Next 'Obamacare' woe: Fewer choices
WASHINGTON — Once they get the website fixed, then what? Keeping your doctors and hospitals may be the next vexing challenge for Americans in the health plans that resulted from President Obama's law.
Obama promised people could keep their doctors. But in many states, the new plans appear to offer a narrow choice of hospitals and doctors. Overall, it's shaping up as less choice than what people get through Medicare or employer-based coverage. And it can get complicated tracking down which medical providers are in what plans.
“The next shoe is going to drop sometime after Jan. 1, when people actually start using their plans,” said health economist Gail Wilensky, who ran Medicare for President George H.W. Bush. “Whether or not they can keep their doctor is going to depend on whether their doctor was chosen — or wanted to be — part of a plan on the (insurance) exchange.”
Concerns are being raised.
Narrow networks are part of the economic trade-off for keeping premiums under control in Obama's health insurance markets, the new gateway to coverage for people who don't have job-based plans.
Exchange plans are required to take all applicants, cover broad benefits and provide robust financial protection against catastrophic illness. In return for that, something else has to give. The result: limited choices and significant out-of-pocket costs through deductibles and co-payments.
“To get that low premium, the way to get there is by having a more limited or narrow provider network,” said Matthew Eyles, a vice president of Avalere Health, a market analysis firm that is following developments.
The administration says none of that takes away from what will be a historic improvement for the uninsured. Exchanges “will vastly increase uninsured Americans' access to providers, giving them an alternative to the emergency room or community health centers,” said Joanne Peters, spokeswomanfor the Health and Human Services Department. The health care law sets standards for insurers to provide adequate networks, she added.
But the American Medical Association has questions.
“Although it may be too early to reach any definitive conclusions, we are monitoring the adequacy of the exchange networks and will be analyzing the impact of these restrictive strategies on patient access to care,” said Dr. Ardis Dee Hoven, the organization's president.
In some states, it's been a problem. It's magnified in New Hampshire because just one insurer, Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, is offering plans there through the new marketplace. The company's new network for individual plans excludes 10 of the state's 26 frontline hospitals.
That was a rude awakening for Dr. Jocelyn Caple, who works at one of the excluded hospitals, Frisbie Memorial in Rochester, N.H., where she's president of the medical staff. She and her family are covered under their own policy with Anthem.
“We all use Frisbie physicians,” she said. Although there's another facility she could go to next year, “it's pretty shocking not be able to come to your own hospital.”
As an Obama supporter, Caple is troubled. The hospital is mulling a lawsuit.
All these years, Frisbie has performed a balancing act caring for a mix of insured and uninsured patients, she said. “Now at a time when you would have thought that the coming of insurance would make it easier to care for those patients, we are being denied the opportunity to care for them,” she added. “It's pretty disturbing.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Piece of plant found on island on way to France for analysis
- Fetal parts in Planned Parenthood lab shown in 4th video
- Feds eye use of federal dollars for ads for for-profit colleges
- McClatchy: Emails on Clinton’s private server contain Benghazi information
- VA whistle-blowers aghast
- Minn. dentist laying low in slaying of lion
- Highway bill on Obama’s desk extends funding 3 months
- Defense chief approves arming more troops at soft sites
- Geological gem The Wave on Arizona-Utah border draws worldwide visitors
- Ex-Cincy cop pleads not guilty, posts bond
- Only 1 co-op health program, of 23, made money in 2014, report says