Published
The folks who invented the credit score for lenders are hard at work developing a similar tool for hospitals and other health care providers.
The project, dubbed “MedFICO” in some early press reports, will aid hospitals in assessing a patient’s ability to pay their medical bills. But privacy advocates are worried that the notorious errors that have caused frequent criticism of the credit system will also cause trouble with any attempt to create a health-related risk score. They also fear that a low score might impact the quality of the health care that patients receive.
Copying your card and collecting a co-pay are not guarantees of being fully paid for services rendered. Having a card in one's wallet is not an indication of an active insurance policy, and even a $25+ copay amounts to a fraction of the cost of most office visits. Perhaps this is a good argument for doing away with 3rd party payors and making individuals fully and directly responsible for payment of healthcare expenses. (Which they ultimately are, anyway.)If you don't want a provider to access your credit score, then don't utilize offices that do so. I wonder if it might prove to be an advantage for those with excellent credit histories. Maybe providers will be willing to discount services for those who have a track record of paying bills promptly.
Do you object as strongly to furniture stores, auto dealers and even Blockbuster having access to your financial information?
I've never bought furniture on credit before, so they don't have my information and I don't have a Blockbuster membership, so they don't know me, either. An auto dealer is a different matter, because I have chosen to finance my cars through them.
Providers choose to contract with certain plans, so they have a fairly good assurance of being paid when a patient presents with that card. You can bet that I would leave a provider who asked for my credit report; the problem would be that if this becomes a commonplace practice, there might not be any providers left to use instead.
Providers choose to contract with certain plans, so they have a fairly good assurance of being paid when a patient presents with that card. You can bet that I would leave a provider who asked for my credit report; the problem would be that if this becomes a commonplace practice, there might not be any providers left to use instead.
Thats not true at all. The business model of any insurance company is to deny as many claims as possible. Thats the reason why their profit margins are higher than in any other industry.
Unfortunately for healthcare providers, 100% of insurance companies do this practice, making it impractical to drop one in favor of another because they all pull the same dirty tricks.
Thats not true at all. The business model of any insurance company is to deny as many claims as possible. Thats the reason why their profit margins are higher than in any other industry.Unfortunately for healthcare providers, 100% of insurance companies do this practice, making it impractical to drop one in favor of another because they all pull the same dirty tricks.
Actually, it is true. These practices are commonplace, as you acknowledge, so practices have a good idea up front of what they will eventually be reimbursed. I have never had a claim for routine or preventive care denied, with fee for service, HMO or PPO coverage.
The system is a mess. My situation will become a growing problem for people/Drs as people go to the 'high deductible' insurance plans to save money. These plans are supported by pres bush to make the health care industry more 'consumer driven.' I'm not sure what should be done.
A couple years ago I went with my husband to a podiatrist to get his ingrown toenails removed. We had insurance with a $1000 deductible. The office manager said we had to pay 'up front.' I do know how the system works, and said that we were entitled to the 'contracted amt' set in place between the ins co and the office. (this amt is often $100's less than what they charge the uninsured.) This person acted like she didn't know what I was talking about, galked around...said she was going to go ask someone else about it...came back and said that we only had to pay half the amt - like she was doing us some big favor. She just didn't want to bill the ins co, or it could have been she just didn't understand the system.
I said 'there are other dr's we can go to' and we walked out. I got my husband an appt with a competing podiatrist who had no problems billing the insurance so that the amt could be applied to the deductible. After that, I went to the office and cut them a $900+ check for the services provided.
Point being, as the costs are being shifted more to the pt, thru higher deductibles, ect I think that 'payment' will become more of an issue. And the ins co's will have to be more up front about the 'contracted amts' they have with the providers....they don't like to disclose those amts, I've heard.
They also fear that a low score might impact the quality of the health care that patients receive.
Sadly, I'm certain that happens now without any numerical risk value added to their record. I'm not so certain it will get any worse, although, logic says it is certainly possible. What is certain is that care will not improve with this new system.
This was discussed on another board that I frequent - which lead to a discussion of how doctors make SO much money, etc., etc.
I asked them if their electrician, banker, mechanic, etc. would climb out of bed at 3AM, get dressed and come care for them. Well, of course not!
People make sure THOSE bills are paid, because they know that the person won't put up with it. But those same folks may just put off paying their medical bills, because, after ALL, doctors and nurses make so much that they can afford to wait.
Most of the docs I knew worked from early morning til late evening - they had little in the way of off time, yet I seldom heard them complain. And I also saw MANY cases of them donating their time.
Please enlighten me how you are certain that happens now?
Sadly, I'm certain that happens now without any numerical risk value added to their record. I'm not so certain it will get any worse, although, logic says it is certainly possible. What is certain is that care will not improve with this new system.
They did if you applied for a credit card. Irregardless you paid for the services before you left the store.
Why would I apply for a credit card at the supermarket? Of course I paid for my groceries before I left the store. Just like I paid my portion of the doctor's bill before I left his office. Which is why I object to either of them having access to my credit report.
Why would I apply for a credit card at the supermarket? Of course I paid for my groceries before I left the store. Just like I paid my portion of the doctor's bill before I left his office. Which is why I object to either of them having access to my credit report.
Mercy,
I understand that you pay your co-pay prior to leaving the doctor's ofice, but for many people that is only a portion of the patient responsibility. While the physician may contract with your insurance company, s/he is also extending credit to the patient who will owe a balance on the bill.
I met a representative of a local healthcare organization at my daughter's softball tournament last year. He stated that the organization was preparing to implement a 10% discount to patients who pay the balance of their statements (hospital, out-patient, physician office billing, etc.) within 30 days of receiving them. He was referring to the 20% co-insurance many people have on their policies, the deductibles that patients must meet before their insurance "kicks in", items not covered by insurance but requested by the patient anyway, etc. He said there was a huge problem with patients refusing to pay any portion of their statement, not just disputed items, because many people feel entitled to simply walk away from healthcare expenses not covered by insurance, as if they bear no personal responsibility. He made it clear that he was not talking about people without the resources to pay. He was referring to people who simply refuse to do so. In cases like this, I can't fault a healthcare organization for considering checking credit reports on patients and declining to provide additional non-emergency services for those who have refused to pay prior balances despite having the means to do so. And perhaps by declining to provide additional non-emergency services to those with a history of non-payment, costs for the rest of us would go down since we would not be subsidizing the care of those who choose not to pay.
LydiaNN
2,756 Posts
Sorry, but where did I say that I don't like it? I have no problem with paying up front. Saves time at check out, and before the appointment, you're just sitting around in the waiting room anyway. It makes more sense to do it then.
No, I really don't check into my credit report that much. I know that could end up biting me in the butt some day, but so can a lot of other things. I refuse to go through life being afraid that someone is out to get me, even if they are.