4 ms·
I am perplexed by the type of people that are able to stomach working in these kind of positions - how do they rationalize it? Do they really just not care? Lik
by JohnMakin 5mo ago
I am perplexed by the type of people that are able to stomach working in these kind of positions - how do they rationalize it? Do they really just not care? Like, in some industries that are not doing great things, or bordering on evil things, I can see sometimes how one could convince themselves they were actually doing good. But this denial stuff is nearly like, "press this button to make money, knowing you may be denying someone critical care that could kill them or cause them harm" and you're comfortable just mashing that button? How do they sleep at night? Or are there just a lot of really gung ho believers that hate provider billing with a passion and believe most of it is waste and they truly know better? Is it a bunch of sociopaths? How this can exist as an industry is crazy to me, I wouldn't even know how to hire, I'd expect the vast majority of applicants upon finding out would say "ew, no" but I guess I have a rosier view of humanity that does not align with reality.
- yks 5mo agoI recommend reading essays from: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48090321 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48090321. Tangentially related to your question. TLDR is that it’s a job that can pay enough to keep one housed, and sometimes there are no alternatives. I’d redirect the outrage away from the grunts denying care, and towards the leadership that set up those incentives. And even further, when the shareholders demand more profit because the line must go up, what to do?
- ahepp 5mo agoWhat are you saying here? Do you just think it's unnecessary to audit the way 18% of US GDP is being spent? You think there is no waste, or it's so small to be negligible? Despite the fact that it's well established the US spends more and gets less benefit?
- JohnMakin 5mo agoThis isn't an audit, and drives up prices. But I guess this response kind of answers my question.
- ahepp 5mo agoMaybe I'm just not understanding what you're saying here, but it seems pretty straightforward that you can't run an insurance system without reviewing claims. That's true whether it's a for-profit, not-for-profit, or government run insurance provider. There's broad consensus that there is a ton of unnecessary and unwarranted care being done in the US. Doctors are not all experts in population health. Even the most well-meaning doctors are still subject to incentives that can lead to excessive testing and expensive treatments that have a low likelihood of improving patient outcomes. Obviously it is also true that having a profit motive to deny claims incentivizes improper denials. But to simply say "no claim should ever be subject to review or denial, and anyone working to make the system efficient is evil" is deeply ignorant and fundamentally incompatible with the concept of insurance.
- JohnMakin 5mo ago> But to simply say "no claim should ever be subject to review or denial, and anyone working to make the system efficient is evil" is deeply ignorant and fundamentally incompatible with the concept of insurance. I did not say this. but you do you.
- hackeraccount 5mo agoBy this logic how could you ever work in Healthcare? If you're a Doctor why are you taking a day off to - of all things - go to the beach? Do you really just not care? Take this day off, knowing you may be denying someone critical care that could kill them or cause them harm? And you're comfortable doing that? Do you love the beach that much?
- JohnMakin 5mo agoThis type of reasoning is called a fallacy. But I guess I found one?