The Integrator Blog
Home
Share |
about
Contact Me, Experience, Mission, Sabbatical in Central America, plus
Editorial Advisory Board
Columnists
Michael Levin
Taylor Walsh
background resources in PDF
Insurance, Integrative Clinics, Industry Summit Reports, News Files '99-'04
some organization links
Professions, Academia, Research, Policy
some CAM/IM publication links
Electronic, Peer-Reviewed, Blogs, More
Bradly Jacobs, MD, MPH, Revolution Health Blog
supported conference
Institute for Health & Productivity Management - Integrative/Complementary Healthcare
Non-Discrimination: A 'Big Honking Lawsuit' to Advance Integrative Medicine and Health? PDF Print E-mail
Written by John Weeks   

Non-Discrimination: A 'Big Honking Lawsuit' to Advance Integrative Medicine and Health?



Two years ago I was part of an invitational, strategic meeting of integrative medicine leaders that included an impromptu exploration. We considered the resistance of hospitals and insurers to embracing integrative medicine and health. These institutions claim to be "patient-centered." Yet they are slow to uptake the practices and disciplines associated with the popular movement for health-focused, whole person approaches.

Among us was an executive of a good-sized business. He was neither familiar with the discussion nor part of the healthcare industry. As a successful investor, he immediately recognized a key misalignment. The financial drivers in U.S. medicine to do more expensive procedures are a mismatch with high-touch, low-tech, human-centered integrative approaches.

Suddenly he interrupted: "Isn't there a big honking lawsuit here someplace that can shift things?"

Image
How harmful is healthcare discimination?
Good question. What's called "integrative medicine" these days began as a grassroots movement for alternatives to conventional treatment. Other successful popular movements in the US, are associated with major lawsuits. For desegregation, Brown versus the Board of Education. For a woman's right to choose: Roe versus Wade. For the environmental movement: Karen Silkwood. A door that opened the "integration" era was the decade-long Wilk vs. the American Medical Association in which the AMA was found to be engaged in restraint of trade.

Is there a big lawsuit that will propel integrative health?

A few of us kicked around ideas, then let the subject drop. Besides, who wants to spend large amounts of a movement's few dollars on a potentially polarizing effort?

Jump forward two years. The Obama administration has passed the Affordable Care Act. The act includes Section 2706 entitled Non Discrimination in Health Care. The core of the short section is this: "A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage shall not discriminate with respect to participation under the plan or coverage against any health care provider who is acting within the scope of that provider's license or certification under applicable State law."

US Senator Tom Harkin and his integrative health supporter colleagues authored Section 2706. They'd been in discussion with representatives of the American Chiropractic Association, the Integrative Healthcare Policy Consortium, optometrists and others. It was passed to ensure that these practitioners were not excluded.

Image
What will 2706 mean anything without legal backing?ut
The law was hailed as a breakthrough for integrative treatment. Consumers could access licensed acupuncturists, massage therapists, naturopathic doctors, chiropractors and home-birth midwives. Medical specialists could more comfortably refer for complementary services knowing that doing so would not require patients to pay cash. A critical barrier keeping patients, doctors and systems from exploring optimal integration via inclusion and referrals would be history.

The historic importance was underscored when attorney and former Washington State insurance commissioner Deborah Senn told a September 2010 policy meeting that she viewed Section 2706 as parallel to the also historic "Every Category of Provider" law in Washington State. That law made that state the most integration friendly in the United States. Consumers and practitioners each have more choices in the care plans they follow, or recommend.

I was close to the implementation of that law as a consultant to diverse Washington stakeholders and as a writer observer. Senn's parallelling of Section 2706 with the Washington law, while hopeful, conjured battles. The Washington experience taught us that insurers will squirm mightily to avoid such a requirement. They sought to postpone enforcement. They tried to scare the public and legislators with a horror of cost increases. Business organizations fronted for them. They urged the legislature to overturn the law. To the point here, insurers fought repeatedly in the courts to overturn or limit the law's impact.

Senn, perhaps the most consumer-oriented of insurance commissioners in the last half-century, battled on every front. Backed by the legal staff in the State Attorney General's Office and the budget of the State of Washington, she parried insurer end-runs in multiple suits. Eventually, she secured a US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision which upheld her interpretation of the law. The U.S. Supreme Court denied the insurer's appeal.

Book-mark this: the horrors never came to pass. As research here and here and here shows, the cost-related outcomes range from marginally more to frank savings. Patient experience is extraordinarily, as we know from Group Health Research Institute examinations published here and here.

Knee-jerk antagonism to the potential value in Section 2706 from mainstream healthcare institutions is to be expected. Guess who's coming to dinner?

Pollyanna thoughts were quickly dissolved in the acid of an AMA resolution against Section 2706 within 90 days of the Affordable Care Act's passage.

Section 2706 will be the law of the land in 2014. Yet in state after state, entire categories of integrative medicine and health practitioners face active discrimination under plans shaping the emerging payment and delivery system. Despite the fact that these practitioners provide covered services like treatment of back pain and help with various chronic conditions, they are typically being excluded from state lists of essential health benefits.

Image
Lawsuits cost. Who will step up?
Some states would appear to be trying to do the right things. Yet the promise to the nation of Section 2706 is at great risk. Removing payment barriers to appropriate use of these licensed integrative health practitioners is everyday threatened by limiting interpretations.

Are we witnessing "good-bye non-discrimination" for another generation? Or, to repeat the businessman's question, do we need to explore the strategy of a "big, honking lawsuit" to break down this discrimination and change the face of US healthcare forever? And if so, who pays?

Millions upon millions have been invested by wealthy U.S. citizens to advance integrative medicine and health in the last 15 years. The goal is to transform health care and improve the health of the public through integrative medicine. Boatloads of cash established integrative centers, supported research, enabled a project from the Institute of Medicine, expanded media interest, and built infrastructure.

All good. But why leave the transformational lever of legal action in the tool box? Maybe it's time to take off the gloves. Section 2706, broadly interpreted, could help us meet the Triple Aims of better patient experience and better outcomes at a lower cost. The highest and the best use of the next big investment in integrative health and medicine may be to insure justice is done in upholding the law, currently on the books, to ban discrimination in health care.

The avenue merits vigilance and serious exploration as we roll toward January 1, 2014, when the era of nondiscrimination in health care officially begin.


< Prev   Next >
Search
Advertisement
Advertisement
Sponsors
Integrative Practitioner
The Westreich Foundation
voluntary contributions
Support the work!
Archive
All Integrator Round-ups
Integrator Top 10 Lists 2006-2015
Issues #140-#142 Oct-Dec 2015
Issues #137-#139 July-Sept 2015
Issues #134-#136 April-June 2015
Issues #131-#133 Jan-March 2015
Issues #127-#130 Sept-Dec 2014
Issues #123-#126 May-Aug 2014
Issues#119-#122 Jan-April 2014
Issues #116-#118 - Oct-Dec 2013
Issues #113-#115 July-Sept 2013
Issues #110-#112 April-June 2013
Issues #108-#109 Jan-March 2013
Issue #105-#107 Oct-Dec 2012
Issues #102-#104 - July-Sept 2012
Issues #99-#101 - April-June 2012
Issues #96-#98-Jan-March 2012
Issues #94-#95 Nov-Dec 2011
Issues #92-#93 Sept-Oct 2011
Issues #90 and #91 - July-Aug 2011
Issues #88 and #89 - May-June 2011
Issues #86 and #87 - March-April 2011
Issues #84 and #85 - Jan-Feb 2011
Issues #82 and #83 - Nov-Dec 2010
Issues #80 & #81 - Sept Oct 2010
Issues #78 & #79 - July August 2010
Issues #76 & #77 - May June 2010
Issues #74 & #75 - March-April 2010
Issues #73 & #73 - Jan-Feb 2010
Issues #69, #70 & #71 - Nov-Dec 2009
Issues #67 and #68 - Sept-Oct 2009
Issues #65 and #66 - July-August 2009
Issues #63-#64 - May-June 2009
Issues #60-#62 - March-April 2009
Issues #57-#59 - Jan-Feb 2009
Issues #55-#56 - Nov-Dec 2008
Issues #51-#54 - Sept-Oct 2008
Issues #47-#50 - July-August 2008
Issues #46 & -#47 - May-June 2008
Issues #43-#45 Mar-April 2008
Issues #41 & #42 - Feb 2008
Issues #39 & #40 - Dec-Jan '08
Issues #37 & #38 - Nov 2007
Issues #35 & #36 - Oct 2007
Issues #33 & #34 - Sept 2007
Issues #30-#32 - July-Aug 2007
Issues #28 & #29 - June 2007
Issues #26 and #27 - May 2007
Issue #25 - April 2007
Issues # 23 & #24 - March 2007
Issues #21 and #22 - Feb 2007
Issues #19 and & 20 - Jan 2007
Issues #17 and #18 - Dec 2006
Issues #15 and #16 - Nov 2006
Issues #13 and #14 - Oct 2006
Issues #11 and #12- Sept 2006
Issues #9 and #10 - Aug 2006
Issues #7 and #8 - July 2006
Issues #5 and #6 - June 2006
Issues #3 and #4 - May 2006
Issues #1 and #2 - April 2006
All Articles by Subject: 2006
All Articles by Subject: Jan-June 2007
IAYT-Sponsored Series on the Future of Yoga Therapy