By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The article alleges that UnitedHealth Group employees, specifically those from its Optum subsidiary, contributed to the deaths of three nursing home residents by delaying or denying necessary hospital care. These cases, alongside whistleblower complaints, suggest a potential conflict of interest, as UnitedHealth acts as both insurer and provider. The company, facing lawsuits and scrutiny, denies wrongdoing, citing patient-centered care and disputing the claims’ validity while also highlighting that many hospitalizations of nursing home residents can be unnecessary.
Read the original article here
UnitedHealth reduced hospitalizations for nursing home seniors. Now it faces wrongful death claims. And boy, is this a tangled web of accusations, concerns, and unfortunately, likely preventable tragedies. It’s a situation that throws a harsh spotlight on the practices of a major player in the healthcare industry and the potential consequences of prioritizing profits over patient well-being. From the outset, the situation is presented as an example of privatization gone awry and the inherent conflict of interest when healthcare is treated as a for-profit venture.
The core of the issue seems to be a push by UnitedHealth, specifically through its Medicare Advantage plans, to reduce hospitalizations for nursing home residents. Now, on the surface, this might sound like a positive thing. After all, nobody wants unnecessary hospital visits. But the claims coming to light suggest that this reduction was achieved through, shall we say, less-than-ideal methods. The implication is that care was denied or delayed, leading to dire outcomes for vulnerable seniors. The article highlights that this was “a concerted effort to deny care by obstructing admissions.”
The accusations are serious, and there’s a strong undercurrent of anger and frustration. The idea that insurance companies actively work to deny care for financial gain is not new. The question always comes down to how far these companies will go to increase profits and reduce costs. The financial incentives seem to be driving a disturbing trend where denying care, even if it leads to worse health outcomes, is seen as a viable business strategy. This is not simply about being efficient; it’s about choosing a cheaper option, even if the cheaper option is potentially fatal for patients.
The details are chilling. There are multiple allegations that this has led to wrongful deaths, or in the words of some, “straight up murder.” The fact that UnitedHealth is now facing wrongful death lawsuits speaks volumes about the gravity of the situation. People are losing their loved ones, and families are left grappling with the aftermath of what they believe was preventable suffering. The sheer number of individual cases and complaints suggests that this is not an isolated incident. The article also suggests that there are whistleblowers raising concerns, which indicates that there are people on the inside who feel this practice is wrong.
One of the more insightful comments comes from an angry RN who worked in nursing homes and at an Optum facility. The perspective is that Optum is willing to keep patients in nursing homes for longer periods by providing services on-site instead of sending them to the hospital. This means that a person may get denied the medical care that they need due to a hospital stay and that can cause the patient’s condition to worsen over time. This can cause delays in care, and it can affect the overall health of the patient, and can potentially be fatal.
The article explores the broader context. The idea that healthcare is infrastructure and should not be privatized. The comments also touch on the role of government oversight and the need for stronger regulations. The idea is that it is often a long and arduous process, and may not ever lead to meaningful change. There are claims of kickbacks and moral hazards that run rampant throughout the healthcare industry. The fact that the AARP is the preferred provider is brought to attention, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest. The tone is heavily sarcastic, suggesting a deep-seated distrust of the system.
The potential for this to get worse is also a concern. As the article suggests, after the ACA is gone, this will only get worse. The rise of Medicare Advantage plans is also highlighted. These plans, promoted by companies like UnitedHealth, often offer enticing benefits like dental coverage, making them attractive to seniors. But beneath the surface, there’s a sense that these plans may come with hidden costs and limitations, potentially leading to a lower standard of care. The concerns are that patients must jump through all kinds of hoops to provide their loved ones with the care and equipment that their team advises they need.
There are also insights into the potential systemic issues within the healthcare system, the incentives for nursing homes. There is an alleged incentive to keep patients in the hospital longer because if they’re in the hospital long enough they can send them back through therapy, which makes them more money. This creates a situation where the financial interests of the various players – insurance companies, nursing homes, and even some healthcare providers – may not align with the best interests of the patients.
So, where do we go from here? The calls for justice through the courts are evident. The legal battles that UnitedHealth now faces are likely just the beginning. The article makes it clear that settlements and fines may not be enough to truly hold these companies accountable. It’s an industry where it is considered a cost of doing business. The real solution lies in fixing the structural problems, such as a strong regulatory system, and an emphasis on patient care over profits. Otherwise, the cycle of tragic events will continue.