AG Shapiro: UPMC’s ‘corporate greed’ hurting patients | TribLIVE.com
Allegheny

AG Shapiro: UPMC’s ‘corporate greed’ hurting patients

Bob Bauder
722150_web1_599905-ecce9e41917c42ccb8b602336860f949
FILE - In this Aug. 14, 2018, file photo, Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro walks to the podium to speak about a grand jury’s report on clergy abuse in the Roman Catholic Church during a news conference at the Capitol in Harrisburg, Pa. Over the past four months, Roman Catholic dioceses across the U.S. have released the names of more than 1,000 priests and others accused of sexually abusing children in an unprecedented public reckoning spurred at least in part by a shocking grand jury investigation in Pennsylvania, an Associated Press review has found. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke, File)
722150_web1_ptr-shapiroUPMChighmark-020819
Brittany Eckert, 32, of East Deer describes fears over possibly losing access to UPMC doctors during a news conference Thursday, Feb. 7, 2019. She was accompanied by Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro (left), Lt. Gov. John Fetterman (right) and about 20 other residents in danger of losing access to UPMC health care providers.

Attorney General Josh Shapiro accused UPMC on Thursday of violating its obligation as a public charity and asked a state court to intervene in its breakup with rival Highmark by forcing it to accept out-of-network patients at affordable rates.

In a 73-page legal challenge filed in Commonwealth Court, Shapiro accused UPMC of breach of fiduciary duties and violating the Solicitation of Funds for Charitable Purposes Act and Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. The petition is posted on the attorney general’s website.

Shapiro is seeking a court-ordered modification of a 2014 state-brokered consent decree that would require UPMC to accept Highmark and any other out-of-network patient in perpetuity.

”The consent decree modifications would do three things: first, require UPMC and Highmark to work together; second, ensure fairness for Pennsylvania taxpayers; and third, protect access for all patients,” Shapiro said during a news conference. “This is not about my office inserting itself into the health care market. We do not want to interfere with the important relationship between doctors and patients.

“We want to stop UPMC from unlawfully interfering with that relationship.”

He said open access to UPMC should be made through “negotiated contracts with any health plan.”

Stephen Foreman, a Robert Morris University associate professor of health care administration and economics, said Commonwealth Court would likely have to act on Shapiro’s complaint.

“I think it would be hard to duck it,” Foreman said, adding that he believes the case will eventually end up before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. “I think that what constitutes a public charity is in some ways pretty amorphous. I’d like to see the court better define the kinds of conduct that constitute charitable conduct.

”I think what UPMC is doing with out-of-network Highmark people by making them pay in advance is not charitable.”

UPMC contends that competition is beneficial to consumers.

“The five-year transition as provided for by the consent decrees expiring June 30, 2019, has allowed businesses and consumers substantial time to prepare for the end of the UPMC-Highmark relationship in Western Pennsylvania,” UPMC spokesman Paul Wood wrote in an emailed statement. “During that period, the region’s insurance marketplace transformed from one of the nation’s most highly concentrated and least competitive to one of the most competitive and pro-consumer markets in the nation with some of the lowest cost health plans available anywhere.”

The two nonprofits have clashed over contracts despite the 2014 consent decree aimed at addressing their feud. The consent decree expires June 30, which means thousands of people with Highmark insurance will not have in-network access to many UPMC hospitals and doctors.

Shapiro announced the court filing during a news conference in his Strip District offices. He was accompanied by about 20 residents who fear they will lose access to UPMC doctors after the June 30 deadline. He was joined by Lt. Gov. John Fetterman of Braddock, who pledged full support from his office and the governor’s. Fetterman, the former Braddock mayor, battled with UPMC over the 2010 closing of Braddock Hospital.

Brittany Eckert, 32, of East Deer said she chose UPMC doctors because they were the only ones she found with experience in treating her rare form of uterine cancer.

“Come June of this year, I have to start my search and my journey all over again because, having Highmark insurance through my husband’s work, I will no longer be able to see my UPMC oncologist, who saved my life from a death sentence,” she said. “It’s very stressful and a very scary process.”

Shapiro said his office proposed “common sense” modifications of the consent decree to UPMC and Highmark.

“I’m here today to announce that Highmark has agreed to those modifications,” he said. “I’m also here today to announce that UPMC did not. UPMC could still change its mind. They could still do the right thing and agree to these modifications, but until then I have no choice but to act to protect Pennsylvanians. I can’t sit idly by and watch our seniors and children and workers suffer because of corporate greed.”

David Holmberg, president and CEO, Highmark Health, said in a conference call with reporters that Highmark is “fully committed” to working with Shapiro’s office.

“We said that getting health care right would be our focus, and that’s exactly what we’ve done as an organization,” he said. “We are very confident that, in a totally competitive market where everybody has to play by the same rules, we will provide a unique experience and a winning formula.”

Highmark officials last year asked UPMC to reconsider its plan to require Highmark-insured Medicare Advantage patients to prepay their non­emergency medical bills in full if they want to continue using UPMC facilities and doctors next summer.

The prepay requirement — announced along with the release of 2019 Medicare plan rates nationwide — is set to take effect June 30.

“As for Medicare Advantage, a federally regulated program, seniors now have more options and enjoy the benefits increased competition provides in terms of low pricing and more expansive plan design,” Wood said. “To the extent there remains any confusion, seniors with Medicare Advantage plans have another opportunity, from January 1 through March 31, to clarify their options and switch their coverage so they have the in-network access to the providers they prefer.”


Bob Bauder is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Bob at 412-765-2312, [email protected] or via Twitter @bobbauder.


Bob Bauder is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Bob at 412-765-2312, [email protected] or via Twitter .

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.