A Response to “Tragic Tale”

November 30, 2011 at 07:00 PM
Share & Print

 I am an independent broker. CIGNA is one of the insurance companies we have used for our clients. They represent less than 10% of my book of business. I am educated as an engineer and I do have an aptitude for math. This is my response to your article, "Tragic Tale," which ran on November 7, 2011.

I agree that we have to face tough issues regarding healthcare that are only going to get tougher. Two of the toughest will be helping our population understand that no one is to blame and that money is a finite resource.

I agree that Bill Mantlo's tale is tragic; it is tragic that he was a victim of a bad driver. But I do not agree that his situation has been made more tragic by our current healthcare system. He has received the all care our system can supply at this time.

We have a reasonable national healthcare system for people over 65, the severely chronically disabled and the people who have exhausted their assets—Medicare and Medicaid. These systems will not improve for existing recipients to any significant degree with any of the proposed legislation.

I do not agree with your comments about MLR and insurance companies concerns over profits. I suggest you secure additional data regarding MLR. For all of my groups over 100 participants, MLR is already 86% or more.

For all groups and individuals, insurance companies will be able to achieve 85%. It is easy, just have the rates support the loss ratio. That is why you have not seen much from the insurance companies on MLR.

What is driving costs?

Let's start by reviewing the January 2008 CBO report and see what is driving healthcare spending increases. The bottom line is new technology is driving health care spending. More spending results in higher funding needs and the expense is paid by insurance, Medicare, personal wealth and lastly Medicaid.

There is much new, great technology that can continue and improve life.

What will today's system do for Bill? For Bill Mantlo, the system has operated exactly as it is designed today. He had medical insurance coverage with CIGNA, had he had long term disability coverage, he would have been eligible for Medicare after two years of disability to pay medical expenses for life, and once he went on maintenance, he would have to spend his assets and then receive Medicaid to cover custodial care for life. I can only estimate Bill will consume a total of $5,000,000 as he lives the remainder of his life.

How is our spending changing? Here is a telling statistic. I have a significant, reasonably stable book of business with one insurance company, and it is not CIGNA. Around 1990, they provided a distribution of claims report for my book of business. The findings were that for a year, 20% of the covered employees and dependents had no paid claims, the top 10% of this population consumed about 50% of the claim dollars and the top 1% consumed about 23% of the claims dollars.

A 2009 distribution of claims report shows the total paid claims is four times the 1990 level with 20% of the covered employees and dependents having no paid claims, the top 10% of this population consumed about 70% of the claim dollars and the top 1% consumed about 52% of the claims dollars. More of the resource is being consumed by fewer people. This is not sustainable.

Could addition care have improved Bill's results? That is questionable. You state Bill is a very strong-willed person, who sustained a serious injury. There is hypothecation that additional therapy would have been helpful. In your article you indicated that CIGNA would not approve certain treatment. What about Medicare? Bill must have qualified for Medicare after his second year of disability. Did Medicare agree to pay for services CIGNA did not agree to pay? With 20 years having past, is Medicare now paying for procedures that CIGNA previously refused? If Medicare did not provide additional benefits beyond CIGNA and CIGNA paid according to their contract, CIGNA was fair to Bill and the other CIGNA policy holders.

What is society's responsibility to any one person? When does the welfare of the group override what is spent for any one person? Money is a finite resource and there is not an unlimited reservoir to use for health care costs for any one person. In past societies, those that could not keep up were left behind to die, because to do otherwise put everyone at risk. When 1% uses 52%, and if this is not sustainable, when do we start to ration? If someone feels "society" has an unlimited responsibility—remembering that we ourselves are society—what can that someone afford?

Does everyone understand insurance companies do not "pay" claims? They redistribute premium dollars to benefit dollars according to a contract. If benefit payments go up, premium dollars increase. CIGNA has a responsibility to their policy holders to honor the contract, and it appears they did. I can only come to this conclusion because you do not mention of any lawsuits from Bill's employer, the Legal Aid Society, against CIGNA. If CIGNA erred, I have to believe that the Legal Aid Society would have questioned CIGNA.

When was it decided it is society's responsibility to provide custodial care other than as a last resort? Why is Bill in a nursing home and not staying with one of his children? My mother-in-law who was confined to bed and lived in my house until her death at age 83. We made adjustments and made it work. And her mother lived in her house until her death at age 93. My grandmother was cared for by her three daughters, one of which was my mother, until her death at age 92.

So, where do we go from here?

We have people living longer than ever before and we have treatment options like never before. None of this could have been anticipated. My experience in 36 years is that insurance companies use an objective standard and pay the claims as the contract specifies. No one is at fault. We are wasting time trying to assign blame and need to direct our efforts to dealing with the real issues, longer life and the related expenses of living longer.

People need to understand the funding of our current system. Social Security was and is designed to supplement retirement income, not to be the primary source. This is stated in most Social Security Administration publications. Medicare is to pay for sickness and injury not wear and tear. As part of my civic responsibility, I have done educational seminars for seniors, on Social Security and Medicare. The audience is predominantly middle class. I have them bring their Social Security benefits statement that shows cumulative contributions by the individual and their employers into the system. I offer that if anyone feels they will get less from the system than they have paid, they can call me and I will help them investigate their situation. I have made this offer to more than 500 people. I have received not one call.

People need to understand their income and expense needs as life expectancy increases. Few people have planned for future retirement income that will last for 25 year after they stop working and even fewer have saved toward the estimated $150,000 of unreimbursed health care expenses over this time.

Longer life and better technology affect all areas of our society. I am a volunteer for our local Developmental Disabilities County Agency that supervises 95 residents with multiple disabilities who have no other available option other than this group home. Most of them have exhausted insurance benefits and have Medicare and Medicaid. We raise funds and help the parents. A major issue we have is that with our improved health care system many of the clients who did not previously outlive their parents will now outlive their caregiver. This is a whole new set of variables.

Combine this with funding cuts and we work very hard to efficiently deliver care to a growing population of people who were born with a condition that through no fault of their own requires they have support to live. As a point of information, no person in my family has ever been a recipient of developmental disabilities services. I chose this project because I wanted to help people that through no fault of their own needs help.

We need for people to plan and be as productive and self-sufficient as possible. There will need to be more emphasis on individual funding of their expenses. We need to design a transition for the elderly who are living longer and who have limited ability to create new wealth; we need to provide for their care for the remainder of their lives. This does not mean everyone gets everything that they want for free. The sooner we start on these issues the better the results.

 

 

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Related Stories

Resource Center