 |
 |
I agree with Ken Janis, this is a pretty lousy situation and may be getting worse. But I think we need to establish our credentials as a political factor by getting Udall funded first, before we as a group adopt other causes (also such as the sorry state of the SSA re SSDI inconsistencies). This continues to be a tough fight and probably should command all our attention. If we get it funded I think the pols might take more note when we lobby them. And if we don't get it funded - we're still a big block of voters. This is not to suggest that those of us who want to should not lobby our Congressmen (especially Republican!) individually on this matter. Personally, I'd like to know more. Any bill which guarantees lawyers more work suing people (even the devil) ought to be looked at carefully. And how is it ERISA is involved. That law was passed long before anyone could have guessed "beancounters in three-piece suits" would be dictating medical care. Bruce Anderson (52, 3.5) -----Original Message----- From: KMJanis <[log in to unmask]> To: Multiple recipients of list PARKINSN <[log in to unmask]> Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 12:50 AM Subject: ERISA and MCO Liability >Now is the time to get out those addresses etc. >for congress: we have a target of opportunity! > >ERISA legislation has created a legal barrier >which protects MCO's from litigation and >legal responsibility for medical decisions >made by non-physician executives . Legislation >has been introduced to remove this exemption >and allow liability litigation against MCO >management thus forcing them to adhere to >standards of medical care. It is called the >Norwood Bill and has over 200 sponsors in >the HOUSE; however, the Republican Leadership >has been reluctant to embrace it. > >Do we want some beancounter in a 3 piece suit >telling us that his MCO won't pay for an >expensive new drug or that we are too old >to invest resources for expensive surgery or >devices? > >As long as this ERISA exemption exists, MCO's >can do what they want (not what we need) and >be protected from liability for medical decisions >masquerading as "administrative" decisions. > >Ken Janis, MD