SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lane3 who wrote (4217)2/3/2008 2:07:58 PM
From: Road Walker  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42652
 
Hospitals sock uninsured with much bigger bills
By Julie Appleby, USA TODAY
Ed and Dianna Jellison let their business' health insurance lapse while they shopped for a better price. But then Ed fell ill, spending 17 days in a Florida hospital as a viral infection ravaged his body.
Now the couple are fighting a $116,000 hospital bill, one they say could be as low as $25,000 if an insurance company were paying it.

The tough truth for patients like the Jellisons — who earn too much to qualify for charity care — is that they are often charged the highest prices for hospital services.

Few know that. And they're stunned when they learn.

"If they accept $25,000 from an insurance company on a routine basis, and what they're charging us for the same thing is $116,000, that's not fair, and it's not right," says Dianne, who closed the couple's roofing business and took a part-time job in a warehouse because Ed's illness left him disabled.

Hospital billing under scrutiny

The hospital industry practice of charging uninsured patients the highest fees has caught the attention of lawmakers and other government officials around the USA:
The House Energy and Commerce Committee is investigating the billing practices of 20 hospitals and health systems and has asked federal regulators whether Medicare law inhibits hospitals from offering discounts to the uninsured.
Yale-New Haven Hospital is being sued by the Connecticut Attorney General, who alleges the hospital failed to tell low-income patients that it had money set aside for free care. Last year, Connecticut lawmakers barred hospitals from charging more than 5% interest on bills and required them to clearly inform patients of charity care programs.
The Illinois attorney general is investigating hospitals in that state, following a campaign by a labor union highlighting the large bills faced by uninsured patients.
Laws to limit collection practices or cap the amount that the uninsured must pay have been proposed in California, New York, Illinois and Florida.

By Julie Appleby





The long-standing hospital industry practice — along with some hospitals' aggressive bill-collection tactics — has caught the attention of lawmakers from Washington, D.C., to California.

Wading into the controversy for the first time, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) last week told hospitals that there are no federal rules stopping them from offering discounts to uninsured patients.

Hospitals had blamed federal rules for presenting a "string of barriers" that discouraged them from reducing charges to the uninsured. On Monday, Rick Wade of the American Hospital Association (AHA) said some points still need clarification, but acknowledged that the "regulatory path is now essentially clear."

In recent months, pressure brought on hospitals by advocacy groups, many backed by organized labor, prompted some, including the nation's largest chain, to offer discounts to more low-income patients.

Still, those programs vary widely — and most do not cover patients like the Jellisons, who have middle-class incomes or assets. Some advocates say discounts should be extended to all uninsured.

"I'm not sure why anyone should be overcharged," says Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access, a patient advocacy group based in California.

The debate comes as the hospital industry faces a number of challenges.

About the only thing all sides seem to agree on is that more families will find themselves stuck like the Jellisons unless ways can be found to reduce the number of uninsured.

"This family typifies the problem we have in our whole health care system: the affordability of health insurance, the tremendous cost you can incur when you get very sick and the question of who is going to pick up the tab," says Rich Morrison, a regional vice president for Florida Hospital in Orlando, where Ed Jellison received his care.

Few patients pay full list price

While it varies by hospital, charges nationally are about double hospitals' costs of providing services, according to Glenn Melnick, professor of health care financing at the University of Southern California. That's up from 10 years ago when charges were about one-third higher than costs, according to data analyzed by Melnick.

But hospitals typically receive less than their listed charges because insurers and government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid negotiate discounts.

"The typical range of discounts nationwide (among private insurers) might be around 45% to 50% on hospital services," says actuary John Bowerline with Milliman USA, a firm that tracks health care costs and consults with employers and health care providers.

Those discounts can be even higher in some markets. Hospital financial data collected by the state of California show that large hospital systems there in 2002 collected 30% to 35% of their billed charges, meaning insurers, the government and other payers receive 65% to 70% discounts.

Uninsured patients generally are able to negotiate smaller discounts, if any. The other group that gets stuck paying all or close to all charges are insurance companies whose policyholders go to out-of-network hospitals, with whom they have not negotiated discounts.

Adding to the pressure on the uninsured is that many hospitals have sharply increased charges in the past two years.

"The charges are inflated because of the way the payment system works," says Dick Davidson, president of the American Hospital Association. "If we had tried to create a billing system to confuse the public, this is what we would have created."

Laura Helm, 48, works as a reservation clerk at an Urbana, Ill., hotel that does not offer its hourly employees health insurance. She bought her own coverage for a while but dropped it when the premiums became too expensive.

Eighteen months ago, she spent a day and a half in Provena Covenant hospital after having chest pains, racking up a bill of nearly $4,000. She earns about $16,000 a year, too much to qualify for the hospital's charity program. Calls to set up a payment program were not returned by the hospital, she says, so she started sending in small monthly amounts.

"The next thing I know, I'm getting letters from them, very hateful letters about not paying the bill and how they were going to sue me," she says.

When the hospital suggested she take out a loan with a local bank at 12.9% interest, Helm agreed. She will be paying that loan for more than two years. Meanwhile, she still cannot afford health insurance.

In May, Provena got a new chief executive, Mark Wiener, who began making changes and working with a local non-profit advocacy group, the Champaign County Health Care Consumers.

One change is that the hospital will accept payments as low as $35 a month toward bills, although it also still encourages bank loans. The hospital also increased eligibility for its discount program. For patients who earn up to 120% of the federal poverty level, care is free. A sliding scale of discounts, which range from nearly 92% to about 6%, are offered to those who earn up to 300% of poverty level.

The federal poverty level is $8,980 for a single person, $12,120 for two and $18,400 for a family of four. A couple earning 200% of poverty level would have an annual income of $24,240, while a family of four at 400% of poverty level would have an income of $73,600.

Last week, Illinois officials revoked the property tax exemption for Provena Covenant, saying the hospital didn't meet the standards of a charitable institution because it had sued patients to collect debt. The hospital said it would appeal the ruling.

Other hospitals are also making changes to their policies on charging the uninsured:

• The nation's largest hospital chain, HCA, standardized its policy in October to offer free care to those up to 200% of the federal poverty level.

• Tenet, the second-largest chain, agreed to offer the uninsured discounts similar to those it gives managed-care insurers in each of its markets. But that policy has not gone into effect; Tenet says it is awaiting a legal opinion from federal regulators.

• Hospital associations in California, New York and Illinois have recently published voluntary guidelines suggesting ways hospitals could offer discounts to low-income patients. California suggests discounts for patients earning up to 300% of the poverty level; the other states suggest 200%.

"All the uninsured should be charged reasonable rates similar to what insured pay," says K.B. Forbes of Consejo de Latinos Unidos, a Los Angeles-based advocacy group that is helping the Jellisons.

A $116,000 bill vs. $25,000?

After analyzing the Jellisons' 49-page hospital bill, Forbes' group says the $116,000 total would likely have been reduced to about $25,000 if an insurance company were paying the bill, a 78% discount.

The Jellisons say they offered to pay Florida Hospital $30,000. "That was everything we had left in savings and borrowing against the equity in our house," Dianna says.

Florida Hospital spokesman Morrison says the hospital rejected an initial offer by the Jellisons to pay $8,000. The couple did not qualify for the hospital's charity care program because their pre-illness income was above $48,000, which the hospital sets as its limit. The hospital offers discounts of up to 49% to patients who earn less than 400% of the poverty level.

He says the hospital, part of the Adventist Health System, has no record of the Jellisons' $30,000 offer. Instead, the hospital offered to settle for $80,000, if the couple paid promptly. The $25,000 figure quoted to the Jellisons by Forbes' group would represent "significantly more of a discount than we're offering any managed-care company," he says.

Morrison says most hospitals lose money on uninsured patients.

"There's this allegation made that we're getting rich off the uninsured," Morrison says. "As a system, we're collecting less than 10 cents on the dollar on the uninsured across the board."

The long-term answer for the nation, Morrison says, requires both that society spend more money preventing illness and that individuals take more responsibility to plan for their health costs.

"If folks can reasonably afford health insurance, and they choose to do something else, then what's the responsibility everyone else has for these people?" he asks.

Other hospital officials also pointed to the issue of the uninsured. At Centura Health in Colorado, which was criticized by Forbes' group for its efforts to collect from the uninsured, spokeswoman Laura Wegscheid says the chain offers discounts to patients up to 400% of the poverty level.

Still, she said, discounts won't solve the problem: "It will probably ease the burden on a portion of patients, but the end result of a lot of this dialogue is, 'How do we reduce the ranks of the uninsured?' "



To: Lane3 who wrote (4217)2/3/2008 2:10:24 PM
From: Road Walker  Respond to of 42652
 
Suits Challenge Hospital Bills Of Uninsured
By REED ABELSON AND JONATHAN D. GLATER
A group of plaintiffs' lawyers filed civil lawsuits against more than a dozen nonprofit hospitals across the country yesterday, contending that the hospitals violated their obligation as charities by overcharging people without insurance and then hounding them for the money.

The complaints name some of the largest hospitals in the Chicago, Atlanta and Minneapolis metropolitan areas. More lawsuits are expected to be filed, said Don Barrett, one of the lawyers involved in the cases. ''It is part of a coordinated attack on this reprehensible practice,'' he said.

The lawyers, some of whom were involved in litigation against the tobacco companies in the 1990's, are calling for the creation of a trust that would be financed by the hospitals and would provide affordable medical care for those without insurance. Because the hospitals have tax-exempt status and other benefits as nonprofit organizations, the lawyers argue that they have an obligation to provide affordable care to the uninsured.

Hospitals' billing and collection practices have emerged as a controversial issue over the last 18 months as many hospitals have come under sharp criticism for charging people without insurance significantly more than they charge those insured, and then aggressively seeking to collect payments from those people.

''It has brought on them the wrath of the community over their tax exemption,'' said Dr. Uwe E. Reinhardt, a professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton University.

The suits were filed in federal courts perhaps because they cite federal laws that govern health insurance. The lawyers are seeking class-action status on behalf of uninsured patients who they say should have received affordable care but did not.

The lawyers also say the hospitals are sitting on large, untaxed sums that should help pay for care for the uninsured. Some hospitals are described in the suits as being among the most profitable hospital systems in the nation with hundreds of millions, even billions, in assets and revenue.

But the hospitals say they are not responsible for the plight of the uninsured. And they say that in seeking repayment by people without insurance, they are not charging unfairly high rates but are simply charging prices that do not reflect the negotiated discounts obtained by insurance companies and health maintenance organizations. Many say they are reviewing their billing and collection practices.

The lawsuits are ''baseless and misdirected, diverting focus away from the real issue of how we as a nation are going to extend health coverage to all Americans,'' said Alicia Mitchell, a spokeswoman for the American Hospital Association, a trade group in Washington.

There is little doubt that people without insurance are frequently charged the highest prices for care. The uninsured do not benefit from the ability of an insurer, health plan or large employer to negotiate low prices for care, and hospitals have typically charged their list price to people without insurance.

One suit filed in Chicago named Provena Health. ''While Provena gives private insurance companies and governmental third-party payers like Medicare and Medicaid large discounts off this gross or 'sticker price,''' the suit said, ''all of its uninsured patients are charged 100 percent of the full sticker price, which is two to three times more than Provena charges its insured patients for the same service.''

The lawsuit claims that Provena each year charges uninsured patients at least $50 million more than its insured patients. The suit does not indicate, though, what portion of the hospital's patients are insured.

''In reality, Provena is anything but charitable,'' the lawsuit said. ''While it promises to provide affordable care to the uninsured poor, Provena has and continues to engage in a practice and pattern of charging inordinate, unreasonable and inflated prices for medical care to its uninsured patients.''

No one from Provena could be reached late yesterday for comment.

Provena, like some other hospital chains around the country, is already facing scrutiny from regulators. Earlier this year, Illinois revoked the tax-exempt status of one of its hospitals for, among other reasons, not providing enough charitable care.

Other state attorneys general have cited similar practices in bringing lawsuits against some nonprofit providers. In Connecticut, the attorney general, Richard Blumenthal, brought a suit against Yale-New Haven Hospital. In New York, hospitals' handling of uninsured patients is an issue of concern to Eliot Spitzer, the state's attorney general, said Christine Pritchard, a spokeswoman for his office.

''The office has received complaints from uninsured individuals related to debt collection for their hospital care,'' Ms. Pritchard said. ''It is of concern to our office, and we would encourage any individual in a similar situation to contact our consumer help line.''

The lawsuits filed yesterday describe aggressive efforts by the hospitals to obtain payment from uninsured individuals without the means to pay.

The suit filed against Advocate Health Care Network of Oak Brook, Ill., for example, asserts that Jannie Watts, one of the plaintiffs, ''received numerous threatening and harassing phone calls'' seeking payment of $48,008.47 for treatment of her uninsured teenage son, a bystander to a shooting who was hit by multiple gunshots in 1998.

Similarly, in a suit brought against Allina Health System in Minneapolis, the plaintiff, Paul Kern, argues that he had no insurance and thought his care was free. Instead, the suit says, he was billed the full cost of the care and he turned to a credit counseling service, which was unsuccessful in its attempts to negotiate with the hospital on his behalf for better terms.

A spokeswoman for Allina said the hospital had not seen the lawsuit and could not comment.

Hospitals say they can ill afford to finance free health care. Many say that they are struggling financially and that whatever assets they have they need to invest in improving the quality of care. These lawsuits would drain already limited resources, said Ms. Mitchell of the hospital association.

The issue of hospitals' treatment of the uninsured is likely to continue drawing attention from lawyers and policy makers, said Eugene E. Elder, a lawyer in the Washington office of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld who has represented hospitals. As more people have direct experience with the high price of hospital care, he said, they are sympathetic to those with medical bills they cannot pay. ''More and more people have become sensitized to that,'' he said, ''and it's easy to get outraged.''

It is unclear how strong the new legal cases will prove to be, said Samuel Issacharoff, a professor at Columbia Law School who has worked with both plaintiff and defense lawyers. ''There are a couple of moving parts that are hard to define,'' Mr. Issacharoff said. ''What is the legal obligation to provide charity care?''

Determining exactly who should have been charged less or received treatment free may be difficult, he said, and deciding how much money they should have been charged for treatment may be equally complex. ''This is a terribly complicated issue,'' Mr. Issachroff said.



To: Lane3 who wrote (4217)2/3/2008 2:12:42 PM
From: Road Walker  Respond to of 42652
 
Scripps to settle uninsured billing suit

Deal could benefit up to 60,000 patients
By Keith Darcé
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

February 1, 2008

A proposed settlement of a class-action lawsuit against Scripps Health on billing of uninsured patients could reduce unpaid hospital bills owed by as many as 60,000 patients.
San Diego Superior Court Judge Steven Denton will consider approving the settlement today at a 10:30 a.m. hearing at the Hall of Justice in downtown San Diego.

The deal would apply to patients who received care from one of the nonprofit's five hospital emergency rooms as far back as July 19, 2002, were uninsured at the time and paid full prices for medical services. Those patients would be eligible for a 35 percent discount on their bills.

Altogether, the discounts could be worth more than $73 million, said lawyers for both sides. Only a fraction of that amount would go into patients' pockets as refunds because most of them have paid little or nothing on their outstanding bills.

Scripps also agreed to maintain discount pricing and “compassionate” collection policies for uninsured patients regardless of income; enhance its charity discounts for moderate-income, uninsured patients; offer financial counseling to uninsured patients; and provide more information about the policies to uninsured patients.

The hospitals – Scripps Mercy Hospital in San Diego, Scripps Mercy Hospital Chula Vista, Scripps Memorial Hospital-Encinitas, Scripps Memorial Hospital-La Jolla and Scripps Green Hospital in La Jolla – would continue the new policies for at least four years.

Scripps denied any wrongdoing or liability in the case.

“We are very proud of our service to the community as a nonprofit health care provider,” Scripps spokesman Don Stanziano said yesterday. “We certainly want to continue that tradition, and we believe that we do every day.”

Most uninsured patients who qualify for discounts or refunds should get claim forms in the mail in the coming months. Those who think they qualify and don't receive a form can request one from the plaintiffs' San Francisco law firm, Lieff Cabraser Heimann and Bernstein.

The lead plaintiff in the case, Phillip Franklin, 56, of Solana Beach, said he was satisfied with the outcome of the litigation, which began in 2006 after a bill collector sued him for failing to pay $2,900 in emergency-room charges from Scripps Memorial Hospital-Encinitas.

Franklin, who had been diagnosed with a kidney stone during the ER visit, was unemployed at the time because of a work-related disability and couldn't pay the charges.

He said he tried to work out a payment plan, but hospital officials were uncooperative.

“I thought it was a big deal,” Franklin said yesterday of his decision to fight the original lawsuit with litigation of his own. “It's like going into McDonald's and ordering a hamburger, and they give you a bill for $800.

“I thought I was doing something that was going to do some good.”

Franklin's lawsuit alleged that the rates at which Scripps billed uninsured patients were, on average, 412 percent above the rates the hospitals received when caring for patients covered by Medicare, the federal health care program for people who are elderly or have disabilities.

Government and private health plans routinely negotiate discounts for hospital services with the leverage of large numbers of patients and guaranteed payment for services.

While uninsured patients account for a small portion of visits to hospitals, their inability to pay hospital bills can be personally devastating, forcing some into financial ruin.

Franklin's lawsuit argued that Scripps' treatment of uninsured patients who couldn't pay their bills violated state consumer protection statutes and contract laws, said attorney Kelly M. Dermody of Lieff Cabraser Heimann and Bernstein.

She said the lawsuit followed the spirit of numerous federal cases filed in recent years in California and other states, alleging that nonprofit health care systems such as Scripps have failed to live up to their legal obligation to provide free and discounted care to the needy in exchange for a tax-exempt status.

Policies already in place at Scripps hospitals meet or exceed the terms of the settlement announced yesterday, said Deborah Giles, corporate counsel for the health care system.

“This settlement reaffirms what we believe we were already doing and allows us to move forward,” she said.

Some of Scripps' policies were updated after the adoption of a state law in 2006 that requires all hospitals to offer discounts to low-and moderate-income uninsured patients, to notify patients about financial assistance programs and to try to negotiate payment plans with uninsured patients before sending delinquent bills to collection services.

Uninsured patients earning less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit – about $20,000 for an individual and $41,000 for a family of four – can ask that their entire bill be forgiven, according to a Scripps Web site on patient financial assistance. Other discounts are available to uninsured patients with income of $20,000 to $40,000 for an individual and $41,000 to $82,000 for a family of four.