Advertise Here
Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.
Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.
Our latest headlines
- From the New Publishers of the California Progress Report
- Standing in the Doorway of College Bound Californians
- Court Must Weigh Tyranny of the Majority in Ruling on Prop 8
- It’s About Time to Change California’s Initiative Process
- Governor Schwarzenegger: Please Don’t Declare 2009 the Year of Anything
- Last Week’s California Budget Vote: Failure or First Step Toward Solutions?
- States Take Action to Stop Privatization Abuses and Reform Contracting Processes
About Us
The California Progress Report is published by Frank D. Russo, a longtime observer of and participant in California politics.
About Frank Russo.
About California Progress Report.
Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column? Contact Frank here.
Sponsors
Books
Insurance Industry Sabotages Injured Workers in California
By Robert L. Weinmann, MD
Governor Schwarzenegger's veto of AB 2969 (Lieber) protects insurance company profits at the expense of injured workers. This legislation, proposed by Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, would have put a stop to an insidious practice by the insurance industry that undermines injured workers, sabotages treatment prescribed by properly licensed doctors, and protects wrongful business practices by insurance interests. Here's how the protected scheme works:
Joe Sixpack or Soccer Mom Sarah incur an on-the-job injury. The injured worker goes to a clinic that accepts industrial injuries. The injury turns out to be complicated. Specialists are consulted. Treatment recommendations are made. Documents are filed according to law to make sure that treatment is covered by the insurance company. At this point insurance companies may retain Utilization Review (UR) companies to review the treatment that has been provided as well as the treatment that is being recommended or prescribed. These reviews are conducted in accordance with law, namely, the AMA Guides, 5th edition, and the ACOEM Guidelines, 2nd edition, both of which enjoy the force of law thanks to statutes pushed into law by the Schwarzenegger administration to reduce costs of industrial injuries to insurance companies and to employers.
The AMA and ACOEM cookbooks allow UR doctors who have not interviewed or examined injured workers to review treatment proposals and to delay, deny, or modify treatment. UR doctors are allowed to overrule properly licensed doctors who have spent hours with their patients. UR doctors who make decisions about workers injured in California do not need to be licensed in California. Any license will do. UR doctors do not have to interview or examine injured workers. UR doctors review paperwork to do their jobs. When these disturbing inequities were noticed in Texas, legislation was passed to put a stop to it -- UR doctors in Texas must now have Texas medical licenses. They're responsible to the Texas Medical Board.
In California UR doctors need not be responsible to any medical board at all. In one quizzical situation, an injured worker in California, under treatment by a California-licensed doctor, had his treatment stopped dead in its tracks based upon the UR decision of a doctor with only a Connecticut license. To add insult to injury, the Connecticut doctor reported his denial of care to a UR company based in Texas. The upshot was that the UR doctor licensed only in Connecticut and the UR company based in Texas effectively conspired to stop treatment prescribed by a California-licensed doctor and that was already underway in California.
Insurance companies and their compliant utilization review companies may use doctors whose bent is to deny as much care as possible. Because UR doctors are allowed to practice medicine in California without California licenses, UR doctors don’t need to worry about what the Medical Board of California might do when they cause harm to patients by wrongful denials, delays, or modifications of care.
Ordinarily, when a doctor amends, denies, delays, or modifies treatment it is assumed that the doctor is practicing medicine. California law requires a California medical license to practice medicine in California. Because of a drafting error, the phrase, "California-licensed," is missing from the relevant section in the California Labor Code. The Medical Board of California recognizes the oversight and sent a letter to Gov. Schwarzenegger that UR doctors are practicing medicine and should obtain licensure to practice medicine in California if they are going to decide about care for injured workers in California. Unfortunately, the Governor's judgment was swayed more by the American Insurance Association (AIA) than by his own medical board.
Here's what AIA said: "AB 2969 (Lieber) would ban medical treatment utilization review by physicians licensed in states outside California." Wrong. Furthermore, Governor Schwarzenegger did not get hoodwinked by this incorrect statement. Nevertheless, he vetoed the bill. Why do we think he did so? The Governor cast his veto against legislation which would only have required that UR doctors also have California licenses no matter in what other states they were also licensed.
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME, AFL-CIO) adopted a resolution that doctors should hold state licenses in any state where they do UR. The Schwarzenegger veto message said that requiring state licenses "would be inconsistent with how utilization review is conducted in other areas of medicine and not in line with best practices nationwide." Governor Schwarzenegger conveniently didn't mention Texas where state licenses have been required for UR since 2007.
It should have been of much more concern to Governor Schwarzenegger that the Western Occupational & Environmental Medical Association (WOEMA), a component society of ACOEM, urged support for licensing UR doctors in California "to help ensure that utilization review is performed by knowledgeable and accountable physicians."
Don't forget this caveat: in California doctors who treat patients must take a specialized 12-hour course in pain management, a leading cause of disability. They are also responsible for 26 pages of single-spaced California-specific regulations governing utilization review. Doctors without California licenses are not held responsible for either.
That would have helped Governor Schwarzenegger to overcome his antipathy to the interests of injured workers since this bill was supported by the California Labor Federation, AFSCME, and the California Medical Association (CMA) and was sponsored by the Union of American Physicians and Dentists (UAPD), the California Society of Industrial Medicine and Surgery (CSIMS), and the California Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Society (PM & R).
Some advocates for the Governor's veto asserted that California doesn't have enough doctors to do peer review and needs out-of-state doctors. This assertion is rubbish. We know that one major UR company based in California uses only doctors with California licenses and actually has a waiting list since more doctors have applied for these positions than are needed. In the words of the CMA, "there is no shortage of qualified California-licensed physicians to perform hands-on utilization review for cases involving California's injured workers." There just may be a shortage of California-licensed doctors willing to do the bidding of insurance companies. That would explain why insurance companies may search for doctors without California licenses.
The main reason that Gov. Schwarzenegger vetoed California-licensure for UR doctors has more to do with the AIA which asked for the veto and which reminded the Governor that AIA represents about 350 insurance companies that write $123 billion annually in premiums. That's the point that influenced Governor Schwarzenegger's unfortunate veto. Governor Schwarzenegger's judgment is that the interests of the insurance industry deserve priority over the interests of injured workers and their pesky doctors.
The answer to this tilt towards the insurance industry over the needs of injured workers is to return in 2009 with new legislation. The name of the game is to put patients before profits.
Dr. Robert Weinmann, past President of the Union of American Physicians and Dentists (UAPD) has a private neurology and pain management practice in San Jose. He is currently president of the UAPD Independent Practice Association. He has provided dynamic and effective testimony before the United States Congress and the California Legislature on matters of healthcare, patients’ and physicians' rights, Medicare, and antitrust reform. Weinmann has received awards from the United States Congress and the California Assembly, and at the invitation of former President Bill Clinton was featured as a speaker at the White House on managed care. He points out that his public policy agitation in healthcare is bipartisan.
Comments
You hit the nail on the head,but do not forget the taxpayer who gets stuck with the Bill. When injured workers are denied medical treatment by insurance companies, Joe and Jills taxes are used through medical and medicare, and the emergency room. It is obvious when a Govenor accepts campaign money From Large Bay Area Oil Company, (Privately insured) and then passes Workers Compensation LAWS That deny court awarded medical treatment some ones palms are being Greased. I do not believe it is the Govenors right to veto the courts and Californians decissions or intent to be fair, and protect the workers of California, I am a Native Californian sixty years of Californian taxes not Down under Politics. I love my state and it is not my STEPPINGSTONE . Wake up be heard and vote or recall the ones that do not listen to the PEOPLE. We are native Californians not mates.
Posted by: Edwin Rees at October 6, 2008 06:13 AM
Are you kidding??? I work in the industry and do you have any idea how many drs just write what their patient tells them to because of the relationship or fear of the patient rating them low. Where is the objective medical opinion? Some sort of review is necessary to ensure objectivity.
Posted by: Dawn at October 6, 2008 09:15 PM
You are Right that is called a UR review and it is in place and should be handled by doctors in the same state as the patient or whats next farm out to China to save the already over proffited insurance company. careful you might need treatment, do not forget Karma rules apply.
Posted by: Edwin at October 8, 2008 08:18 AM
Dawn by the way you are accusing some one in the industry of fraud so I am unable to make a qualified answer with out all the information available so could you please post case number of fraud investigation as I am sure you know the govenor has stated that all claims of fraud will be investagated and in fact mandated to all District attorneys that when fraud is reported it must be investigated but I am sure as a citizen of California you have already contacted your local DA and it is now Public Knowledge. But I guess by your post you are requesting a insurance investagator contact your email address.
Posted by: Edwin at October 8, 2008 08:44 AM
Post a comment
Get Email Updates
Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.
© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.
RSS 