Re: Lunelle/contraception coverage
From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com)
Tue Jan 30 08:05:02 2001
again - dissatisfied employees should insist that employer purchase
insurance from a more understanding insurer at first opportunity.
art
At Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Joanne Bulley wrote:
>
>Actually, this mostly conservative "Live Free or Die" state of New
>Hampshire has already passed the law - been in effect for a year - there
>are some glitches but overall it is working. Also - here in NH there
>are few insurance options and I have not found much help on the employer
>side. We have lots of small employers and the options are not out there
>and purchasing power to get what the employers/employees want doesn't
>happen when you have only a few employees.
>
>I have several women whose migraines are controlled best by continuous
>oral contraceptives - and because OCP's are packaged as 21 active pills
>= 1 month supply - even with appeals one patient has gone through, she
>has to pay her "one month" co-pay every 3 weeks. She therefore has to
>pay 17.3 co-pays per year (when her co-worker on Viagra only pays 12
>co-pays per year). The insurance company says it was the employer's
>"choice" and the employer says they can't do anything cause it was what
>the insurer's rules were...
>
>Joanne
>
>At Tue, 30 Jan 2001, art fougner, md wrote:
>>
>>Joanne -
>>
>>here's a somewhat diff take - since most folks receive insurance thru
>>employment - suggest that the women and their spouses, so's, etc bring
>>their collective pressure together on employers to consider these issues
>>in choosing insurance coverage choices for employees. legislation is a
>>very inefficient mechanism for dealing with these issues.
>>
>>now catastrophic coverage for all americans - that's a whole diff kettle
>>of fish.
>>
>>art
>>
>>just my opinion - i could be wrong.
>>
--
art fougner, md
A series of 1000 cases begins with but a single anecdote.
