Eric Novack observes state proposal to ensure a continuing right to private health care:
The right of citizens to enter into private contracts with health care providers for health care services shall not be infringed. No law shall be enacted requiring any citizen, or any class of citizens, to participate in any state sponsored health care system or plan.
Similar Posts:
- Convincing doctors to accept a public health care plan option
- Should a public plan option be part of any health reform initiative?
- 10 things your insured patients need to know about health care reform
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 1 comment }
As things stand, nothing infringes the patient from private contracting, provided he is able to find a physician willing to do so. Plastic surgeons privately contract all the time. But for a doctor to privately contract with the patient, the penalty by Medicare, if that patient were to be a Medicare beneficiary, is exercised primarily against the doctor: the doctor is excluded from any participation with Medicare for two years following, for all Medicare patients and for all Medicare-eligible services. And he is required to give the contracting patient notice that the services will not be compensated in any way by Medicare; it becomes entirely the patient’s expense. The patient is, however, allowed to have other services from other doctors covered by Medicare if he chooses, and at any time. For the patient, with the exception of having to pay out of pocket when hiring a private contractor does not infringe on any of his other relationships with his other doctors, and he still enjoys full Medicare coverage.
As I read this language, it merely states the situation as it presently exists. The doctor is plenty infringed; the patient not at all.
Comments on this entry are closed.