I received one of those type letters from BCBS a year or two ago. I considered filling it out, then thought better of it. When I received another a week or so ago, I tossed it. In some ways it sounds helpful, but I am suspicious of their motives.
It can't be that novel; pretty much every insurance contract I've ever seen has language along the lines of "you agree to let us sue on your behalf to recover costs". But the letter struck me as a little crass not because they seek to recover costs but because her medical records clearly show that it wasn't the result of an identifiable injury. They didn't need to hassle her; they already had the information.
The next step, obviously, is to eliminate the doctor entirely. But if you come down with leukemia, they'll be happy to send you a box of herb tea and a CD full of positive affirmations.
Yeah, that was my reaction as well. There are far too many ways in which the insurance company might find this information useful that are *not* in my best interest...
It's nice that they're being so pro-active about interfering in your well-managed medical business, and are fighting us about covering a test that I need regularly to keep on top of an already diagnosed condition!! Do they want people to get preventative medical care or not?
If they complain about the hearing test I had last week, I may have a temper tantrum.
I have a high degree of confidence that their recommendations for pro-active, preventative care all involve things that don't cost them money: eat these foods, do this exercise, stop this bad habit, etc. Somehow I suspect that the picture changes when it comes to actual diagnostics and screenings.
and are fighting us about covering a test that I need regularly to keep on top of an already diagnosed condition!!
Gah. And presumably this is something you've been doing since long before this particular company covered you, so it's not like you're doing something new. I guess it's only a matter of itme before they challenge my every-several-months visits to my opthamologist. (That's covered under the health, not vision, plan because the reason for the visits is glaucoma treatment and monitoring, not ordinary vision checks -- though she does that too while I'm there.)
Comments 15
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
That's just a novel way of reclaiming their costs.
/sarcasm
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Reply
If they complain about the hearing test I had last week, I may have a temper tantrum.
Reply
and are fighting us about covering a test that I need regularly to keep on top of an already diagnosed condition!!
Gah. And presumably this is something you've been doing since long before this particular company covered you, so it's not like you're doing something new. I guess it's only a matter of itme before they challenge my every-several-months visits to my opthamologist. (That's covered under the health, not vision, plan because the reason for the visits is glaucoma treatment and monitoring, not ordinary vision checks -- though she does that too while I'm there.)
Reply
Leave a comment