News

NewsWe need a second opinion in battle between private health insurers and hospitals
We need a second opinion in battle between private health insurers and hospitals

We need a second opinion in battle between private health insurers and hospitals

Private health insurers don’t exactly top most patients’ popularity polls with their regularly rising premiums, gap payments and complex exclusions.

But the present stoush between the largest, the recently privatised Medibank Private, and the private hospital sector has implications for what we pay and where we might be treated.

If talks this week between Medibank and the Catholic run Calvary Health Care stumble some patients could face higher costs for further treatment.

Medibank, which has almost 4 million members and 30% of the market, says it’s playing hardball with the private hospitals to keep prices and hence premiums down.

The issue is around the $40 million it pays to the hospitals for so-called ‘unplanned patient readmissions’ within four weeks of surgery.

There are always complications and things do go wrong, such as infections and falls, but Medibank has a list of 165 such events it calls ‘ highly preventable adverse events’ which it says it will not pay for.

It’s demanding the biggest private hospital players such as Ramsay Health Care and Healthscope carry for the can, ie pay, for when these things occur and not the insurer.

“If the industry doesn’t start looking at this as a whole, private healthcare is going to become progressively less affordable,” Medibank’s Dr Andrew Wilson told The Australian.

The other larger insurer NIB agrees with him and analysts figures suggest the private hospitals’ profits are growing apace while the insurers’ margins are shrinking.

Other interested parties take a different line. The doctors’ group the AMA says since privatisation Medibank seems more concerned for its shareholders than its members and is putting pressure on the patient.

The private hospital industry body concurs and says Medibank is being a bully. It warns if patients stay with the insurer they might not be fully covered at their hospital of choice.

In a statement Medibank says it’s unfortunate Calvary will not agree to their affordability and quality requirements.

Some 21,000 Medibank members used Calvary’s 11 hospitals in the past 12 months and if the contract isn’t extended beyond August 31 it could turn nasty.

The insurer warns: “Medibank and ahm members may still attend Calvary Health Care hospitals after this date and Medibank will continue to cover a large proportion of their costs. However, they may incur higher out-of-pocket costs because Calvary Health Care will be able to charge their own rates.”

In terms of the much larger hospital chains, Ramsay and Healthscope which have 113 hospitals between them, the contracts with Medibank expire next year.

Are they as one newspaper has it on a ‘collision course? Or will the brinksmanship of previous negotiations, which have also gone to the edge, be resolved in everyone’s interests?

It’s a hard call.  As consumers we pay the insurers’ more each year as medical costs rise at almost twice the rate of inflation.

If we need to use a private hospital who does or doesn’t pay for what may go wrong afterwards seems an academic issue so long as someone pays.

But if as Medibank claim, and the hospitals dispute, these are preventable events we should care a great deal more.

If you are with Medibank, and concerned about the Calvary talks breaking down, the insurer says they’ll contact everyone affected and there are 450 other hospitals which offer real alternatives.

Do you believe Medibank is doing this to protect member’s interests and keep premiums down? Or do you follow the hospitals’ line that the insurer is just trying to shift costs onto them?

Originally posted on .

Join the conversation

FiftyUp Club
We need a second opinion in battle between private health insurers and hospitals

Share your views with other members. 

Want to leave a comment? or .
Read our moderation policy here.
John
John from NSW commented:

Payment for so-called "unplanned patient readmissions within four weeks of surgery" is a minefield for all concerned and the only real loser is poor old joe blow. Why can't the insurer foot the boody bill and if the issue falls into one of the 165 such events (Medibank for example) calls ‘ highly preventable adverse events’ then chase the offending care provider for recompense. In other words leave the poor old patient - recovering from surgery and facing further stress and worry - to get on with life as best they can. If, as charged, Medibank is "only looking after its shareholders', fine. Aren't we long suffering high premium payers "shareholders". OK,OK - now we'll hear the funds crying about the high legal cost of recovering the "debt" when, really, it would be a "running cost". 

Ronald
Ronald from NSW commented:

Private hospitals charge obscene prices, recently had an overnight stay and it cost closer to two thousand than one. I could stayed in a 5 star hotel for less than the what the hospital charged. I queried the price and the health fund said that was what they had to pay. No, I wasn't in intensive care, just had a bed overnight. 

margaret
margaret from NSW replied to Ronald:

Yes. It is a free for all out there with all concerned knowing there is no justification for many charges. As no one refuses to pay until a reasonable list explaining the reason for those charges is forthcoming, the system will remain unchanged. Pointless asking the only people we should be able to turn to, our quite useless politicians, as the skills of these gutless wonders do not extend much further than bashing the poor and defenseless. The chance of them taking even one swing at anyone likely to attempt to defend them self, even when they are defending the indefensible, is very low indeed 

William
William from NSW commented:

Private enterprise is by definition profit driven. Insurance companies are at the high end of profit driven organisations. Medibank, on two counts, must be considered as having a less than charitable approach to parting with money. The term "members" of Medibank is a glaring misnomer. The term "customer" is appropriate. The shareholders of Medibank are the real members of Medibank. Medibank is definitely looking after its real members. As with any private enterprise the profit motive reigns supreme. Why else was Medibank able to be sold? 

Barry
Barry from NSW commented:

Barry from NSW This had to happen from MP when privatised I really thought we owned MP and would be looked after a little better than we are like some here the day is coming when I will have to choose I cannot pay anymore the refunds are little if any at times I have a heart and cancer problem not anyone's fault but mine but it would be far better for me just to pay nothing but the older generation have a little pride and try to pay their way in life. 

Greg
Greg from NSW commented:

Greg from NSW I agree with Allan from Queensland and many others. It is time for the governments at both Federal and State levels to to step in and force some common sense leadership in this issue. I'm a still a healthy elderly pensioner but I'm now the wrong side of 80 and I'm struggling to retain my ongoing private hospital insurance as premiums continue to escalate. If this argument is not resolved sensibly, I will be forced back into the public hospital system that is already overloaded and in danger of collapse. 

Allan
Allan from QLD commented:

Allan from Queensland, Must be time the Government stepped in and showed some common sense leadership on this issue, I'm a pensioner and struggle to keep my Health Insurance membership, Any more increases in the cost will most likely see me pull out, and that is going to put more cost back on the public system. I know a lot of people who feel the same way. 

Donald
Donald from NSW commented:

My wife and myself are considering changing from Aust Unity to AHM mainly because they cheaper nearly 40% cheaper we are pensioners so as you would relies any saving must be considered do you think we should stay put and pay the extra with Aust Unity or change over to AhM. Regards DW 

Lefki
Lefki from QLD replied to Donald:

Stay Put. 

lynn
lynn from QLD commented:

If the private health funds insist on doing this then the hospitals will start screening patients and refusing admission to those it de ems high risk. A 120kg diabetic needing a hip replacement is much more likely to get "preventable" complications. So we will see discrimination against those who have made poor lifestyle choices, those with poor family history, the elderly and those with chronic illnesses. 

Raylene
Raylene from NSW commented:

Medibank increased premiums with less refund. It is all. About shareholders dividends. Have been with MP since it's inception but feel we can no longer afford premiums. This breaks my heart but a reality for many elderly people. Today I saw specialist $600 get nothing from private health fund & less than $200 from Medicare. I don't order the tests the specialist does so why not a better rebate? 

neil
neil from NSW commented:

Like all privatised entities it is all about profits and dividends to share holders we knew it would happen as soon as Medibank Private was actually privatised 

Comment Guidelines