RSS Feeds RSS | Views on ITInews | contact | terms of use | privacy 

Editorial Categories:


Forthcoming Events:

No Upcoming Events

Save by getting insurance quotes

Proudly South AfricanInforming Consumers and Financial Advisors since 1988 | Click Here to Advertise
Car, household, life and business insurance quotes

News Article : Regulation 8 – Do we really think this is our only problem?
Category: Healthcare Insurance : Medical Schemes
Author:Edited by ITInews
Email:[email protected]
Posted:06 Aug 2015

 Email this article Comment on this Article  Print this article

A rights based medical scheme framework with voluntary membership requirements

Opinion by: Michael Settas, Managing Director, Xelus Specialised Risk Solutions.

The furore this past week, subsequent to the Minister of Health giving notice of his intention to change Regulation 8 of the Medical Schemes Act, misses the point entirely about what factors are responsible for the massive cost escalations the medical scheme industry has been facing for 15 years.

The first and most critical element to note is that, although the Regulation 8 wording has been in place since 2000, it was only enforced in its current form by the industry’s regulator, the Council of Medical Schemes (“CMS”), from about 2008.

This was when the CMS made an interpretation that the words “payment in full”, contained within Regulation 8, meant that benefit payments by medical schemes should be at any cost billed by a provider for the prescribed minimum benefits (“PMB”) rather than the fixed tariffs used by medical schemes.

That a regulatory body, responsible for a R120 billion a year industry, could possibly have made such a far-reaching interpretation of law, let alone do so on an autonomous basis, should be guarded against in future laws.

This interpretation practically handed a blank cheque to medical providers – it is no wonder that we see some providers manipulating the system to their financial advantage on PMB claims.

This unilateral action by the CMS is what Health Minister Dr Motsoaledi is now overturning – an interpretation of law that should never have occurred in the first place.

But nonetheless, this interpretation and enforcement of Regulation 8 has been going on for around 7 years and has simply added further to the extreme pressure that medical schemes have been under since 2000.

The pertinence of noting the timing of when Regulation 8 was enforced by the CMS (i.e. 2008), is to examine medical inflation prior to 2008 and then after that.

Ironically, in real terms, the level of medical inflation for private hospitals and specialists, which make up the vast majority of PMB costs, has in fact been slightly lower post 2008 than what it was pre 2008.

So one may ask the question - how is this possible? Is Regulation 8 really then such a big problem in its current format?

The answer is an emphatic YES! But - and it’s a big but - Regulation 8 is only one component of a myriad of problems that have distressed the medical schemes industry since 2000, when the current Medical Schemes Act came into effect.

The primary cost problems afflicting the medical scheme industry do not exist in Regulation 8. They exist in maintaining a rights based medical scheme framework with voluntary membership requirements, serviced by unregulated, monopolised supply chains of healthcare providers that are virtually guaranteed business regardless of the quality of healthcare they deliver.

The Medical Schemes Act entitles consumers to join a medical scheme at any age regardless of health status. It further prevents medical schemes from being able to underwrite new members and then also compels them to charge every member the same rate, regardless of how much they claim out of the system.

These consumer protection mechanisms would be reasonable if we could ensure that everyone - young and old, healthy and sick - entered and stayed in the medical scheme system because this would achieve a balance of risks.

But the reality is that human nature drives people to act in accordance with what is to their immediate advantage when membership is voluntary. If they are sickly, they will almost certainly join a medical scheme. If they are healthy they may take their chances without medical scheme cover.

And since consumers are afforded such favourable rights, it’s not a big risk to stay out of the system until the cost of one’s healthcare exceeds the cost of joining a medical scheme.

This gaming of the system to each individual’s advantage is called anti-selection and is very well known to all medical schemes in South Africa, since it occurs virtually on a daily basis.

The evidence in medical scheme demographic statistics of anti-selection is obvious. Younger members are underrepresented in the age data. The prevalence of chronic disease has skyrocketed over the past decade because only the sick are staying in the system. 

The size of insured families has shrunk by nearly 20% since 2000 because members selectively insure their less healthy dependants, in order to save the monthly contributions on the healthy ones.

Subsequently, those members who conscientiously remain in the system have been forced to downgrade their cover level because they cannot afford the exorbitant contribution increases created by this rampant anti-selection.

It is an intrinsically unfair system that needs to change and it needs to change quickly!

There is also a need to implement regulation around providers. There is much that can be done to improve efficiencies on the supply side of healthcare.

Preventing individual practitioners from owning hospitals or any other supporting providers will remove the existing conflicts of interest that are simply not in the best interest of patients.

Ensuring the proper implementation of treatment and diagnostic coding systems will provide for measurable health outcomes that can be used by medical schemes to contract the best quality providers.

Both these initiatives will collectively focus providers on improving the health outcomes of their patients since their revenue will be entirely contingent upon it.

In closing, consider this single but significant statistic. In real terms, private hospital costs have more than doubled between 2000 and 2012. Read that sentence again. Now think about continuing for another 12 years in this regulatory framework!

If Health Minister Dr Motsoaledi really wants to fix the private sector’s cost and quality problems, he should replace the current Medical Schemes Act with more balanced provisions, set about regulating the private provider supply chain in a more efficient manner and create an overarching regulatory framework to support the entire system.

Modifying the wording of one or two regulations will not fix these very fundamental problems. A major overhaul is required!

There are no comments at this stage. Be the first to comment!
Please Login To Comment On an Article - Click here To Login

ITInews invites comments at the foot of each of its articles in which readers can respond freely - anonymously if they wish - to various topical issues and industry debates. However, comments submitted by readers that are defamatory or deemed, by the editors, to be racist or obscene will be deleted from the database. Furthermore, ITInews's editor would like to caution potential posters on its websites that while it welcomes robust debate, it will not hesitate to make the IP addresses of the authors of such defamatory statements available to the authorities, in the event of a court order compelling them to do so.

Get car, home, life and business insurance quotes in 3 easy steps

Join us today

Insurance Quotes

Car Insurance Quotes
Household Insurance Quotes
Business Insurance Quotes
Funeral Insurance Quotes
Life Insurance Quotes

Read the InsuranceQuotes Blog

Healthcare Insurance - Medical Schemes
Medical Schemes
State Healthcare

More in Healthcare Insurance : Medical Schemes
The healthy decline of South African Medical Aid Schemes
Raising contributions while reducing benefits is not sustainable
Discovery Health response to Stan Eiser
It is unclear why Mr. Eiser chooses to persist with these unfounded allegations
Discovery’s probable loss of control over Discovery Health Medical Scheme
By now Gore should have reduced Limited’s cash dependency on DHMS
Medical aids "need to demystify themselves"
Medical aids are offering less value for money
Regulator of medical schemes concerned over false advertising, high administration fees
"The public is being misled"
High Court dismissal of BHF application has profound implications for medical schemes industry
Triumph of a fanciful ideology on healthcare financing that lacks sustainability
I found your article on the court ruling regarding PMBs to be misleading
The uncertainty with regards to pricing of healthcare will be allowed to continue
Victory for regulator, members of medical schemes
The prescribed minimum benefits (PMBs) which protect members of medical schemes remain in place
Regulator deregisters GetMed Medical Scheme
Complaints received from its members
There are 2 realities about private medical cover in SA
Firstly it is expensive and secondly, benefit structures are complex
The latest on Bonitas Medical Fund
Postponement of the special general meeting and elections to 28 May 2011
Regulator wants curator for Sizwe Medical Fund
Investigation points to material irregularities
Bonitas in new hands
Costs awarded on a punitive basis
Regulator wants curator for Bonitas Medical Fund
... the third-largest medical scheme
Resolution no longer an administrator and managed care organisation
Flagrant contravention of the provisions contained in Regulation 23 of the Medical Schemes Act
How to choose your medical aid
I’m often asked by patients to
SAG Response to SAMA
Reduce the power of administrators
Specialist Advocacy Group overview
Particularly concerned for the safety of the patient in the current environment
Nonsense, says Discovery Health, we’ve never been better - response to newsletter
DHMS continues to enjoy the highest rating of any medical scheme in South Africa
Public or private practice?
Healthcare is a monopolistic business

Join ITInews in supporting

Available Recruitment:
No Vacancies Listed...

ITM Website Design Cape Town
Copyright © 2005 - 2015 ITInews Online Publications (Pty) Ltd. All rights reserved Insurance Times & Investments Online and ITInews. ..::ISSN 1995-1256::.. No part of the materials including graphics or logos, available in this Web site may be copied, photocopied, reproduced, translated or reduced to any electronic medium or machine-readable form, in whole or in part, without specific permission from ITInews Online Publications (Pty) Ltd. Distribution for commercial purposes is prohibited.