Republish
New bill pushes insurers to stop playing doctor
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
New bill pushes insurers to stop playing doctor
Share this:
By Vivian Gonzales, Special to CalMatters
Vivian Gonzales is a public health nurse living in Los Angeles.
When doctors identified a tumor growing in my dad’s lungs last August, we knew that any chance we had of beating his cancer would be rooted in the team of specialists handling his care and taking swift action. Curing my father’s cancer, however, was completely at odds with the goals of his health insurer.
From the start, virtually every treatment and test his doctors said he needed required prior authorization. Prior authorization requires doctors to get approval from a health insurance company before prescribing medicines or performing medical services.
State Sen. Richard Pan, an M.D., has a bill pending in the California Legislature that will change this broken system. Senate Bill 250 will allow patients like my dad to get treatments they urgently need without unnecessary delays from insurance companies by requiring insurers to consult with doctors when determining which services require authorizations and streamlining the process to allow physicians to provide treatments and services based on their patients’ needs.
Before my dad’s treatment could even begin, his doctors struggled to get approval for a biopsy that would detect early signs of cancer and provide a more accurate diagnosis.
Ten weeks later, diagnostic testing showed that my dad had metastatic melanoma. He was referred to an oncology specialist, where again there was a delay in obtaining approval for further diagnostic testing — a positron emission tomography (PET) scan. Four weeks later, the scan showed his cancer had already spread into his adrenal gland, hips and lungs.
His team of doctors kept our spirits high and developed an immunotherapy treatment plan.
In January, I was thrilled to get dad transferred to the University of Southern California’s state-of-the-art Keck Hospital, offering specialty care and trials for metastatic melanoma. Every new treatment or scan, however, was met with an obstacle course of prior-authorization denials, appeals and ultimate approvals from my dad’s insurer.
I worked hand in hand with his team of specialists, who kept his insurance company on speed dial. I vividly remember spending three and a half hours one day in March trying to request appeals of its denial of an MRI and PET scan requested by his doctors.
Time is your most precious resource when it comes to cancer, and I was spending my time — the last few months of my father’s life — fighting with his insurance company.
Still, we held out hope as his doctors worked to get him into a clinical trial that would ensure he got immediate treatment, rather than the repeated delays from the prior-authorization process. But in early April, an MRI showed that his cancer had spread to his brain and he would no longer qualify for the clinical trial.
Dad’s doctor told us not to give up. We didn’t. But he was then referred to a radiation oncologist to continue with a different form of treatment — radiation therapy. The referral was denied. Appealed. Overturned. It was all too late. Dad passed away on April 27, 2022.
I wish Senate Bill 250 had been in place in time to help my father.