Skip to main content

Soon Highmark will be asking you to pay $69 NOT to see the doctor . . .

You can't make this stuff up.

Highmark is now rolling out a new dermatology idea:  instead of actually being seen by a doctor, you photograph the affected area and send it in digitally.  Then the doctor decides whether or not you need to come in for a real appointment, or whether s/he will simply diagnose a picture.

The cost for this "service" will be $69, because it is NOT a covered benefit on any Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield plan.

So let's get this straight:  instead of paying my Highmark co-pay (usually around $25 but never higher than $50) and having the opportunity to be examined by a real live dermatologist, I am now going to be asked to pay $69 NOT to be seen at all.

Highmark is simply gushing over this new "service":

"This new process makes it convenient for patients to access care," said Eric Starr, director of business innovation and development at Highmark. "They will just simply take a photo with a smartphone device or digital camera and then go to the secure website and send the image. Based on the image, the physician can determine if the patient can be treated virtually. This really modifies the workflow of the dermatologist allowing office visits to be used for the most critical cases."  A win for both the doctor and the consumer.
Yeah.  Aside from the fact that I cannot wait to see what happens when a doctor misdiagnoses something carcinogenic from a blurry digital image, this is a win for Highmark's accountants and nobody else.

You get stuck with a bill for more than your co-pay and don't see a doctor.

You also have absolutely no assurance that any particular doctor (or even any doctor) is the one providing your treatment advice.

Meanwhile, Highmark is spared having to pay out anything in claims.

Your doctor, by the way, will probably embrace this service for the following reasons:

1.  S/he first charges you $69 that s/he gets to keep for spending fifteen seconds looking at a photo.

2.  Then, in the well-grounded practice of defensive medicine, s/he tells you that you need to come in for an appointment, collecting another $25 from you, as well as the insurance company payment.  (In other words, Highmark has found a way to increase the doctor's capitated pay without actually having the company pay it.  Your effective co-pay to see a dermatologist just increased from $25 to $94.)

Thank you thank you thank you Karin Weldin Stewart, for allowing the unbridled philanthropy that is Highmark to set up shop in Delaware.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/11/30/5021188/highmark-teams-up-with-pittsburgh.html#storylink=cpy

Comments

NCSDad said…
Watch for outsourced virtual exams performed by doctors in India next. I'd go for it too if I could get a prescription from there filled and it saved me money.
Anonymous said…
WOW! this is insane!

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...