Canton, Ohio hospitals wouldn't do that, would they?
From John Curry, June 13, 2010
A costly lesson in the value of transparency in health care
Akron Beacon Journal, June 13, 2010
Better care at lower cost. If there's one undisputed goal in the health-care system, that is it. It holds for employers and insurers as much as for patients and care providers. The business of health care thus involves maintaining both a flow of paying consumers and a quality and cost of services sufficient for an institution to thrive. In Canton, served by two hospital systems, signing up the employers and patients whose premiums and payments support the health services is competitive business.
Still, the spectacle of two reputable institutions, Mercy Medical Center and Aultman Health Foundation, exchanging blows in court has been disheartening, considering the resources expended and an outcome that hardly has turned out conclusive.
Mercy alleged that beginning in 1997, Aultman paid bonuses secretly to insurance brokers to switch clients to Aultman. It leveled six charges of unfair business practices, which the hospital claimed cost it more than $100 million. It sought damages of $110 million. Aultman denied the accusation and countersued. It contended its business practices did not violate federal or state laws. It accused Mercy of spreading ''libelous falsehoods'' to damage its business.
It has been an ugly fight in which precious little appears settled. After a two-month trial, Mercy is declaring victory on a jury verdict last week that rejected five of six charges, concluding only that Aultman had engaged in ''a pattern of corrupt activity'' regarding the secret payments. The jury awarded Mercy $6.1 million in damages, rejecting Aultman's charge of libelous falsehood. Aultman, also claiming victory, has vowed to appeal the one verdict. It does not plan to change its business practices, either.
What to make of this bruising feud? There's some merit to Mercy's contention that it has served the community well by exposing the secret payments. Many factors influence an employer's choice of a health insurer. One of those, certainly, is trust that the broker's recommendations are in the employer's best interest. Secret payments undermine that confidence. Transparency counts.
Better care at lower cost. If there's one undisputed goal in the health-care system, that is it. It holds for employers and insurers as much as for patients and care providers. The business of health care thus involves maintaining both a flow of paying consumers and a quality and cost of services sufficient for an institution to thrive. In Canton, served by two hospital systems, signing up the employers and patients whose premiums and payments support the health services is competitive business.
Still, the spectacle of two reputable institutions, Mercy Medical Center and Aultman Health Foundation, exchanging blows in court has been disheartening, considering the resources expended and an outcome that hardly has turned out conclusive.
Mercy alleged that beginning in 1997, Aultman paid bonuses secretly to insurance brokers to switch clients to Aultman. It leveled six charges of unfair business practices, which the hospital claimed cost it more than $100 million. It sought damages of $110 million. Aultman denied the accusation and countersued. It contended its business practices did not violate federal or state laws. It accused Mercy of spreading ''libelous falsehoods'' to damage its business.
It has been an ugly fight in which precious little appears settled. After a two-month trial, Mercy is declaring victory on a jury verdict last week that rejected five of six charges, concluding only that Aultman had engaged in ''a pattern of corrupt activity'' regarding the secret payments. The jury awarded Mercy $6.1 million in damages, rejecting Aultman's charge of libelous falsehood. Aultman, also claiming victory, has vowed to appeal the one verdict. It does not plan to change its business practices, either.
What to make of this bruising feud? There's some merit to Mercy's contention that it has served the community well by exposing the secret payments. Many factors influence an employer's choice of a health insurer. One of those, certainly, is trust that the broker's recommendations are in the employer's best interest. Secret payments undermine that confidence. Transparency counts.
posted by Kathie Bracy at 7:05 PM
<< Home