The item before this is a link to a Reuters article that accuses the Wellpoint Health Insurance folks of unspeakable greed, yanking the policies of women who contract breast cancer because, well, it costs money to honor those policies. I received an e-mail from a reader of this site whose name I'm going to withhold, even though he didn't request anonymity. He wrote, in part…
I currently work at WellPoint, and I want to make sure you are aware that WellPoint is saying that the Reuters article you link to is mostly false. I don't remember all the details of the memo, but for instance, Patricia Reilling is not a member of WellPoint.
Speaking entirely on my own behalf, I and everyone I've interacted with at WellPoint do our very best to follow the rules and act ethically.
I admire your voice of reason in the cacophony of all the brain dead people on the internet and other media. I trust that you will consider the rebuttal and not automatically go along with (what seems to me to be) the scapegoating of WellPoint. I'll see if I can get you a link tomorrow.
Here's a link to Wellpoint's statement and if there's another piece the gentleman feels should be noted, I'll gladly link to that. I'd be delighted to reach the conclusion that the article does not present an accurate picture of the situation. It's awful to think that kind of thing might be going on.
This statement does not say Patricia Reilling is not (or was not) a member of WellPoint. It does say that Robin Beaton, who was also portrayed as a victim in the story, was not a member of WellPoint. The statement does not say that what was allegedly done to Ms. Beaton was not done by some insurer. It also does not say that that insurer was not in some way affiliated with WellPoint.
But the gent is right. Let's keep open minds on this one. My own experience with health insurance (not with Wellpoint) has involved no treachery of the kind described in the article…but a lot of errors that one could easily view as treachery. I'll confess though that I have a deep distrust of insurance companies. It flows from hearing of some friends' experiences but mainly from hearing my once and future doctor tell me how often insurance firms make it difficult for him to provide the best possible treatment for his patients. (He's my "once and future" doc because he's currently on assignment for the government and has suspended his practice until that job is done. I not only trust this man with my life, I have trusted him with my life.)
Like I said, I'd be glad to hear that Wellpoint is not guilty as charged. I'm curious as to whether the defense is going to be, "This kind of thing doesn't go on in the industry" or "It does but we don't do it." If the latter, maybe they can undo the damage this report may do to their rep by suggesting how to stop it.