ZusammenfassungVon Vertragsärzten in ihren Praxen angebotene oder hier von Patienten nachgefragte "individuelle Gesundheitsleistungen" sind in unserem Gesundheitswesen zu einer häufigen Erscheinung geworden. Es hat sich ein "zweiter Gesundheitsmarkt" mit einem erheblichen ökonomischen Potential entwickelt. Die Leistungen umfassen ein weites Spektrum; sie adressieren ganz unterschiedliche Gesundheitsstörungen, Ziele und Hoffnungen und sind extrem heterogen. Auch dies erschwert eine einheitliche Definition. Aus Patientensicht scheint das wichtigste Merkmal, dass IGeL vollständig privat bezahlt werden müssen. Der Beitrag diskutiert IGeL unter normativen Gesichtspunkten und adressiert 6 (...) Fragen: welche Risiken und Chancen beinhalten IGeL für das hergebrachte Bild des Arztes und seine Profession, das Verständnisder wissenschaftlichen Grundlagenärztlicher Untersuchungs- und Behandlungsmethoden, das Verständnis der Medizin und ihrer Ziele, die bisherige Rolle der Patienten, die Beziehung zwischen Arzt und Patient und das Bild der Gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung? Einerseits sind IGeL aus unterschiedlichen Gründen für Patienten und Vertragsärzte attraktiv. In Zeiten einer zunehmenden Regulierung der Medizin erhöhen sie Freiheitsgrade und Wahlmöglichkeiten beider Seiten. Andererseitshaben sie das Potential, vor allem die Rolleund Profession des ArztesimSystemderGKVund ihreWahrnehmungtiefgreifendzu verändern. Obsich der IGeL-Markt bei uns kontrollieren und regulieren lässt, ist eine zurzeit offene Frage. (shrink)

PurposeTo evaluate the prevalence and treatment patterns of speech and language disorders in Germany.MethodsA retrospective analysis of data collected from 32% of the German population, insured by the statutory German health insurance. We used The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th revision, German Modification codes for stuttering, cluttering, and developmental disorders of speech and language to identify prevalent and newly diagnosed cases each year. Prescription and speech therapy reimbursement data were used to (...) evaluate treatment patterns.ResultsIn 2017, 27,977 patients of all ages were diagnosed with stuttering. Stuttering prevalence peaks at age 5 years. Cluttering was diagnosed in 1,800 patients of all ages. Developmental disorders of speech and language were identified in 555,774 AOK-insurants. Treatment data indicate a substantial proportion newly diagnosed stuttering individuals receive treatment, with slightly fewer than 20 sessions per year, on average. We confirmed a previous study showing increased rates of atopic disorders and neurological and psychiatric comorbidities in individuals with stuttering, cluttering, and developmental disorders of speech and language.ConclusionThis is the first nationwide study using health insurance data to analyze the prevalence and newly diagnosed cases of a speech and language disorder. Prevalence and gender ratio data were consistent with the international literature. The crude prevalence of developmental disorders of speech and language increased from 2015 to 2018, whereas the crude prevalence for stuttering remained stable. For cluttering, the numbers were too low to draw reliable conclusions. Proportional treatment allocation for stuttering peaked at 6 years of age, which is the school entrance year, and is later than the prevalence peak of stuttering. (shrink)

The doctor-patient relationship is the foundation of any medical intervention. Over time, the relationship has changed, from the era of paternalism to the era of self-determination or patient autonomy, following changes resulting from consumerism and lately, in South Africa, socialised medicine as a result of the proposed National Health Insurance. The premise of this article is that patient autonomy is invariably limited by a determination of who will carry the cost of a medical intervention. In recent years, legislative (...) developments have affected the understanding of a patient and doctor through the introduction of new references, such as ‘user’, ‘data subject’ and ‘consumer’ for a patient, and ‘service provider’ and ‘responsible party’ for a doctor, each giving different meanings to the doctor-patient relationship. Recent statutory additions also include new remedies available to aggrieved patients as parties in the doctor-patient relationship. The article concludes with brief observations on how the NHI will alter the essence and nature of the doctor-patient relationship in future. (shrink)

Germany has just started a public debate on priority-setting, rationing and cost-effectiveness due to the cost explosion within the German health care system. To date, the costs for German health care run at 11,6 % of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP, 278,3 billion €) that represents a significant increase from the 5,9 % levels present in 1970. In response, the German Parliament has enacted several major and minor legal reforms over the last three decades for the sake of (...) cost containment and maintaining stability of the health care system. The Statutory Health Insurance—SHI (Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung—GKV) is based on the fundamental principle of solidarity and provides an ethical and legal framework for implementing equity, comprehensiveness and setting the principles and rules for financing and providing health care services and benefits. Within the SHI system, several major actors can be identified: the Federal Ministry of Health, the 16 state ministries of health, the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA), the physicians (with their associations) and the hospitals (with their organizations) on the provider side, and the sickness funds with their associations on the purchasers’ side. This article reviews the structure and complexities of the German health care system with its major players and participants. The focus will be put on relevant ethical, legal and economic aspects for prioritization, rationalization, rationing and cost-effectiveness of medical benefits and services. In conclusion, this article pleads for open discussion on the challenging subject of priority-setting instead of accepting the implicit and non-transparent rationing of medical services that currently occurs at many different levels within the health care system, as it stands today. (shrink)

Reforms in the German health care system in the attempt to bring more competition into health care have increased the sovereignty of the insured or patients, who have finally been allowed to make choices. “The start of a reorientation of the statutory health insurance system and hospital care are to be welcomed as first steps towards a supply of health services that reflects individual preferences.” The authors can be contacted care of Prof. Dr. Oberender (...) at Rechts‐ und Wirtschafswissenschaftliche Fakulät, Universität Bayreuth, 95440 Bayreuth, Germany, where Dr Oberender is Professor in the Faculty of Law and Economics, and Ansgar Hebborn is his Assistant. The authors wish to record their gratitude to Jan Hacker for translating this article. (shrink)

Reforms in the German health care system in the attempt to bring more competition into health care have increased the sovereignty of the insured or patients, who have finally been allowed to make choices. “The start of a reorientation of the statutory health insurance system and hospital care are to be welcomed as first steps towards a supply of health services that reflects individual preferences.” The authors can be contacted care of Prof. Dr. Oberender (...) at Rechts‐ und Wirtschafswissenschaftliche Fakulät, Universität Bayreuth, 95440 Bayreuth, Germany, where Dr Oberender is Professor in the Faculty of Law and Economics, and Ansgar Hebborn is his Assistant. The authors wish to record their gratitude to Jan Hacker for translating this article. (shrink)

To properly comply with the Health Sector Act of 1992 a functioning competition should be introduced in the interests of the insured of the German Statutory Health Insurance, while still maintaining the principle of solidarity. This is a critical order-political aim, because the principles of solidarity and selfresponsibility as typically understood are functionally in contradiction. This paper analyzes the important measures of the Organizational Reform and concludes, that the principle of self-responsibility ought to obtain priority. Therefore, (...) the German legislature ought to focus on further competitively oriented reform steps. (shrink)

Rising health insurance costs and the cost of living crisis are likely leading to an increase in unpaid health insurance bills in many countries. In Switzerland, a particularly drastic measure to sanction defaulting insurance payers is employed. Since 2012, Swiss cantons – who have to cover most of the bills of defaulting payers - are allowed by federal law to blacklist them and to restrict their access to medical care to emergencies.In our paper, we briefly (...) describe blacklisting in the context of the Swiss healthcare system before we examine the ethical issues involved in light of what is known about its social and health impacts. We found no evidence that blacklisting serves as an effective way of recovering unpaid health insurance contributions or of strengthening solidarity within the health insurance system. Furthermore, the ambiguous definitions of what constitutes an emergency treatment and the incompatibility of the denial of medical care with the obligation to provide professional assistance complicate the implementation of blacklists and expose care providers to enormous pressure.Therefore, we conclude that blacklists and the (partial) denial of medical care not only pose profound ethical problems but are also unsuitable for fulfilling the purpose for which they were introduced. (shrink)

This paper explores the consequences of the oft ignored fact that public health insurance must actually be supplied by the state. Depending how the state is modeled, different health insurance outcomes are expected. The benevolent model of the state does not account for many actual features of public health insurance systems. One alternative is to use a standard public choice model, where state action is determined by interaction between self-interested actors. Another alternative—related to a (...) strand in public choice theory—is to model the state as Leviathan. Interestingly, some proponents of public health insurance use an implicit Leviathan model, but not consistently. The Leviathan model of the state explains many features of public health insurance: its uncontrolled growth, its tendency toward monopoly, its capacity to buy trust and loyalty from the common people, its surveillance ability, its controlling nature, and even the persistence of its inefficiencies and waiting lines. (shrink)

Health insurance exchanges can organize the market for health insurance by connecting small businesses and individuals into larger insurance pools. HIEs have been proposed as a possible means of making insurance more accessible, increasing competition among health plans, and promoting choice of insurer. President Obama's campaign proposal and various congressional leaders have proposed establishing insurance exchanges through federal legislation. However, whether the federal or state government, or even a private entity, can organize (...) an insurance exchange to connect health insurance sellers and buyers under the law is the question explored in this paper. Specifically, the paper addresses legal restraints or limitations to such an exchange at the federal, state or private entity level, and offers solutions. Although exchanges implicate many design and policy issues regardless of whether they are implemented at a federal, state, or private entity level, the paper concludes that are no absolute legal bars to the establishment of health insurance exchanges. (shrink)

By 2014, each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia will have a new health insurance exchange, or marketplace, established under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. These exchanges are the centerpiece of the reform law: they will be the main portals where people who do not have health insurance coverage through their jobs and small businesses will go, either in person or online, to find a health plan and to learn about (...) and apply for federal subsidies. The most immediate challenge facing all fifty‐one exchanges is fulfilling their most basic role: ensuring that all who are eligible to enroll in qualified health plans and to receive federal subsidies in fact enroll. (shrink)

This paper examines the role that population vulnerabilities play in insurance coverage for a representative sample of Latinos and Asians in the United States. Using data from the National Latino and Asian American Study (NLAAS), these analyses compare coverage differences among and within ethnic subgroups, across states and regions, among types of occupations, and among those with or without English language proficiency. Extensive differences exist in coverage between Latinos and Asians, with Latinos more likely to be uninsured. Potential explanations (...) include the type of occupations available to Latinos and Asians, reforms in immigration laws, length of time in the United States, and regional differences in safety-net coverage. Policy implications are discussed. (shrink)

This “Legal Solutions in Health Reform” paper identifies and analyzes the legal issues raised by health insurance exchanges. Like all Legal Solutions papers, it does not purport to provide a concrete proposal as to how health insurance exchanges should be organized or even whether they should play a role in health care reform. Rather, it attempts simply to describe the legal issues that health insurance exchanges raise, and to propose alternative solutions to (...) legal problems where useful. More specifically, it analyzes and offers alternative solutions to the legal problems raised by proposals to establish insurance exchanges by the federal government, by state governments, and by private entities or associations. Because the focus of this project and paper is on legal issues, discussion of policy and design issues is attenuated. Nevertheless, some attention to policy issues is unavoidable because law is the realization of policy. (shrink)

This article investigates the scope and effects of enhanced consumer choice in health insurance that is presented as a cornerstone of the new health insurance legislation in the Netherlands that will come into effect in 2006. The choice for choice marks the current libertarian trend in Dutch health care policymaking. One of our conclusions is that the scope of enhanced choice should not be overstated due to many legal and non-legal restrictions to it. The consumer (...) choice advocates have great expectations of the impact of enhanced choice. A critical analysis of its impact demonstrates that these expectations may not become true and that enhanced consumer choice should not be perceived as the ‘magic bullet’ for many problems in health care. (shrink)

In The Ethics of Universal Health Insurance, Alex Rajczi shows how defenders of universal health insurance can address the ethical issues raised by these objections and make the moral case for an American universal health insurance system that improves on the gains made in the Affordable Care Act.

This paper examines the lack of health insurance coverage in the US as a public policy issue. It first compares the problem of health insurance coverage to the problem of unemployment to show that in terms of the numbers of individuals affected lack of health insurance is a problem comparable in importance to the problem of unemployment. Secondly, the paper discusses the methodology involved in measuring health insurance coverage, and argues that the (...) current method of estimation of the uninsured underestimates the extent that individuals go without health insurance. Third, the paper briefly introduces Amartya Sen's functionings and capabilities framework to suggest away of representing the extent to which individuals are uninsured. Fourth, the paper sketches a means of operationalizing the Sen representation of the uninsured in terms of the disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) measure. (shrink)

The study is designed to provide an informal summary of what is known about consumer switching of health insurance plans and to contribute to knowledge about what motivates consumers who choose to switch health plans. Do consumers switch plans largely on the basis of critical reflection and assessment of information about the quality, and price? The literature suggests that switching is complicated, not always possible, and often overwhelming to consumers. Price does not always determine choice. Quality is (...) very hard for consumers to understand. Results from a random sample survey ( n = 2791) of the Alkmaar region of the Netherlands are reported here. They suggest that rather than embracing the opportunity to be active critical consumers, individuals are more likely to avoid this role by handing this activity off to a group purchasing organization. There is little evidence that consumers switch plans on the basis of critical reflection and assessment of information about quality and price. The new data reported here confirm the importance of a group purchasing organizations. In a free-market-health insurance system confidence in purchasing groups may be more important for health insurance choice than health informatics. This is not what policy makers expected and might result a less efficient health insurance market system. (shrink)

National attention on issues of public health preparedness necessarily brings into sharp focus the question of how to assure adequate, community-wide health care financing for preventive, acute care, and long-term medical care responses to public health threats. In the U.S., public and private health insurance represents the principal means by which medical care is financed. Beyond the threshold challenge of the many persons without any, or a stable form of, coverage lie challenges related to the (...) structure and characteristics of health insurance itself, particularly the commercial industry and its newly emerging market of consumer-driven health plans. States vary significantly in how they approach the regulation of insurance and in their willingness to support various types of insurance markets. This variation is attributable to the size and robustness of the insurance market, the political environment, and regulatory tradition and custom. Reconciling health insurance markets with public health-related health care financing needs arising from public health threats should be viewed as a major dimension of national health reform. (shrink)

This is a volatile time for health insurance policy. Medicare and Medicaid are in turmoil, as is the private health insurance market. Public and private health insurance costs constitute eighty percent of healthcare spending in the United States. Public health professionals depend on the insurance system to behave in ways that are responsive to public health in prevention and crisis management.Seventy-five percent of the American population, excluding the elderly, has coverage through (...) the private health insurance system. Ninety percent of this group receives their insurance through employer-sponsored programs, and the remaining ten percent buy their own coverage. Approximately ten percent of the non-elderly population has insurance through a government program, and fifteen percent of the non-elderly population, almost forty-one million Americans, is uninsured. (shrink)

We may create a catch-22 so that only people who are unlikely to need health insurance can afford it.... Genetic risk testing is important because it exposes the logic of a system that provides access to health insurance to those least likely to need it.

We may create a catch-22 so that only people who are unlikely to need health insurance can afford it.... Genetic risk testing is important because it exposes the logic of a system that provides access to health insurance to those least likely to need it.

According to US law, insurance companies can lawfully differentiate individual health insurance premiums on the basis of non-genetic medical information, but not on the basis of genetic information. The article reviews the case for such genetic exceptionalism. First, I critically assess some standard justifications. Next, I scrutinize an argument appealing to the view that genetically based premium differentiation expresses that persons do not all merit equal concern and respect. In the final section, I argue that even if (...) genetic exceptionalism is unjustified, there is a forceful luck egalitarian argument against basing premiums on genetic risks, to wit, that this tends to make some individuals worse off than others as a result of the bad brute luck involved in having a genetically determined, above-average risk of developing health problems. (shrink)

The reform of the health care system will include a mandate: Individuals are required to purchase health insurance provided that affordable options are available. But what is affordable health insurance? Three accounts of affordability of health coverage have been advanced. The first two accounts are empirical. The third account is needs-based. All three accounts are inadequate. I propose a fourth, the reasonable tradeoff account, according to which individuals should only be required to make reasonable (...) tradeoffs in order to pay for their health coverage. That is, health insurance is affordable if in order to pay for it one does not to have to sacrifice other benefit(s) that are comparable in importance to the benefits of health coverage. (shrink)

In thinking about how to expand insurance coverage, the issue that matters is whether insurance enables sick and high-risk people to get medical care. Over the course of three decades, market-oriented insurance reforms have shifted more costs of illness onto people who need and use medical care. By making the users of care pay for it , cost-sharing discourages sick people from getting care, even if they have insurance, and for people with low-incomes and tight budgets, (...) cost-sharing can effectively deny them access to care. Thus, covering or not covering sick people is the core issue of health insurance reform, both as a determinant of support and opposition to proposals, and as the proper yardstick for evaluating reform ideas. (shrink)

In most other nations, insurance for medical care is called sickness insurance, and it covers sick people. In the United States, we have “health insurance,” and its major carriers — commercial insurers, large employers, and increasingly government programs — strive to avoid sick people and cover only the healthy. This perverse logic at the heart of the American health insurance system is the key to reform debates.Focusing on sick people versus healthy people might seem (...) a strange way to view the coverage issue. Most discussions of insurance categorize people into other groupings: the insured versus the uninsured; Caucasian whites versus other racial and ethnic groups; men versus women; poor and low-income people versus everybody else; children, adults, and the elderly; or citizens versus immigrants and undocumented aliens. More recently, health researchers have begun talking about “vulnerable populations,” using most of the same demographic groupings and adding other illness-inducing factors such as social isolation, stress, and impoverished neighborhoods. But as I will show, insurance plans now use premiums, cost-sharing, and other design features in ways that indirectly divide each of these groups into the sick and the healthy, to the detriment of the sick. By shifting the costs of illness onto people who use medical care — that is, sick people — market-oriented reforms of the last few decades have eroded insurance in the name of strengthening it. (shrink)

Public healthcare systems are increasingly refusing (temporarily) to reimburse newly approved medical treatments of insufficient or uncertain cost-effectiveness. As both patient demand for these treatments and their list prices increase, a market might arise for voluntary additional health insurance (VHI) that covers effective but (very) expensive medical treatments. In this paper, we evaluate such potential future practices of VHI in public healthcare systems from a justice perspective. We find that direct (telic) egalitarian objections to unequal access to expensive (...) treatments based on different ability to afford VHI do not stand up to scrutiny. However, such unequal access might lead to loss of self-respect among individuals, or loss of fraternity within society, rendering it more difficult for citizens to interact on equal moral footing. This would be problematic from a relational egalitarian perspective. Moreover, the introduction of VHI might turn out to have negative consequences for the comprehensiveness and/or the quality of the public healthcare services that are offered to all patients equally through basic health insurance. These consequences must be weighed against potential health gains and the value of liberty. We conclude that governments should be careful when considering the introduction of VHI in public healthcare systems. (shrink)

On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed into law the nation's first comprehensive health care reform bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Within weeks, twenty states filed lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of its most politically charged feature—an individual purchase mandate. By 2014, the bill requires most individuals to have health insurance. With certain exceptions (pertaining to income level and religious objections), individuals without qualifying coverage will pay an annual tax penalty. If anything, the tax penalty (...) is too low compared with the cost of insurance, so it may not provide sufficient incentive for healthy individuals to purchase insurance. But it remains controversial because it compels people to purchase coverage they choose not to have, raising the question whether Congress can lawfully and ethically require individuals to contract with, and transfer money to, a private party. (shrink)

BackgroundTo prevent the planet from catastrophic global warming a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to net zero is required. Thus, divestment from fossil fuels must be a strategic interest for health insurers. The aim of this study was to analyse the implementation of environmental, social and governance criteria in German private health insurers’ investments.MethodsIn 2019 a survey about ESG strategies was sent to German private health insurance companies. The survey evaluated investment strategies and thresholds for the (...) exclusion of sectors and business practices, as well as company strategies for sustainable business development.FindingsGiven their business reports, German private health insurers manage assets of more than €350 billion. 11 of 40 insurance companies provided quantitative data, 10 refused to answer. According to quantitative data, €66 billion of assets is managed according to any ESG criteria; this equals an average of 76% of each company’s bonds. None of these insurers excluded the production and sale of fossil fuels. All excluded coal mining but only at high thresholds. For €226 billion, no data were provided.InterpretationThe findings are in contrast to the expected intrinsic economic interest of the insurers to stop global warming and improve public health. The majority of assets are managed in a highly problematic manner, especially the absence of capital allocated in fields contrary to medical ethics cannot be presumed. Lack of transparency is a major problem that limits clients in choosing the insurer who has the most advanced ESG criteria. (shrink)

Current research on the human genome holds enormous long-term promise for improvements in health care, but it poses an immediate ethical challenge in the area of health insurance, by raising the question of whether insurers should be allowed to take genetic information about customers into account in the setting of premiums. It is widely held that such discrimination is immoral and ought to be illegal, and the prevalence of this view is understandable, given the widespread belief, which (...) I endorse, that every individual in a society as affluent as ours has a basic right to affordable health care. But prohibiting genetic discrimination in health insurance is not an effective way to protect this right. On the contrary, I argue that because of the nature of insurance as a product sold in a competitive market, such a prohibition is misguided, and its worthy aims must, instead, be pursued through reforms in our country’s system of publicly provided health care. (shrink)

Lack of health insurance coverage is a large and growing problem for millions of American families. Rising health care costs and economic insecurity continue to threaten the bedrock of the health insurance system - employer-sponsored coverage - while states’ fiscal situations and the escalating federal deficit complicate any efforts at reform. Providing health insurance coverage to the millions of uninsured remains a major health care challenge for the nation and understanding the current (...) health insurance environment, who the uninsured are, and why they are uninsured is critical when considering health care reform. This paper aims to define the problem of the uninsured, providing an overview of the uninsured in America and the roles and limits of private and public insurance. Following this discussion, the paper describes the current health insurance environment and examines the prospects for improving coverage. (shrink)