Letter to the Editor: The ‘fallacy’ of competition lowering health care costs
BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee announced it would not renew its contract with Methodist Le Bonheur Healthcare because of the costs and could not reach an agreement with the hospital system. Thus, BlueCross members lost access to Methodist hospitals in 2023. (Mark Weber/The Daily Memphian file)
Letters to the Editor
The Daily Memphian welcomes a diverse range of views and invites readers to submit Letters to the Editor at letters@dailymemphian.com. Submissions should be fewer than 250 words in length. Preference will be given to letters addressing local issues. Writers must provide their name, city where they reside, email address and phone number. Letters that are published will include the writer’s name and city. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.
In response to the recent opinion article (“Opinion: BlueCross’ decision shows how competition can lower health care prices”) on BlueCross BlueShield showing how competition can lower health care prices, I feel compelled to point out a fallacy in the opinion’s logic.
BlueCross has apparently decided to drop hospitals from its network that provide care for children. Admittedly, this can indeed save money for the general population. However, if you are a parent of a sick child, then you are blocked from health insurance.
In 2022, BlueCross dropped the University of Mississippi Medical Center (UMMC) from its network, three months into the calendar year. Batson Children’s Hospital is affiliated with UMMC, which is the largest hospital in Mississippi. Those insured were deprived of ALL health care provided by UMMC.
Besides providing care for children, UMMC also provides a wide variety of specialized health care. Because of public outcry, UMMC was readmitted to the network, but only late in December 2022. This decision deprived the insured of specialized quality care for most of the year.
It is apparent that BlueCross is primarily concerned with making money and not providing quality health care for all. Many of us have opted to change to a similar, and cheaper, plan that has UMMC in its network.
I had BlueCross for some 20+ years but could no longer stay with a company that did not have the best interests in health care for all. BlueCross should be exposed as interested in their costs only and not in providing quality care. I suspect this “care” policy goes beyond the Mid-South.
Bill Martin,
Vicksburg, Mississippi
Related stories
Opinion: BlueCross’ decision shows how competition can lower health care prices
“BlueCross BlueShield’s move is a welcome sign of the emergence of a competitive, price-transparent health care marketplace, which is needed to reverse runaway costs driven by hospital overcharging.”
Opinion: How BlueCross is ensuring access to care during network changes
“We are redirecting members to other high-quality providers in the area, and when that’s not possible, we’re ensuring they still have access to the care from Methodist or Le Bonheur.”
Letter to the Editor: Downtown Mobility Center is ‘redundant’ and too focused on cars
“The new garage is ultimately redundant and serves only to improve the mobility of people who can afford to drive.”
Want to comment on our stories or respond to others? Join the conversation by subscribing now. Only paid subscribers can add their thoughts or upvote/downvote comments. Our commenting policy can be viewed here.