Showing posts with label Discovery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Discovery. Show all posts

Friday, June 11, 2021

Discovery Medical "Scheme" is not a Medical "Aid"

Whenever I visit my Cardiologist, I remember that he doesn't like medical "aids" because they don't actually help their customers, they are there to collect contributions and keep it for themselves. That's why it is called a Medical Scheme, not a Medical Aid. I always pay him on the spot. Then he stamps the invoice with a "paid" stamp. That's when the fun starts.
To submit the claim and for the MEMBER to be refunded, it has to have a "paid" stamp. You can't write "paid" and sign it. It has to be a stamp. Never mind if the doctor sent you the invoice via email because of the pandemic. Discovery simply won't believe you if you write "paid", it has to be a stamp. And the member has to sign the invoice. No signature, no pay. No stamp, and the doctor gets paid instead of the member. Go figure. Why would a member claim on behalf of the doctor? Oh, because honest doctors hate Discovery. You only find out AFTER the doctor has been paid, and by then it's too late. Screw the customer, when he calls to find out what is going on, just stonewall him and don't tell him why. Tell him to tell the doctor to contact Discovery. After much coaxing, they finally admit that the doctor can waste his time with a call centre, or email healthpartnerinfo@discovery.co.za.
When you send a claim to claims@discovery.co.za you are sending a document to a moron. You get an automated message giving you a reference number. That's it. If you follow up with a query, it is ignored. After all, the customer is not to be trusted. Even if he is simply requesting a refund from his own Medical Savings Account, which is, after all, his own money.
Discovery used to be a world-class medical aid, recommended by most medical professionals because they paid promptly, and they didn't get in the way between doctor and patient. They had innovative ideas like subsidising gym membership and rewarding people for looking after their health. Now they are just a medical SCHEME that is only interested in themselves. They deliberately make it difficult for the customer to claim: that's company policy. They try at all costs to avoid responsibility for anything going wrong, and prefer to deflect and deny, blaming the customer if at all possible, and if not, then making unreasonable demands on the doctor.
They are arrogant and inflexible, and no longer think they need to listen to their customers. It will be their downfall. They are worse than the government, and one day the government will take all their money and call it the NIH.

Update: I got a call from Nicole Deveroux, and asked her to follow up with an email. She left out most of what I asked, but sent me the email from noreply@discovery.co.za. Exactly what I expected from Discovery.
Update Tues 15 June: I sent through a R1600 claim for a visit to the Cardiologist. They paid R132.20 from the medical scheme, and R668.40 from my own money (MSA). Not bad since I pay them a piffling R2,241 per month. That means that R799.40 wasn't paid at all. I must just suck it up, even through R581.60 could have been paid to me from my own MSA. They just decided not to, because Discovery knows best how to spend my money. Just like the government.
Update Thurs 22 July: "Chronic" medication costs R527.31 per month. Discovery pays R110 out of their Chronic Benefit; I have to pay R417.31. Now you know why they have a glittering new steel and glass building in the expensive part of Sandton.

Monday, December 24, 2018

Discovery Health (still) doesn't understand maths or medication.


It would appear that the schemers at Discovery Health don't understand the basic concept of medication and maths. I don't know why the pharmaceutical industry packs all their tablets in multiples of 10 instead of 7, but that's not my problem. I go to the chemist every 4 weeks because two of the tablets, Cialis and Melodene, come in packs of 28, while the rest of the medication comes in packs of 30 or 10. So what Discovery wants me to do is collect my Chronic medication every 30 days (yellow dates), and the other medication every 28 days (red dates). Why can't I just get the medication every 4 weeks (green dates) when it is convenient to me?
I guess I'll just have to ask the chemist to give me 28 tablets instead of 30 tablets because the Discovery scheme is too stupid to allow for convenience. Let's see how this works in 2019. (see note below)
My other observation, apart from Discovery's superior snotty attitude (or just complete incomprehension of my query) is that they don't allow for tablets to be lost or dropped down the sink by accident. They don't cover that. They only cover 13 claims in a given year, even if that means that 13 x 28=364 days. I asked which day I should not take the medication (day 365), but they wouldn't give a straight answer. They behave more like a bank and less like a medical "aid" every day.
Update Thursday 27th December: I got a call from Discovery after they had read my blog. They have to monitor mow many tablets I have in order to comply with government regulations. I suggested that instead of refusing the claim at the chemist, they should be a little more proactive and send me a note warning me that I already have too much medication on hand and I should delay my next visit until I have used up the meds. That would require just a single extra visit to the chemist to get an extra supply of the 28 day medication. This cycle repeats every 420 days, so a warning would be appropriate at 420-30=390 days, or 420-60=330 days. In my case the refusal was issued at 373 days, which is both inconvenient and impractical.
Instead of getting multiples of 28 tablets and driving the pharmacist crazy, I will ask for only 20 tablets (instead of 30) every 140 days (420/3) because that's also 28*5 days, i.e. every 20 weeks (dark green dates). Let's see whether their computers explode.

Update Thursday 10th October: Their computers decided to dictate which days I can go to the Chemist. My previous visit on 12 September went without incident. When I arrived on Thursday 10th October, my prescription was rejected. Come back on 12th October, the computer said.

I sent a direct message with my account number and got the following response:

Update Friday 11th October: The "clarification" came in the form of a patronizing phone call where the Discovery drone repeated that I can collect my medication after 25 days, but I'm not allowed to collect it before 12 October. What kind of contradictory nonsense is that?
So I have decided to screw their computer system and to only collect 28 day supplies from now on. What the pharmacist does with the spare 2 tablets out of a box of 30 I don't know or care. He can ask Discovery, since they have all the answers. The pharmaceutical industry clearly hasn't thought this through either because if they had, we would get tablets in multiples of 7, not 10. I refuse to be dictated to by idiot bureaucrats at Discovery. That's why it's called a Medical Scheme, not a Medical Aid. Because they don't help, they just deduct money.

Update Tuesday 15th October: I got another "explanation" call from Discovery today. They blame the pharmacist. How convenient. But it gets more confusing. My prescription started on 30 September 11 years ago. So they check my medication over a "year" to make sure I didn't claim more than I should have. How then does a claim get rejected on 10 October, 10 days into the new year? Because they included it in the previous year, of course. The pharmacist allegedly said my 20 day supply was for 30 days, but when we checked it, the script was correct for 20 days. They can't tell me which script was wrong, and they can't fix it either. The pharmacist must fix it. But when I pointed out that if they reverse a claim older than 3 months and then resubmit it, the new claim will be rejected because it is older than 3 months. Catch 22. Basically they have no idea what is going on. Their new motto is: "The computer is always right. We use it to screw the customer."
Update Wednesday 16th October: I got a nice long explanatory email that is extremely short on specifics.
The Medicine and Related Substances Control Act 101 of 1965, has [sic] amended, together with the Good Pharmacy Practice (GPP) Guide published by the South African Pharmacy Council describes appropriate best practice in dispensing scheduled medicines to the public by pharmacists. In applying electronic restrictions on the quantity and frequency of medicines claimable, we are enforcing what we expect to happen routinely in a pharmacy in accordance with regulatory pharmacy and registered medicine use. In this way we also enforce pharmacy risk management on our claims and this serves to protect both members and the Scheme from any fraudulent activities.
The law states that not more than 1 month supply of a medication can be provided at a time – these are the “prescribed conditions” that take the interval between prescriptions into consideration as well as the maximum registered dose per days of supply. We electronically enforce monthly prescription refill rules to accommodate the legislation within a reasonable claiming period i.e. 23 or 26 days instead of 30 days.
The onus is still on the pharmacist to ensure that legal prescription refill intervals are enforced. If this is not done, we have additional quarterly and annual validation rules that ensure we do not reimburse in excess of routine allowable prescription filling rules.
For example, the pharmacist can submit 13 fills for 30 tablets in a 12-month cycle and our system will allow you to claim every 23 days instead of waiting for 30 days (4 fills in 90 days). Should there be a discrepancy in which the quantity submitted on a claims doesn’t match the number of days of therapy submitted on system, this might cause the system to reject the claim. However in those instances, the pharmacist can call our Propharmaceutical Benefit Management Department to get clarity on the rejection and check if a possible override can be done
If you have any more questions, please visit www.discovery.co.za to log a query or call us on 0860 99 88 77.
Personally, I find the implication that I am somehow trying to defraud the scheme to be insulting and offensive. Also, I still have not been told why a claim after 28 days was rejected ("our system will allow you to claim every 23 days instead of waiting for 30 days"), but the same claim after 30 days was not. They also haven't explained which rule I broke: the quarterly or annual rule. And for which period?
It looks to me like the "Customer Relations" people at Discovery have no idea what is going on and are resorting to the only explanations they know of. That's why the details are lacking and contradictory.
Update Thursday 31st October: I finally got an explanation that makes sense. The explanation of 16 October is just bullshit. What really happens is this:
  • An annual claim cycle is 392 days of supply. That's one calendar year plus 27 days. That's 14x28 = 392.
  • You can claim early (23 days or more) but they keep a running total of the period for which you claim. This is the "days of therapy" total. If you claim for 20 days, but the chemist lists it as 30 days, you're screwed.
  • If I claim every 28 days and claim for 20 days instead of 30 days every 5 months, then I get (4*30+20) = 140 over 5*28 = 140 days. I can do that twice in the year.
  • Then I will do another 4 months of 30 days, and end up with 8 extra tablets after 392 days. At which point their system will probably reject my next claim. We'll see.
Update Friday 3rd January 2020: I went to get my medication and for one of the tablets I was told to come back on 15th January. Same for one of my wife's tablets. All the rest are fine. How is that possible? Another new wrinkle in the "Medical Scheme". It's definitely not a medical "aid". On Twitter they promised to investigate if I sent my details. I sent my details and have heard nothing.
Update Thursday 9rd January 2020: On Wednesday the Social Media team phoned me and put me through to someone in Chronic Medication who had no idea what my query was about and handn't read this blog. I hung up. Then I got an email from discoveryhealthsurveys@discovery.co.za to find out if the query was resolved. I replied and said
The person who called me had no idea what my complaint was
https://donnedwards.openaccess.co.za/2018/12/discovery-health-doesnt-understand.html
So a lady from Mujeeb Bray's office (Head of Service) phoned to help. I gave her the short version and she phoned some other department and then phoned me back. I explained to her that their computer system was broken, but she tried to tell me what to do. Each "solution" she offered hasn't worked in the past. That's when I realised that she hadn't read this blog either. At that point I lost it. This is beyond ridiculous.


Update Monday 13th January 2020: I phoned Discovery's call centre on 0860 99 88 77 and told them I had run out of the tablets they rejected on 3rd January. What must I do? They contacted the notorious ProPBM department, and asked for the "block" to be lifted for my medication, and then we did the same thing for my wife. ProPBM is a "Pharmacy Benefit Management" system sold by McKesson in the USA. Their crappy system is the one that rejects my claims. What I am supposed to do is ask the pharmacy to call 0860 776 726 and speak to this department whenever a claim is rejected. Discovery lays the entire blame on the shoulders of the pharmacist. How convenient. Next time this happens I will be sending this long tirade to chronicqueries@discovery.co.za because the management of the ProPBM department is too scared of hearing from the public. I'm not surprised, given how pig-headed they are.

Saturday, October 01, 2016

Uber Customer Service: Don't call us, we'll call you.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but if I'm a customer who bumps into a problem, I expect the company who screwed up to at least listen. Of course Google doesn't do that, nor Microsoft, nor Apple. They are big, brash arrogant companies who I do business with only because I have to, and if I don't have to, I don't. That's why I no longer buy Apple products, and I tolerate Google because they pay me. If I could find a database program better than Access, I wouldn't use any Microsoft products either. Which brings me to the arrogance of Uber. I don't like to be stonewalled, especially when my personal safety is at stake.
I have been trying to speak to someone at Uber in South Africa for some time. In the case of their General Manager, it has been 4 weeks that he has been ignoring my tweets, and his company has refused to forward messages to him. During this time I have paid for 15 trips with their taxi service. I'm still concerned about my safety, and that of my wife. I call her during her ride to make sure that everything is OK.
On Friday I finally got a response (and an apology) from Alon Lits. It seems that the "speculative" ride receipts are a bit of a touchy issue.
So I DM'd my email address to Alon, and got the following:
Hi Donn
Thanks for getting back to me. Firstly, let me apologize for the delay in getting back to you.
Please let me know when it would be convenient for me to give you a call.
Best
Alon Lits
General Manager | Sub-Saharan Africa
alon@uber.com | uber.com

So I replied as follows:
Dear Alon
I’d prefer not to have a phone call right now, because I will just end up yelling. As a regular Uber customer I am dismayed and outraged at the way I have been treated by Uber. Do you think I would post this if I was a happy Uber customer?
http://donnedwards.openaccess.co.za/search/label/Uber
Yours sincerely
Donn

Later he sent the following:
Dear Donn
Thanks for sharing the various correspondence as well as the link to your blog. I do understand that you are an unhappy customer, hence my request to contact you to discuss your concerns.
I have tried to highlight some of the points raised in the email below but please know that the offer for a call still stands (at your convenience).
  • Drivers in Joburg have had access to an emergency number for well over a year. This emergency number is communicated to driver partners during training, via sms and email. If you have examples of drivers who are not aware of this number; please let me know so that I can arrange for the team to follow-up with the driver/s in question.
  • Furthermore, emails have been sent to drivers outlining safety tips - this includes the suggestion of opening the boot before commencing the trip. As above, if you have met with drivers who are unaware of this fact, please let me know so that we can follow-up directly.
  • As you are aware, we are currently testing an SOS button for drivers in Joburg (as a pilot). This SOS button is linked to a control room which will dispatch either security or medical assistance in the event of the emergency. If this pilot proves to be successful, it is our attention to make this functionality available across both the driver and rider base across SA.
  • As you mention, an SOS button is available in India. [For the past 18 months!] This button is linked to the local authorities. We don't believe that the same SOS button is a viable option for SA. Hence we are trialling the SOS button in the hope of delivering a more effective solution.
  • We have recently appointed Deon as the head of our Physical Security team. We are excited to appoint Deon after months of searching for a suitable candidate. Deon joins our head of Trust and Safety (David) who has been based in Joburg for over a year. We also have an incident response team which is based in the UK and support the entire EMEA region.
My heart breaks for the victims and their families and I cannot begin to imagine what they have been going through. I know that you have watched the ENCA interview. As you are aware we are limited in what we can say with regards to the investigation at the request of the authorities. I know this is frustrating to hear but anything that we say could compromise the investigation.
I appreciate your feedback and hope that I have addressed some of your concerns. Please let me know if this is not the case and I will gladly make the time for a call.
Have a good weekend.
Best
Alon

So the "incident response team" isn't based in California, but in the United Kingdom. I feel much better now. Instead of on the opposite end of the planet, it's only an 11 hour flight away, and two time zones. Thanks for that! I'm sure the rape victims will appreciate an international long distance call to say "I'm sorry, but it wasn't us".
My initial response was as follows:
Hi Alon
Thanks for taking the time to write. My main question remains unanswered: *why is there no phone number* that customers can call to get in contact with Uber? You want to contact me by phone, and have requested three times to do so. Well, now you know what it’s like. Don’t call me, I’ll call you.
I point to the case of Sally Polack, who has never been an Uber customer, and whose phone is an old Nokia that can only do SMS messages and calls, yet started getting Uber deductions from her credit card. Uber refused to be of any assistance in any way, either through my Twitter enquiries, or her email enquiries. She had the charges reversed by the bank, but the fraudster continues to be an Uber customer for all we know.
I point to the case where I was charged R3,100 for a ride than should have taken less than half an hour. If I had been unsuccessful in getting a reply via Twitter (it took you from 5th September to reply to my Twitter enquiries) I would have been stranded at the gym for several hours, or had to walk home.
Deon and David are “ghost” employees as far as I’m concerned, because they are uncontactable. As far as I know I have *never* been in touch with anyone in South Africa via email until now. I notice you haven’t denied that the “rapid response team” is currently based in California and would not have been able to help the rape victims. [I missed the UK reference]
I still think you really don’t “get” how frustrating it is to deal with a nameless, faceless drone that spouts corporate claptrap (if not downright lies) and *doesn’t listen* to its customers. Try reading the Cluetrain Manifesto. Get a clue.
Best wishes
Donn Edwards

Even Discovery Health is more willing to listen than these guys. And that's saying something, since they have an official "give the customer a big runaround" policy to save themselves money by denying patient benefits that they are obliged to pay. But that's another story.

Friday, July 17, 2015

Discovery Health wants a photo of my backside. Seriously? (Not any more)

Update noon 22 July: common sense and decency has prevailed and "the committee" has decided that they really don't need to see a photo of my arse after all. See Dr Martin Young's take on the matter here.

Discovery Health is a medical "aid" with some weird ideas. Once of them is that they claim to practice "evidence based" claims processing. This has some weird side effects, such as their latest debacle: they want a photo of my injured backside. First, some background.
On Friday 26th June I noticed that a lump on my left buttocks was getting swollen and painful. On Saturday it got worse and eventually I decided to go to my GP for treatment. By then their offices were closed and I was directed to the Olivedale Hospital instead. Their emergency doctor identified a peri-anal abscess and used a local anesthetic while she made an incision to drain the pus. I was then given antibiotics, pain killers and a dressing and told to come back on Monday for a checkup.
It was still painful on Monday and my GP took one look at the wound and said I needed to see a specialist surgeon at Olivedale. On Tuesday I saw the specialist surgeon who examined me and said I needed surgery as soon as possible and antibiotics on a drip. I was to report back to the Olivedale Hospital later that evening and he would operate the following morning, Wednesday 1st July.
The necessary hospital pre-authorization was obtained from Discovery Health, and I took a printout of the authorization number 17263206 with me. Because the surgeon also wanted to do a follow-up colonoscopy, I had to make a "co-paymnent" of R2750 when I got to the hospital. The pre-authorization email ended with a curious statement:
You can receive the care you need at home with Discovery HomeCare

Discovery HomeCare is a unique healthcare service that offers our members quality home-based care in the comfort of their home. Certain treatments can be rendered in a home environment, making it possible for Discovery HomeCare to provide quality nursing and care worker support in your home rather than in in a medical facility or institution. For more information on Discovery HomeCare visit our website www.discovery.co.za.

If you are interested in this service, please discuss this with your treating doctor. If your doctor is in favour of you receiving care at home for your condition, please email or call us on 0860 99 88 77.

We hope this information helps you prepare for your hospital stay.
When you read that does it sound like you need to obtain pre-authorization for the HomeCare? Does it imply that the doctor has to send Discovery Health a motivation letter and photos before the care commences? It is sufficiently vague as to not even specify the email address to contact. Even the website address is very generic and non-specific. I have provided a link to the relevant page. But I digress.
I was admitted on Tuesday evening and after some confusion put in a ward and given a drip. This contained antibiotics and pain killers. The surgeon and the anesthetist came to see me and asked me various questions to establish my past medical history and so on. On the Wednesday I was given a general anesthetic at around 11am and when I woke up they had drained the pus completely and I had a large hole in my backside with gauze in it to prevent the wound from closing. I continued to receive antibiotics and pain killers via the drip for the rest of Wednesday and Thursday morning.
The following day the dressing was changed (quite painful) and I was allowed to go home on Thursday afternoon. The surgeon introduced me to a private nurse who would come round to my home on Friday and on the weekend to dress the wound and make sure the infection did not come back. There is a 20% chance of the abscess recurring. I was quite keen to avoid going through this process again.
I couldn't sit down properly on Friday or Saturday, so work was out of the question. I was advised to take at least 2 weeks off work. Since I am self-employed this wasn't difficult to arrange. Those first few dressing changes were painful, as the gauze went quite deep into the wound, where there are plenty of nerve endings. I was given stuff to put in the bath, and had to soak the would before the nurse arrived. By Monday I was able to walk outside and on Tuesday I decided to try going to the gym to see if I could manage any exercise. The sweat made the wound itch, but apart from that I managed fairly well.
I was also able to catch up on some admin work so I sent in the motivation letter provided by the private nurse, as well as the first invoice, which I had paid. Big mistake, according to Discovery Health. I shouldn't have sent the motivation letter along with the claim to claims@discovery.co.za, which seemed to me to be the logical thing to do. What I was supposed to have done, according to two different Discovery officials I spoke to today, is to have phoned Discovery when I got home, and requested permission to be treated by the nurse, even though the surgeon had already told me that he required it to be done. Then I was supposed to obtain a motivation letter from the nurse and the surgeon and send them to preauthorisations@discovery.co.za and wait for a response.
"If your preauthorisation request does not need additional input, we will get back to you in 2 – 3 working days. For requests that need additional review, we will give you feedback in 3 – 5 working days."
Never mind that the wound would probably have gone septic by then. But then Discovery Health doesn't provide health care: they are only accountants and insurance providers who try to avoid paying for it whenever they can. They have the audacity to call themselves a medical "aid". Perhaps "Medical Scheme" is more accurate, but it doesn't identify who does the scheming.
Treatment continued from 3rd July to 13th July, and I submitted claims as I paid the invoices. Each time I sent the motivation letter along with the invoice and receipt to claims@discovery.co.za. And each time I received an automated notification that my claim was being processed. No mention that the motivation letter was being sent to the "wrong" address. After all, they only process claims, and I am supposed to know how their system works. I'm the customer who pays, remember?
Today (Friday 17th) I noticed that my claim refunds were being deducted from my Medical Savings Account, and not being taken from the much-vaunted Hospital Benefits, even though the hospital, anesthetist and surgeon were all paid from the Hospital Benefit. So I called to find out. That's when things got a bit bizarre.
Firstly, I was told that the claims department doesn't decide which claims should come from Hospital Benefits, only the pre-authorisation committee can do that, and they were still busy with their decision. They promised to escalate the request, since it was now 10 days since I had sent the letter. At 16h22 on Friday they sent me the following letter:
Dear Mr Edwards

Request for Wound Care for Mr Donn Edwards

Thank you for your recent communication to Discovery Health.

We have received your request for Wound Care from Sr Bev Lawrence. In order for us to assist you with this request. We require the following information:-
  • A detailed Letter of Motivation from the requesting Doctor indicating the clinical information of the wound.
  • A quote with the relevant nappi codes.
  • A recent colour photograph of the wound with a ruler indicating the size of the wound, patient details and date. Photographs need to be submitted in a JPEG, PDF, PNG , GIF, DOC , DOCX format to be viewed in colour.
  • The exact treatment dates.
Please send the information to us by:-

Fax: 011 539 2192

Email: preauthorisations@discovery.co.za

I trust all of the above is clear and to your satisfaction; should you have any further questions in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact Discovery Health.

For any queries send an email to clinicalhelp@discovery.co.za or visit www.discovery.co.za

Regards
Orleans Ledile Sindane

Discovery Health (Pty) Ltd
On behalf of Discovery Health Medical Scheme
Both the surgeon and the nurse had warned me they might try a stunt like this, and absolutely and point blank refused to be associated with any photographs in any way. I have yet to figure out how to take a selfie of my own backside. The letter refers to National Pharmaceutical Product Index (NAPPI) codes. These are a unique identifier for a given ethical, surgical or consumable (pharmaceutical) product, not for treatment procedures. Treatment procedures are identified by ICD codes, K61.3 and Z48.0. So presumably when they say "we have received your request" it means that have only received it, but not actually read it.
I still can't believe they could actually send a letter like that. Especially the bit where I am supposed to fax them a colour photograph or my backside. Seriously? So I replied as follows:
Dear Orleans Ledile Sindane
I fail to understand your request, late as it is. Specifically:
a)   The wound has almost completely healed, a photo is a little bit late, don’t you think?
b)   The wound area is close to my anus. You have no right to request a photo of a private area such as this.
c)   The photo cannot be taken by either the doctor or the nurse without them being prosecuted for privacy violations, since the injury is in my anal area. You would know this if you had bothered to read and comprehend Sr Lawrence’s letter (attached)
d)   Sr Lawrence provided both the ICD 10 codes and a quote. See attached letter.
e)   Sr Lawrence provided measurement information of the size of the wound in her letter.
f)   Treatment commenced on the day after I was discharged from Olivedale Hospital (i.e. it began on 3rd July 2015) and concluded on 13th July 2015. You already have these dates because I have sent all the invoices from Sr Lawrence to claims@discovery.co.za. I have attached them again anyway for your easy reference.

So if I understand matters correctly, you require a motivation letter from the surgeon at Olivedale. Have you informed the surgeon, or do you expect me to waste more time going to see him to obtain such a letter?

Kindly advise
Donn Edwards
This raises a number of ethical concerns. Just who exactly gets to look at sensitive photos of my backside? The fact that they are happy for me to email them means that they have no concerns whatsoever about security or privacy, since emails of this nature can be forwarded to anyone they like, and their is no audit trail. Also, the emails are not secure, and we know for a fact that both the GCHQ in the UK and the NSA in the USA have copies of all emails sent in the last few years, including ones in South Africa. I may as well just post the photos on Twitter. Twitter messages are just as confidential as email, i.e. not at all.
What gives a bunch of accountants the right to request photos of my body? If they have already paid for the surgeon to operate under general anesthetic, they know that there will be a post-operation wound. Why do they need a letter from the surgeon and the nurse, as well as photos? Why not the anesthetist as well? Don't they believe the doctor and/or the nurse?
Update Saturday 18th July 2015: I have been assured by Jonny Broomberg via Twitter that only qualified health care professionals will see the information. I find this difficult to believe, given the nature of email. I find it more disturbing that a "health professional" would even request such a photo in the first place. What kind of perverts are they?

Then there is the question of the way the refunds are being financed. They are "borrowing" money from my Medical Savings Account for the purpose, i.e. it isn't covered by the Medical Scheme benefits. The money in the MSA is my money. It doesn't belong to Discovery. Nice of them to pay it back to me instead of paying it out of my hospital care benefits. This is the first time I have been to hospital since 1986, so its not like the funds are depleted or anything.
Even Mr Broomberg seems to think this is OK. He's a member of the Social and Ethics Committee and CEO of Discovery Health

He obviously thinks that "post-operation wound care" is an "out of hospital treatment". I disagree, but them I'm only the paying customer, so I must be wrong.
Update Monday 20th July: I called Discovery Health and spoke to someone at the pre-authorizations call centre. She confirmed that email confidentiality cannot be guaranteed by Discovery Health, nor that only qualified healthcare practitioners would see the photograph.
Since she was unable to help me resolve the issue, I was put through to Danette, since Orleans Ledile Sindane wasn't available. Danette explained that the photograph requirement is non-negotiable, but isn't written in the Member Rules, so there is no way that I would be able know about this in advance. He also accused me of being irresponsible for not phoning Discovery after being discharged from hospital. When I pointed out that her insistence on a photograph was effectively blackmail, she wouldn't back down. I asked her to repeat her insistence in writing. Here is her letter:
Dear Mr Edwards

Thank you for contacting us.

Request for conservative wound care

As per the communication sent to you on 17 July 2015 we informed you of the information we require in order to review the conservative wound care from the Hospital Benefit.

We received confirmation from you and Sr Bev Lawrence that you are not willing to send colour photos to Discovery Health for review. We are therefore unable to confirm funding from the Hospital Benefit. The claims will be funded from your available Day-to-Day Benefit as per your chosen plan type and the Discovery Health Scheme and billing rules.

We make consistent and fair funding decisions in the interest of all Scheme members

We recognise that treating provider is in the best position to make medical decisions about your condition and treatment. In reaching this decision we have not questioned the diagnosis or the treatment recommended by the treating provider. As a healthcare funder, we decide on funding treatment to make sure the Scheme can cover claims now and in the future.

Our role is to make sure members of the Scheme enjoy access to quality healthcare in a way that remains affordable and sustainable. Some of the ways we achieve this is in our plan and benefit design, the creation and application of funding policies and clinical protocols that are developed using a rigorous, evidence-based decision-making process. This process also helps us make decisions about which procedures and treatment to exclude from cover.

If you have any more questions, please call us on 0860 99 88 77, email clinicalhelp@discovery.co.za or visit www.discovery.co.za

Regards
Danette Gerber

Discovery Health (Pty) Ltd
On behalf of Discovery Health Medical Scheme
That's a nice way of blackmailing me: no photo, no benefit. The red emphasis is mine.

Also, on Friday I asked the Discovery CEO whether he would be prepared to take the photo of my backside. He's ducking and diving and won't reply. He knows it's illegal and doesn't want to run the risk of losing his license and landing up in jail.
I also tweeted that I thought Discovery was blackmailing me. Their replies show their hypocrisy and lack of understanding of the nature of reality:

I proposed a different solution: I would come in to their offices and show the photograph directly to a qualified healthcare professional. They can't do that because the "Benefits Committee" meets electronically. So they have to have an electronic copy. There is no secure upload facility on their web site, and they admit that a fax copy isn't in colour, so I have to send it via email. This is how seriously they take the confidentiality of their medical information.
The Twitter PR guy seems to think its OK for me to bring the photo to their walk-in centre.
Update Tuesday 21st July: Last night Jonathan Broomberg emailed me and asked if it was OK if Discovery's team could talk to my surgeon and the nurse. I said this would be most welcome and supplied him with their numbers. It seems like sanity and common sense may yet prevail. I hope so.
In the meantime, my friend Dr Martin Young has written an insightful article on the matter for his own blog.
Update Wednesday 22nd July: Three weeks after the operation, and 2 weeks after submitting my claim for post-op care, it has taken the personal intervention of the CEO to get "the committee" to decide that they don't need to blackmail clients and insist on a photo if it offends medical and social ethics. They just phoned me to confirm that they will indeed cover my post-op care from my hospital benefits and not out of my own pocket.
To the trolls on Twitter who claim I made this all up to defraud my medical aid: I am waiting for the day you get a very painful infection and have to hear your medical aid administrators tell you that they won't cover it. Then all of a sudden you'll think a little differently about what should be covered or not.
And in any case, I had to pay the money from my own account and then wait for a refund. I made nothing out of it financially. The nurse provided a medical service and didn't prolong the treatment for a day longer than necessary. She charged Medical Aid rates and didn't charge for the plasters and gauze, because it was already supplied by the hospital pharmacy.
The nature and position of the wound was such that I can't see it or treat it myself, not even with a mirror. And it was too painful to allow an amateur to touch it. That's why I had to have a general anesthetic for the initial operation. DUH!

Discovery's risk analysis people are clever enough to realize that providing post-op care by a professional is better and cheaper than (a) keeping the patient in hospital for 2 extra weeks and (b) forcing the patient to do the dressing himself (assuming he can actually reach the injured part) and running the risk of the wound going septic. There is in any case a 20% chance of the abscess returning. Halving those odds will reduce their hospital costs considerably. Prevention is better than cure in many ways.
When the smug Discovery PR person phoned to explain their procedures and pointed out that I should have known in advance that I was supposed to obtain pre-authorization or post-op care, I said to him that I thought he was exactly right, and that that made me feel much better about his company and I was most likely to recommend them to all my friends because they had proved that they were right and I was wrong. I don't think he got the sarcasm.
Neither their web site nor their emailed letter to me said anything about obtaining permission or authorization in advance. It still doesn't. It makes general hints and relies on the customer to call and find out. Why they can't be open and upfront in advance I don't know. Perhaps a paragraph like this would help:
We want you to get better after your operation, so before you leave the hospital you need to obtain permission from us to get better. In order for us to grant such permission, we'll need a quote from the nurse, and a motivation letter from the referring doctor, together with a detailed description of the wound, photos of the wound with an electronic date included and a ruler or tape measure blocking any private areas, a list of all the plasters, ointments, medication and pharmaceutical products to be consumed.

We'd prefer not to have to pay for this so if you can treat the wound yourself, tough luck and we hope you get better on your own. Remember that without prior approval for such treatment, which we don't see as in any way related to your recent stay in hospital, you will have to pay the bill yourself out of your own funds.

We think you are just using your hospital stay to milk us of all your monthly contributions and make a profit at our expense. Sorry, buster, we make the profit and keep 15% of your money no matter what else happens.

The problem is that companies and institutions set up systems with their own (evil) logic and rules. The people inside those organisations don't see how these rules clash with reality. They'll ask for a photo taken two weeks ago without even thinking about the laws of physics. They'll instruct a nurse to do something unethical for which she could go to jail, and then not understand why she refuses.
Most of us just capitulate because it's too much hassle to kick up a fuss. I kicked up this fuss because my butt was on the line. Hopefully now others will have a more compassionate experience. I'm just glad it wasn't my previous medical "aid". I left them in 1999.