News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Big Insurance Met Match When Turned Down a Top Trial Lawy... by lotsofpulp on Wednesday November 08, 2023 @07:50AM (#38189701)
> I love replying with “at least in public healthcare the doctors get to decide, with only private health insurance paid for by insurance companies, it’s a faceless claims adjuster with zero medical experience who isn’t even deciding as much as they are just telling you that treating you properly would cost the company too much money… I’ll take my chances with a death panel of doctors over the death panel of accountants any day of my entire life”

I think a licensed doctor/pharmacist employed by the insurance company has to make the decision, although, since they do not have liability exposure, I can imagine metrics can be imposed on them that make the quality of their work less than desirable.

Re:Big Insurance Met Match When Turned Down a Top Trial Lawy... by SamoyedFurFluff on Wednesday November 08, 2023 @09:02AM (#38190397)
Remember: the doctors working at insurance companies do not need to have a license to practice medicine to do so. In fact an orthopedic surgeon had to fight a denied authorization from a guy who lost his license for surgery for life because he installed a hip backwards!
Re:Big Insurance Met Match When Turned Down a Top Trial Lawy... by lotsofpulp on Wednesday November 08, 2023 @09:04AM (#38190431)
Yes, that was an egregious example. I think they skirted that one through because that doctor still had a medical license, but not one for surgery? Which, whoever wrote the rules or even just hired him, should have prevented him from being able to be in that position.