Americans’ Treatment at Risk

Reporting Highlights

  • An Insurer Sanctioned: Three states found United’s algorithmic system to limit mental health coverage illegal; when they fought it, the insurer agreed to restrict it.
  • A Patchwork Problem: The company is policing mental health care with arbitrary thresholds and cost-driven targets, highlighting a key flaw in the U.S. regulatory structure.
  • United’s Playbook Revealed: The poorest and most vulnerable patients are now most at risk of losing mental health care coverage as United targets them for cost savings.

An article from a month ago about United Heathcares problematic coverage, which I believe is relevant again.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] quixotic120 66 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

The last time this article was published I almost posted a reply to this but didn’t. Now I have time so I will. The denied claims are tragic, obviously, and this behavior is insidious. But something this article only touches upon at the end is what this system is really designed to do: extract previously paid monies from providers

This is such an important issue. I get why they lead with denied claims, because to the average person that is the issue that impacts them. But the above issue destroys mental health care systematically by burning out providers, slashing their income, and shuttering practices. And United is the worst, for sure, but they are not the only offender

What the article describes is what happens, generally. Something in the insurance providers “system” gets flagged. So they audit on their end. Then they may audit on your end. Or they may not even need to. They may find that an error in their system resulted in them paying you for months of sessions that someone wasn’t actually covered. Now they want their money back. They want it all, now. Or they do what United does, they audit you, and they find something that justifies not paying. They almost certainly will because the regulations are extremely complex.

Now you have a hell of a decision: do you spend a ton of time appealing? Remember: many outpatient mental health practices in the us are independent because attaching to a healthcare network means losing 50+% of your income. So if you appeal it means you’ll spend 5-10 hours a week on phone calls and paperwork, for free. Not to mention if it’s in reaction to an audit you may need an attorney so now it’s costing you money, and a significant sum at that.

Do you give in? If you run a medium sized practice and this included a handful of clients you could be on the hook for 20, 40, $50,000 or more. Do you even have access to that? Would a line of credit like that cripple your business?

Do you penalize your staff? You’ve already paid them, do you tell them what’s going on and ask them to pay back the funds? (no, this is unheard of, they’re all not making terribly much money usually)

Do you penalize your clients? In some cases this is genuinely what the insurance company expects you to do. If it’s a case where the policy was not actually active and they paid out in error but didn’t catch it for weeks or months they will claw back their money, guaranteed, and tell you to bill the client $3800 or whatever.

I had a client who was on permanent disability and they didn’t process his disability paperwork for some reason. By the time this was caught by his insurer it was 4 months after the time it should have been. 15 sessions had occurred, they asked for 1767.90 returned immediately. Now what am I supposed to do, demand he turn over two entire disability checks? Turn him into collections when he can’t pay because his (subsidized) rent alone takes up over 60% of his income and destroy his already wrecked credit? I’m here to help him improve his mental health, not destroy it, fuck that. So now I eat that 2 grand. What am I supposed to do? How do I balance that? That’s a 3% pay cut in a day because once again it’s put upon me to subsidize my clients care when the system fails.

I run a lean practice. It’s only me and occasionally I’ll bring on one supervised staff who is in post grad that I give a very fair fee split too. I still keep a secret savings account of 15,000 for clawbacks.

The reason is because I’ve had colleagues with medium practices, roughly 10-12 people in the group, go out of business because they get hit with a 40+k clawback that they simply weren’t prepared for. Or they just burn out dealing with that shit. Or they stay in business but now they no longer accept insurance at all, have ridiculous policies ($125 missed appointment fees! 48 hour notice required!) and inaccessible to anyone who makes less than 150k/yr

Then overnight a practice with 12 clinicians is gone and the community, which is desperate for clinicians, has 10 or so scrambling for new jobs and the 1-2 who ran it considering just getting a manager job at target or something. Then my inbox gets that many more emails even though my psychologytoday says “not accepting clients” because my waitlist is already months long.

Don’t even get me started on commercial rental prices

[–] stickmanmeyhem 34 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Jesus Christ, America is a nightmare

[–] quixotic120 15 points 2 weeks ago

Remember this when they talk about how they give a shit about small businesses

[–] rayyy 10 points 2 weeks ago

America is a nightmare

Capitalism working as intended.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago

If only. I'd like to wake up.

[–] Tikiporch 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Great write-up. This explains why so many of my provider friends tell me they want to go work at Starbucks or Target, which didn't make sense at first because you still have to deal with the public. This gives some additional perspective.

[–] quixotic120 10 points 2 weeks ago

You do but at the end of the day target or starbucks won’t randomly take back 3-12% of your gross income. They also pay you consistently. I like my job but there are a lot of times I get real fucking frustrated at a period where my pay is super low for an extended period of times. Insurance companies are also assholes about paying. To be fair most of the time they’re on top of shit but sometimes they’re not and there’s nothing I can do about it. Sometimes they’re weeks behind on payments and it’s just like, oh well, that sucks, hope you have savings! But if I’m late submitting billing to them they will often raise a stink about. and this can absolutely be one of the things that later becomes an issue during an audit that results in them clawing back a payment. 0 sympathy if I am overwhelmed but if theyre overwhelmed? Tough shit, I’m getting no pay that week.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The part that immediately got me was the clinician hiring a biller to dispute the $20k payback, only for it to be reduced to $10k. They probably paid the biller almost $10k to get the documentation together. For smaller paybacks, the clinic would probably be taking a loss to dispute the charge even if it gets stopped completely. As long as the insurer can provide justification for the charge, there's basically no way to punish them for doing this, even when the insurer knows the original payment was legit.

[–] quixotic120 1 points 2 weeks ago

I would not be surprised if this was the case or if they paid slightly more when all was said and done. Billers aren’t cheap