UnitedHealth Group CEO Andrew Witty claimed his firm guards against “unnecessary” care.
Summary
UnitedHealth CEO Andrew Witty criticized public outrage over the health insurance industry following the assassination of UnitedHealthcare executive Brian Thompson.
In a leaked video to staff, Witty dismissed criticism as “misinformation” and urged employees not to engage with media.
Thompson’s murder outside a Manhattan hotel has intensified scrutiny of the industry’s practices, with bullet casings found at the scene bearing phrases linked to insurance claim denial tactics.
The killing has sparked debate on UnitedHealthcare’s history of denying claims, while the shooter remains at large.
The fact that this is an internal video means at least one of your employees don't think you've learned the lesson you need to learn from this mr witty.
Witty, clearly reading from a script and dressed casually, defended his industry against accusations it refuses people vital coverage saying “we guard against the pressures that exist for unsafe care or unnecessary care.”
The doctor thinks its necessary. Claims handler and insurance company suddenly become medical professionals and give a second opinion of “its not necessary”.
Why even bother with the doctor? Just ask the insurance company instead.
Whats funny too - whenever the alternative is brought up (socialised healthcare), at least the conservative side of america starts seething over it, falling over themselves defending private insurance companies
Why even bother with the doctor? Just ask the insurance company instead.
100% this. If they know what's best for us they should open a hospital.
Do the people making these refusals have medical degrees? Those people without medical degrees actually think they know better than a doctor?
"Necessary" is a really telling word there. Is it necessary that I have pain meds? No. It's possible to go through my life in pain. It would fucking suck, but those pain meds aren't strictly necessary. Just fuck anybody and any corporation who would want you to go through life in pain.
Part of it might be trying to guard against upselling.
We had two kids. One at a corporate hospital that specializes in pre- and post-natal care, and another at a non-profit independent hospital.
In retrospect, the first kid felt an awful lot like buying a car. Or getting married. Literally felt like they were trying to tack on all the things. "Oh you need to take first aid and CPR classes, they are covered by your insurance if you're pregnant". "Oh you should take this breastfeeding class". "Have you seen our Alternative Birthing Center?". "Babies looking a little big. Let's schedule extra ultrasounds to track it". Followed by scaring us into a planned c-section.
Kids first night he's got a little wheeze. Head nurse during the day knew her shit, she said it was fine and noted it in the chart. Night nurse ain't having that. Sent him right down to the NICU. Spent the night. Nothing wrong with him, he just didn't really cry a lot so he never got to get all the fluid out of his lungs.
And then the bottle shaming after the fact. La leche League, et al....all a bunch of titnazis. But lactation counseling is covered by insurance. So...
Second kid, hospital looked and felt a lot more rundown, but the kid was even bigger, and they were less concerned about his size and even encouraged my wife when she said she wanted a VBAC. Staff was way more personal. Totally different experience.
I partway expect to start getting calls about my first kids extended warranty soon.
My sleep doctor has talked about going to appeal hearings for medicine with insurance companies, and talked about how they brought doctors, but not sleep doctors. So, when the arbitrator or whatever asked a question about sleep practices or medicine to the insurance doctor, they would defer the question to her because they didn’t know the answer.
Just being Devil's Advocate here: Medicare fraud is a thing - docs who prescribe, or claim to have performed, unnecessary treatments, which may be as much as $60B (out of $900B spending, so...7-ish%). Maybe not enough to justify UHC's 32% denial rate. And nobody seems to source their $60B or $100B fraud estimates - I can only find case evidence for a few hundred million, and those are cases spanning years.
"There are very few people in the history of the US healthcare industry who had a bigger positive effect on American healthcare than Brian [Thompson]."
Lol you fucking shitting me? This guy's whole speech is a lie.
Not so much a lie as speaking from a very twisted point of view. From his perspective, making more money is the only kind of positive change. As the CEO who oversaw the highest denial rate in the industry, Thompson's leadership would of course be seen as positive by his fellow executives.
In a way it's true. In death, he's having a hand in changing the public perception of privatized healthcare in the US, and perhaps will help spark change altogether.
What would he even do if he found any? His own insurance would deny coverage for their removal since they weren't found by a medical provider, but would also deny a second colonoscopy since they had records of his DIY scope.
If a handful of people are celebrating this and the rest are condemning that behaviour then sure I might listen to this dude.
If more than 95% of the comments I’ve seen across all platforms and political leaning, then I’m afraid that society has spoken and they’ve had enough of these parasites.
Do think we will have change? No, not unless we get more people willing to do things like that hero in NYC did the other morning.
Never forget that when a business owner tells you that they put consumers first, nothing is stopping them from converting their business into either a cooperative or a nonprofit organization dedicated to the public benefit. Even if it’s the case that at some given moment, the business really is putting consumers first, there is no benefit to the consumer for the business to continue operating as a privately owned for-profit institution. The only benefit a for-profit institution provides that a cooperative or nonprofit cannot, is the power for leadership to prioritize their own interests above all other stakeholders whenever it suits them.
A lot of nonprofit organizations will try to justify underpaying workers on the basis of social interest. However, it certainly is not some kind of requirement and many do offer compensation which is competitive with what the private sector offers. And furthermore, if more firms in the market were structured in a cooperative or nonprofit manner such that this became the expectation instead of the exception, these firms would not easily be able to get away with underpaying workers because they’re not actually doing something special anymore.
By the way, none of this is to say that this would magically solve all of our problems or anything like that. It’s only that there will be a lot fewer problems to worry about when most businesses are legally obligated to prioritize the interests of consumers and workers above arbitrary shareholders
Is the OTHER CEO of your company not an indication that you should probably stop your bitching?
Get the bankers out of my doctor's office, the only people who should have the authority to decide what care is necessary is the physician treating me and myself when signing informed consent forums.
We should really take the time to appreciate this man's dedication to the grindset and professionalism. He woke up earlier than most executives to get this once in a lifetime opportunity. He arranged travel plans by bus to execute on a plan that, by all objective measures, worked. Really they're just upset the murderer did it better.