New York shuts down doctor's attempt to offer health care to low income

Wheezer

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 1999
6,731
1
81
Text

Veteran doctor John Muney says his flat-fee, $79-a-month medical service is a formula for making health care affordable and patient-friendly. But state regulators see it as self-styled insurance and have told him to shut it down.

The dispute, which emerged this month, reflects a rising issue in what is sometimes called "retainer" medical care. At least two other states have grappled with whether to consider such arrangements insurance, reaching different conclusions.

The question could become more pressing as jobs disappear in the ailing economy, taking many workers' traditional health insurance plans with them.

The debate "makes no sense to me. ... I feel that my flat-rate memberships provide a great service," Muney said at a press conference Wednesday. He is negotiating with the state Insurance Department to try to keep the service at his five AMG Medical Group centers around the city.

There are no definite numbers on how many of the nation's more than 1 million MDs and osteopathic physicians have flat-fee arrangements, some of which are known as "concierge" or "boutique" practices. But their popularity is mounting: Boca Raton, Fla.-based MDVIP Inc., which provides extensive preventive care for $1,500 a year, has grown into a 300-physician, 100,000-patient network in nine years, president Darin Engelhardt said.

Supporters say flat-fee plans let doctors strip away insurance company costs and red tape to make everyday medicine more accessible and less hectic. Critics fear they siphon much-needed primary care doctors from insurance networks and raise questions about equity -- especially models that promise to make doctors more available to the fee-paying patients. The American Medical Association says retainer practices raise ethical concerns but also expand health care options.

Muney, a former surgeon, started offering the $79-a-month plan last year. About 50 patients have signed on, not yet enough for the plan to break even; the rest of AMG's more than 7,000 patients use traditional insurance.

The monthly fee buys unlimited office visits, including certain tests and in-office surgeries and even a prescription-discount card. It doesn't cover treatment requiring hospitalization or specialized care.

That's fine with patient Matthew Robinson. He has a one-person architectural business and no health insurance, which could run hundreds of dollars per month. AMG's arrangement has let Robinson, who is in his 50s, catch up on checkups and routine tests. Otherwise, he says, "I'd play Russian roulette," skipping physicals and hoping nothing serious went wrong.

AMG's Web site declares the arrangement isn't insurance, but the Insurance Department says it meets the definition: charging a regular fee to provide a benefit in case of an unforeseen event, such as an illness or injury. Insurers are required to submit to a licensing process that examines their finances and capacity to deliver what they promise.

"It's not just a technical requirement to bust his chops -- it's to protect consumers," said Troy Oechsner, the agency's deputy superintendent for health. "I applaud innovation, but we also have got to do it in a way that protects consumers."

The department told Muney in a Feb. 2 letter to end the monthly fee service. His lawyer has since proposed adding $33-per-visit charges for all but preventive care; a department spokesman said the agency wouldn't comment on the ongoing discussions.

Other states have split on similar questions. The Maryland Insurance Administration concluded last month that offering unlimited office visits for a single fee might constitute an unauthorized form of insurance, though retainer practices offering more restricted services did not.

But the Washington state insurance commissioner's office concluded several years ago that such arrangements didn't amount to insurance, because they concerned only primary care, spokeswoman Hilary Young said.


riiiiight....he's ok to offer health care to people who can pay cash for his fees because they have no insurance, and he's good enough to have the insurance company send their insured to him, but as soon as he offers quality care for a flat fee that would cover everything he offers and a small co-pay all of a sudden they are "looking out for consumers"....what a crock.

 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
I think the problem is that you'll end up with someone needing heart surgery and the doc won't be able to comp that. Since he's not a registered insurance, he won't have the capital in case of large expenses like that.


In any case you don't really want doctors to do this sort of a business model, since his clients are still de facto uninsured. What he's doing is exacerbating the problem, since with the 80 dollar plan people will lose all the incentives to actually insure... and taxpayers will be paying for their bills if they need surgery and such.

Think about it - If i have to pay 100-200 for a routine visit, I would consider paying 200/mo for regular insurance and be covered. If I can get a half ass 80/mo plan that covers my visits, I'd go for that ... and have taxpayers bail me out if I'm ever hospitalized.
 

Slew Foot

Lifer
Sep 22, 2005
12,379
96
86
In reality, this is likely nothing more than politicians pandering to the insurance companies. If a guy wants to structure his business around a fee structure like that more power to him. He's already telling his clients that they arent getting major surgery or anything included, so there's nothing shady about it. If the insurance cos wanted to play fair they could offer to insure the big costs for a lower price, but they would want anything to cut into their profits.

 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: Slew Foot
In reality, this is likely nothing more than politicians pandering to the insurance companies. If a guy wants to structure his business around a fee structure like that more power to him. He's already telling his clients that they arent getting major surgery or anything included, so there's nothing shady about it. If the insurance cos wanted to play fair they could offer to insure the big costs for a lower price, but they would want anything to cut into their profits.

That argument kind of falls apart in the light of the fact that rates for non-profit insurers (blue cross/blue shield etc.) really aren't that different from for-profit operations. I actually get a better deal with united health than what I can get from BX/BS for the same price.
 

Slew Foot

Lifer
Sep 22, 2005
12,379
96
86
Originally posted by: halik
Originally posted by: Slew Foot
In reality, this is likely nothing more than politicians pandering to the insurance companies. If a guy wants to structure his business around a fee structure like that more power to him. He's already telling his clients that they arent getting major surgery or anything included, so there's nothing shady about it. If the insurance cos wanted to play fair they could offer to insure the big costs for a lower price, but they would want anything to cut into their profits.

That argument kind of falls apart in the light of the fact that rates for non-profit insurers (blue cross/blue shield etc.) really aren't that different from for-profit operations. I actually get a better deal with united health than what I can get from BX/BS for the same price.

That has nothing to do with what I said. The insurance companies would only have to pay for the big expenses since the buyer is picking up the tab for the minor procedures and office visits and even some prescriptions. Since the insurance cos are providing less service, they could in theory charge less.
 

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
Originally posted by: winnar111
Government healthcare can't compete, so they ban the competition.

I'd guess it's more like the other doctors don't want someone working that cheap, and for New York, that seems like it must be dirt cheap??
 

SirStev0

Lifer
Nov 13, 2003
10,449
6
81
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
Originally posted by: winnar111
Government healthcare can't compete, so they ban the competition.

I'd guess it's more like the other doctors don't want someone working that cheap, and for New York, that seems like it must be dirt cheap??

this is the work of insurance company lobbying not of other doctors or the AMA.
 

bdude

Golden Member
Feb 9, 2004
1,645
0
76
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
If a person can have a lawyer on "retainer" why not a doctor?

It isn't that simple. Not all doctors can perform an eight hour surgery.
 

Wheezer

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 1999
6,731
1
81
Originally posted by: bdude
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
If a person can have a lawyer on "retainer" why not a doctor?

It isn't that simple. Not all doctors can perform an eight hour surgery.

if you read the article his plan is to cover basic requirement and out patient services like wart removal, anything more would have to be referred to a hospital and such.

what he is offering is exactly what a majority of people visualize when they think of socialized medicine.

They can go to the doctor for a check up, a broken finger, a cut that needs stitches, a flu shot or vaccine and not have to pay through the nose.

The difference?

No one in government is telling them where they HAVE to go, no insurance company is there to price gouge or refuse every little service.

god forbid the guy makes a decent living and employing a few people while providing a service to those that need it at a reasonable price without government bullshit.

 

Codewiz

Diamond Member
Jan 23, 2002
5,758
0
76
This is how things have changed over time.

My grandfather was a doctor. This was long before the wildspread insurance. If you want to look at it this way, he taxed the rich to pay for the poor with his medical service. He had rich clients and he had poor clients. No two clients paid the same amount. I remember as a child seeing people come by and give us homecooked apple pies and such. These were poor people that could only afford to give him things like that.

My grandfather made good money without dealing with insurance and he never turned people away. Could he help people who went into the hospital? No but for routine care, everyone could afford to pay for his services.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: Wheezer
Originally posted by: bdude
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
If a person can have a lawyer on "retainer" why not a doctor?

It isn't that simple. Not all doctors can perform an eight hour surgery.

if you read the article his plan is to cover basic requirement and out patient services like wart removal, anything more would have to be referred to a hospital and such.

what he is offering is exactly what a majority of people visualize when they think of socialized medicine.

They can go to the doctor for a check up, a broken finger, a cut that needs stitches, a flu shot or vaccine and not have to pay through the nose.

The difference?

No one in government is telling them where they HAVE to go, no insurance company is there to price gouge or refuse every little service.

god forbid the guy makes a decent living and employing a few people while providing a service to those that need it at a reasonable price without government bullshit.

WRONG

He's providing the service that people want, without making them pay for the true cost of health care. The reason why it's cheap is because if you end up hospitalized, no one will pay for it (well except for taxpayers). You're basically passing on the extra $100-200/mo it would cost to fully insure onto people that support the hospital.

The main reason why people get coverage as opposed to being uninsured is because they want to be able to go the doctor. On the flip side, we (U.S.) want people to full insure, because otherwise we'll end up paying for their surgeries and such. So if you let a doctor do this, he'll profit, the people he sees will profit and the rest of us will up paying for all that profit.
 

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
Originally posted by: halik
Originally posted by: Wheezer
Originally posted by: bdude
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
If a person can have a lawyer on "retainer" why not a doctor?

It isn't that simple. Not all doctors can perform an eight hour surgery.

if you read the article his plan is to cover basic requirement and out patient services like wart removal, anything more would have to be referred to a hospital and such.

what he is offering is exactly what a majority of people visualize when they think of socialized medicine.

They can go to the doctor for a check up, a broken finger, a cut that needs stitches, a flu shot or vaccine and not have to pay through the nose.

The difference?

No one in government is telling them where they HAVE to go, no insurance company is there to price gouge or refuse every little service.

god forbid the guy makes a decent living and employing a few people while providing a service to those that need it at a reasonable price without government bullshit.

WRONG

He's providing the service that people want, without making them pay for the true cost of health care. The reason why it's cheap is because if you end up hospitalized, no one will pay for it (well except for taxpayers). You're basically passing on the extra $100-200/mo it would cost to fully insure onto people that support the hospital.

The main reason why people get coverage as opposed to being uninsured is because they want to be able to go the doctor. On the flip side, we (U.S.) want people to full insure, because otherwise we'll end up paying for their surgeries and such. So if you let a doctor do this, he'll profit, the people he sees will profit and the rest of us will up paying for all that profit.


Live and let DIE!!!!
 

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
From the article, some of you might want to actually READ it.

There are no definite numbers on how many of the nation's more than 1 million MDs and osteopathic physicians have flat-fee arrangements, some of which are known as "concierge" or "boutique" practices. But their popularity is mounting: Boca Raton, Fla.-based MDVIP Inc., which provides extensive preventive care for $1,500 a year, has grown into a 300-physician, 100,000-patient network in nine years, president Darin Engelhardt said.
 

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
Originally posted by: Codewiz
This is how things have changed over time.

My grandfather was a doctor. This was long before the wildspread insurance. If you want to look at it this way, he taxed the rich to pay for the poor with his medical service. He had rich clients and he had poor clients. No two clients paid the same amount. I remember as a child seeing people come by and give us homecooked apple pies and such. These were poor people that could only afford to give him things like that.

My grandfather made good money without dealing with insurance and he never turned people away. Could he help people who went into the hospital? No but for routine care, everyone could afford to pay for his services.

That's why doctors were respected so much. Notice I said WERE.
 

Codewiz

Diamond Member
Jan 23, 2002
5,758
0
76
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
Originally posted by: Codewiz
This is how things have changed over time.

My grandfather was a doctor. This was long before the wildspread insurance. If you want to look at it this way, he taxed the rich to pay for the poor with his medical service. He had rich clients and he had poor clients. No two clients paid the same amount. I remember as a child seeing people come by and give us homecooked apple pies and such. These were poor people that could only afford to give him things like that.

My grandfather made good money without dealing with insurance and he never turned people away. Could he help people who went into the hospital? No but for routine care, everyone could afford to pay for his services.

That's why doctors were respected so much. Notice I said WERE.

By the time my grandfather retired, he had enough of the politics in medicine. He just wanted to help people and didn't want to deal with the BS.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: brandonbull
I like how doctors/hospitals will give you a "discount" if you are uninsured.

Well of course, the people with insurance pay for the people without. This is exactly why the system is broken... and why doctors providing a membership plan without real insurance will only drive the costs higher for the people with real coverage.

Look if you let doctors provide this sort of service, you'll only end up with more uninsured people. It just follows the instant gratification principle - I can see the doctor right now for only 80/bucks a month... what a steal! And who cares if I end up with a 200K bill from a hospital, that's like way in the future.
 

Wheezer

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 1999
6,731
1
81
Originally posted by: brandonbull
I like how doctors/hospitals will give you a "discount" if you are uninsured.

they don't have to pay 15 people to process the bullshit forms from all the different insurance insurance companies.

They pay 1-2 people to process a few simple forms.

the less people you have working for you the less overhead and if you are a quality doctor actually concerned about the well being if the people that use your services you can pass that savings on to your patients.


 

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
Originally posted by: halik
Originally posted by: brandonbull
I like how doctors/hospitals will give you a "discount" if you are uninsured.

Well of course, the people with insurance pay for the people without. This is exactly why the system is broken... and why doctors providing a membership plan without real insurance will only drive the costs higher for the people with real coverage.

Look if you let doctors provide this sort of service, you'll only end up with more uninsured people. It just follows the instant gratification principle - I can see the doctor right now for only 80/bucks a month... what a steal! And who cares if I end up with a 200K bill from a hospital, that's like way in the future.

How could this drive up costs?

Wouldn't it be cheaper for people to be able to regularly see a doctor for prevention rather then wait until they run up big bills trying to fix what could have been easily preventable?

I think your just having a knee jerk reaction to this, OMG this is going to cost me even MORE MONEY AAAIEEEEEE!!!

:laugh:
 

Anubis

No Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
78,712
427
126
tbqhwy.com
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
Originally posted by: Codewiz
This is how things have changed over time.

My grandfather was a doctor. This was long before the wildspread insurance. If you want to look at it this way, he taxed the rich to pay for the poor with his medical service. He had rich clients and he had poor clients. No two clients paid the same amount. I remember as a child seeing people come by and give us homecooked apple pies and such. These were poor people that could only afford to give him things like that.

My grandfather made good money without dealing with insurance and he never turned people away. Could he help people who went into the hospital? No but for routine care, everyone could afford to pay for his services.

That's why doctors were respected so much. Notice I said WERE.

This sortta thing happened as recently as 20 years ago. My dad is a Doc and he often received something other then money for seeing people (in office). One time we got 20 or so gallons of Maple syrup from someone who owned a farm, we got sides of beef, we got woodwork done by carpenters.... all was good and everyone was happy.
 

wwswimming

Banned
Jan 21, 2006
3,695
1
0
Originally posted by: Wheezerriiiiight....he's ok to offer health care to people who can pay cash for his fees because they have no insurance, and he's good enough to have the insurance company send their insured to him, but as soon as he offers quality care for a flat fee that would cover everything he offers and a small co-pay all of a sudden they are "looking out for consumers"....what a crock.

American "heath" care has very little to do with health care. it's an industry that employs people with medical degrees.

IATROGENIC

that's when a doctor's "care" causes the patient's health to deteriorate - a common outcome in American "health care" institutions.

best work-around = healthy lifestyle + frontier medicine.

 

Wheezer

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 1999
6,731
1
81
Originally posted by: halik
Originally posted by: Wheezer
Originally posted by: bdude
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
If a person can have a lawyer on "retainer" why not a doctor?

It isn't that simple. Not all doctors can perform an eight hour surgery.

if you read the article his plan is to cover basic requirement and out patient services like wart removal, anything more would have to be referred to a hospital and such.

what he is offering is exactly what a majority of people visualize when they think of socialized medicine.

They can go to the doctor for a check up, a broken finger, a cut that needs stitches, a flu shot or vaccine and not have to pay through the nose.

The difference?

No one in government is telling them where they HAVE to go, no insurance company is there to price gouge or refuse every little service.

god forbid the guy makes a decent living and employing a few people while providing a service to those that need it at a reasonable price without government bullshit.

WRONG

He's providing the service that people want, without making them pay for the true cost of health care. The reason why it's cheap is because if you end up hospitalized, no one will pay for it (well except for taxpayers). You're basically passing on the extra $100-200/mo it would cost to fully insure onto people that support the hospital.

The main reason why people get coverage as opposed to being uninsured is because they want to be able to go the doctor. On the flip side, we (U.S.) want people to full insure, because otherwise we'll end up paying for their surgeries and such. So if you let a doctor do this, he'll profit, the people he sees will profit and the rest of us will up paying for all that profit.


umm if he is the one providing the health care shouldn't HE be the one to determine the cost?

the reason the cost is so damn high now is because you have doctors who like contractors after a storm raise their rates to gouge the insurance companies. If the customer is paying out of thier pocket they charge less.

For major problems they are refereed to a hospital which they would go to anyway.

so many walk into the emergency room, with a fever, it is determined that they have the flu...they get some antibiotics, the hospital sends them a bill for $1500 for services along with a form that says if you make under x dollars your care is absorbed by the hospital and the state.

They fill out the form, the hospital determines they qualify and the cost is passed onto the tax payers.

So how exactly does denying this guy the ability to provide HIS services for a discount rate help anyone?...it certainly does not help the tax payers.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
Originally posted by: halik
Originally posted by: brandonbull
I like how doctors/hospitals will give you a "discount" if you are uninsured.

Well of course, the people with insurance pay for the people without. This is exactly why the system is broken... and why doctors providing a membership plan without real insurance will only drive the costs higher for the people with real coverage.

Look if you let doctors provide this sort of service, you'll only end up with more uninsured people. It just follows the instant gratification principle - I can see the doctor right now for only 80/bucks a month... what a steal! And who cares if I end up with a 200K bill from a hospital, that's like way in the future.

How could this drive up costs?

Wouldn't it be cheaper for people to be able to regularly see a doctor for prevention rather then wait until they run up big bills trying to fix what could have been easily preventable?

I think your just having a knee jerk reaction to this, OMG this is going to cost me even MORE MONEY AAAIEEEEEE!!!

:laugh:

Because $80/mo doesn't cover any more advance tests and hospitalization. If you need an MRI, EEG or surgery you'll go to the hospital uninsured and drive up the cost of the rest of us.

If you let people get half-ass coverage, they will not get real coverage and still be uninsured and drive up the cost for the rest of us.