HWZ Forums

Login Register FAQ Mark Forums Read

Downgraded my prushield private hospital plan

Like Tree2Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 22-11-2020, 10:25 AM   #1
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
yyhwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,772
Downgraded my prushield private hospital plan

This year the premium has increased to over 1.5 k inclusive of co pay rider, enough is enough. Downgraded it to government plan only, if premium continue to rise, may terminate the co pay rider too.

Personally think this perpetual ultra inflation on medical insurance premium is not going to last. Eventually people will realize that the premium is too expensive and start to seek a way out of this.
yyhwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 11:09 AM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 52
This year the premium has increased to over 1.5 k inclusive of co pay rider, enough is enough. Downgraded it to government plan only, if premium continue to rise, may terminate the co pay rider too.

Personally think this perpetual ultra inflation on medical insurance premium is not going to last. Eventually people will realize that the premium is too expensive and start to seek a way out of this.
Why can't they do it like car insurance? Maybe make the premium go up just for those who have history of claims?

This feels like they are just kicking the can down the road. The latest across the board price hike is just to pay for the current excessive claims and it burdens everyone. By the time I reach the age where hospitalisation coverage is crucial, the hikes might have made these plans unaffordable for me and I wouldn't get to utilise the hospitalisation plan like the earlier generations. Feels like the younger folks are just funding the older gen's health care now with no guarantee that they will have the same hospital coverage when they are older.
Rayleigh1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 11:16 AM   #3
High Supremacy Member
 
reddevil0728's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 37,720
Why can't they do it like car insurance? Maybe make the premium go up just for those who have history of claims?

This feels like they are just kicking the can down the road. The latest across the board price hike is just to pay for the current excessive claims and it burdens everyone. By the time I reach the age where hospitalisation coverage is crucial, the hikes might have made these plans unaffordable for me and I wouldn't get to utilise the hospitalisation plan like the earlier generations. Feels like the younger folks are just funding the older gen's health care now with no guarantee that they will have the same hospital coverage when they are older.
I think prudential is by your personal claims experience.

but the diff between car insurance and hospitalisation is.. for car insurance, sometimes is a choice about whether you want to be careful when driving or not. whereas for hospitalisation is a no choice thing.

and if those people who really need to be hospitalised have their premium increase year after year, then sooner or later they wouldn't be able to afford the coverage at all and end up you got another problem again
__________________
Whatever floats your boat...
reddevil0728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 11:20 AM   #4
SBC
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,993
This co-payment is a killer. Many medical providers will take adv & adjust their prices almost every year.
SBC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 11:24 AM   #5
High Supremacy Member
 
reddevil0728's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 37,720
This co-payment is a killer. Many medical providers will take adv & adjust their prices almost every year.
you referring to the rider?
__________________
Whatever floats your boat...
reddevil0728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 11:34 AM   #6
Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 8,994
https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/m...d-4868488.html

Linked to a 2014 thread - $200k private hospital operation to remove benign tumour.

Thats why from the start me and my family only took the govt plan (with rider) and not the private plan.

In the end, all the premiums you pay for private shield plan are used to pay the claims of those who are overconsuming medical services. Like in the thread above, the cost of taking out benign tumour in private hospital came up to $200k all paid by insurance which is like double govt hospital. That post was in 2014. Might be $300k now.
limster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 11:35 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 52
I think prudential is by your personal claims experience.

but the diff between car insurance and hospitalisation is.. for car insurance, sometimes is a choice about whether you want to be careful when driving or not. whereas for hospitalisation is a no choice thing.

and if those people who really need to be hospitalised have their premium increase year after year, then sooner or later they wouldn't be able to afford the coverage at all and end up you got another problem again
At the same time, it doesnt feel very fair if the younger folks are sharing the burden for premiums increase but they cant even get the same coverage they helped sustain for older folks previously.

Hope someone is looking into excessive consumption/charging in hospitals as well.
Rayleigh1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 11:42 AM   #8
High Supremacy Member
 
reddevil0728's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 37,720
https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/m...d-4868488.html

Linked to a 2014 thread - $200k private hospital operation to remove benign tumour.

Thats why from the start me and my family only took the govt plan (with rider) and not the private plan.

In the end, all the premiums you pay for private shield plan are used to pay the claims of those who are overconsuming medical services. Like in the thread above, the cost of taking out benign tumour in private hospital came up to $200k all paid by insurance which is like double govt hospital. That post was in 2014. Might be $300k now.
Actually government A class ward good enough already. you are a private patient in a government setting and you got the entire government medical expertise behind you.

for private, really is dependent on that particular doctor.

At the same time, it doesnt feel very fair if the younger folks are sharing the burden for premiums increase but they cant even get the same coverage they helped sustain for older folks previously.

Hope someone is looking into excessive consumption/charging in hospitals as well.
that's the nature of insurance sadly.

Alternatively, we can become like those countries with state covered healthcare like U.K.

Instead of every member paying a bit for their own healthcare, end up only tax payers pay for it and pay a lot more in taxes.
__________________
Whatever floats your boat...
reddevil0728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 11:47 AM   #9
Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 8,994
I think prudential is by your personal claims experience.

but the diff between car insurance and hospitalisation is.. for car insurance, sometimes is a choice about whether you want to be careful when driving or not. whereas for hospitalisation is a no choice thing.

and if those people who really need to be hospitalised have their premium increase year after year, then sooner or later they wouldn't be able to afford the coverage at all and end up you got another problem again

Many claim they sign up for private plan because 'major /critical illness', they want want the 'best doctor' which to them is only in private.

If that's the case, then for 'minor' illness, they should save money and go to govt hospital instead. But once they are on a buffet style private plan, there is no incentive to use govt hospital for minor illness. To give a simple example - removing tonsils or appendix. Anyone govt hospital can do, you don't need top surgeon to operate and charge you 50k (for example) but private plan, you can choose a 'top surgeon' to remove your tonsils.

I think NTUC insurance provides cash benefit for those in private shield plan who decide to go to Govt instead. So maybe they should increase this 'cash benefit' which is in a sense a 'no (private) claim bonus'.

Alternatively, there could be a hybrid plan where private coverage is only available for a scheduled list of specified critical illness. Everything else like remove tonsils, you have to go to govt hospital. If you remove tonsils, can't enjoy the private hospital lobster dinner anyway
limster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 11:49 AM   #10
High Supremacy Member
 
reddevil0728's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 37,720
Many claim they sign up for private plan because 'major /critical illness', they want want the 'best doctor' which to them is only in private.

If that's the case, then for 'minor' illness, they should save money and go to govt hospital instead. But once they are on a buffet style private plan, there is no incentive to use govt hospital for minor illness. To give a simple example - removing tonsils or appendix. Anyone govt hospital can do, you don't need top surgeon to operate and charge you 50k (for example) but private plan, you can choose a 'top surgeon' to remove your tonsils.

I think NTUC insurance provides cash benefit for those in private shield plan who decide to go to Govt instead. So maybe they should increase this 'cash benefit' which is in a sense a 'no (private) claim bonus'.

Alternatively, there could be a hybrid plan where private coverage is only available for a scheduled list of specified critical illness. Everything else like remove tonsils, you have to go to govt hospital. If you remove tonsils, can't enjoy the private hospital lobster dinner anyway

Don't understand why is it automatic that the "best" doctors are in private. It's more like those more entrepreneurial doctors are in private. not necessary the best.

The thing about private is you are dependent on 1 doctor. whereas in government, in A class ward, if the senior con cannot figure out, he can bring in the entire "army".

I think some ppl feel that if go government = those junior mo treat etc. maybe that's the case for those subsidies patient. but for a class ward, i believe on senior con or con will treat.

I think if only certain condition can go private, then all the private doctors will be complaining already.
__________________
Whatever floats your boat...
reddevil0728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 12:12 PM   #11
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,161
I think NTUC insurance provides cash benefit for those in private shield plan who decide to go to Govt instead.
That's a fairly common feature in riders.

So maybe they should increase this 'cash benefit' which is in a sense a 'no (private) claim bonus'.
Who would pay for higher cash benefits? Answer: policyholders, through their premiums (with the carrier's overheads added).

However, I think there's something the insurance carriers could try in their private plans: add a proration factor if you stay in anything above a 4 bedded ward in a private hospital. The 2 bedded and single bedded wards are more expensive, and those patients who want a private room can still get one at a public hospital. In other words, policyholders could decide whether they want 3 roommates at Mt. Elizabeth or zero roommates (except a spouse or other loved one who can stay in the room on the sofa) at SGH. (Interesting!)

Alternatively, there could be a hybrid plan where private coverage is only available for a scheduled list of specified critical illness. Everything else like remove tonsils, you have to go to govt hospital. If you remove tonsils, can't enjoy the private hospital lobster dinner anyway
I don't think this'll work. The major problem is that patients don't always, or even often, know what ails them. There's already a lot of financial risk in getting care from the private medical sector. "Good news: the tumor is benign; bad news: your private hospital surgery will have a 60% proration factor applied" doesn't work in practice.

Another thing an insurance carrier might try is an enhanced "medical concierge" service. What that'd mean is that you always seek care from the public medical system, but there are a couple exceptions via the concierge:

1. "Diagnosis Protection": For a certain list of ailments, you can get a medical review and second opinion from a private panel specialist. This'd be limited to one per policy year, for example.

2. "Queuing Protection": If your carrier's medical concierge cannot get you an appointment anywhere in the public system within XX days, you can tap into the private medical system (including the lowest private hospital ward class).

I don't think these particular fears about the public system are particularly rational, but a lot of people have them. OK then, an insurance carrier could innovate to provide specific assurances in these narrow areas. In practice they wouldn't cost very much.

Last edited by BBCWatcher; 22-11-2020 at 12:15 PM..
BBCWatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 12:15 PM   #12
Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 7,974
If Iím not wrong, the seniority of the doctor on government hospitals attending to ur case is dependent on the seriousness of ur illness

So if it is a major ops, I think itís not junior doctors but if u r there for consultation only or smth, the ones at attending to consultation r usually junior doc

It doesnít depend on if u r a class or not a class? But I heard A class can specify a specific doctor. Not quite sure
~Dragonite~ likes this.
Kaypohji is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 12:23 PM   #13
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,161
In the public hospitals patients in A and B1 ward classes can choose their doctors, subject to their schedule availability and hospital privileges of course. In other ward classes the hospitals choose for them.

This distinction really doesn't have much to do with skills, specialization, and how they're applied. All the public hospital doctors see patients in all ward classes. It's really about a patient valuing a particular relationship for reasons like bedside manners.

"Ward class" is usually the ward you stay in, but it doesn't have to be. You might be a lucky B2 ward class patient staying in B1 or even A ward because B2 ward happens to be full when you check in. In that situation you get the lower occupancy room (and air conditioning), but you don't get to pick your doctor(s). The hospital can still move you to B2 ward when a bed frees up.

In fact, there are occasions when even a public hospital C ward class patient gets to stay in a private hospital. Public hospitals rent space from private hospitals from time to time, when they need the space.

Occasionally the reverse occurs: you want public hospital A ward, and you can pay for it (and the hospital recognizes that fact), but there are no spare beds in A ward. Then you end up in B1 ward, let's suppose. For the time you're in B1 ward you'll be charged B1 ward rates. However, there are restrictions against voluntary ward downgrades. If for example you start off in A ward but decide, no, you really want to be in B2 ward, you can move to B2 ward if you insist...but you'll be charged A ward rates.

Last edited by BBCWatcher; 22-11-2020 at 12:28 PM..
BBCWatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 12:26 PM   #14
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
yyhwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,772
A class is specific doctor plus one bed room, but no cashback from insurance company.
Surgeons assigned are subjected to availability, not dependent on factors like ward class. Your chance of recovering fully not dependent on ward class too.

If Iím not wrong, the seniority of the doctor on government hospitals attending to ur case is dependent on the seriousness of ur illness

So if it is a major ops, I think itís not junior doctors but if u r there for consultation only or smth, the ones at attending to consultation r usually junior doc

It doesnít depend on if u r a class or not a class? But I heard A class can specify a specific doctor. Not quite sure
yyhwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2020, 01:02 PM   #15
Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 8,994
Who would pay for higher cash benefits? Answer: policyholders, through their premiums (with the carrier's overheads added).
Currently insurers are giving cashback for those who choose a 'lower class' of ward (eg: private -> govt). They are not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts but because they are saving money.

The cash benefits they are giving out are only a fraction of the savings they get when someone uses govt hospital instead of a private hospital. The more people they get to downgrade their ward, the more they save.

I assume that those that sign with private will never want to downgrade if they are facing a major illness because of the perception that private is better.

But for routine operations like remove tonsils and remove appendix, if they increased the cash benefit, I'm sure some won't mind downgrading their hospital ward which will result it greater net savings rather than increased premiums. There is really no reason to use a more expensive private hospital for 'routine' medical procedures.
limster is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Terms of Service for more information.


Thread Tools

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On