Lawsuit Against Health Net Reveals Danger of Single Payer

This may seem counter intuitive, but a lawsuit filed in California against Health Net Insurance, for allegedly denying coverage for life-saving medical treatment, illustrates the danger of single payer health coverage.  First, the story from the L.A. County Medical Association Press Release, and then my reasoning:

It [the suit] alleges that the multi-billion-dollar insurance provider systemically refuses legitimate patient claims by employing its own definition and set of criteria for “medical necessity,” violating well-established standards set forth by California law. According to the suit, Health Net is “the leader” in this calculated corporate practice to avoid paying claims. “Once again, we see a health insurance company putting profits ahead of patient health and lives,” said Rocky Delgadillo, CEO of LACMA and the former Los Angeles City Attorney. “By deciding which medical treatments are necessary and which ones it will cover, Health Net is dictating medical care from the boardroom. Patient care should be decided by doctors, not business suits.”

If Health Net did it, I hope they are ordered to pay through the nose!

But imagine the same scenario under a single payer plan—as has happened in the UK, Canada, and Oregon Medicaid, which have all denied life-extending chemotherapies for people with terminal cancer.  The wronged patients were without a remedy—as I describe in this Weekly Standard article.

You think I exaggerate?  Read the linked article and learn about the Arizona liver transplant patient—who had been approved for life-saving surgery on Medicaid—only to have the consent withdrawn when cost-cutting led the state to take away the benefit.  There. Was. Nothing. He. Could. Do.  But if it had been a private insurance company unilaterally pulling out the rug by suddenly changing the organ transplant benefits—the lawyers would have stampeded!

In other words, in a private system, wrongs happen to be sure, but we have potentially robust legal and administrative remedies to both dissuade and punish.  In a publicly financed single payer system, often a wronged patient is limited to an in-agency administrative appeal—or less if the state decides the malady isn’t to be covered.  As in Veteran’s Administation appeals, good luck with that!

Dear Reader,

Can I be direct with you?

War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.

First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.

But we can’t do it without readers like you.

Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.


Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.

Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.

GIVE NOW

If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

The Church in the Age of Therapy

Matthew Loftus

In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…

Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot

Anna Farrow

On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…

The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen

Mike Aquilina

Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…