Letter to the editor: UPMC-Highmark decision will cause patients to suffer | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: UPMC-Highmark decision will cause patients to suffer

The ruling from Judge Robert Simpson regarding the UPMC-Highmark debate (“Judge: UPMC-Highmark split set for June 30,” June 14, TribLIVE) may be the letter of the law, but it is a huge disappointment to chronically ill and disabled individuals.

Qualifying for in-network access to a provider of choice by age or presence of cancer simply is not enough. People who combat serious chronic conditions also rely upon trusted specialists within facilities that are now off limits. That is, unless payment can be made up front. How many can afford that?

Marketplace competition and the bottom line has driven this debate. But patients with diminishing health and diminishing finances will suffer the emotional aftermath. They were given just two weeks to choose a new doctor or a new health plan. How does that equate with continuity of care?

Georgie Blackburn


The writer is vice president, government relations and legislative affairs, and corporate secretary of Blackburn’s Physicians Pharmacy.

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.