Third-party payment in the United States
Construction Site
This article is work in progress and not yet part of the free encyclopedia IntactiWiki.
Third-party payment is the term used to refer to payments for medical services and procedures by a third-party, usually public or private medical or health insurance company or government program.
Third-party payment for non-therapeutic or unnecessary medical procedures encourages the performance of such services, simply so the attending physician can collect a fee.
Third-party payment for injurious medically-unnecessary, non-therapeutic child circumcision in the United States keeps the incidence of non-therapeutic circumcision of children higher than any other industrial nation.[1] The only party to benefit from such third-party payments is the receiving physician, or hospital.
The physicians that most commonly perform non-therapeutic infant circumcisions are obstetricians, pediatricians, and family doctors. They formed an agreement in 2007 to produce a new statement with the AAP as the lead. It was published in 2012 but was poorly received because of its evident omissions of facts. The AAP statement was not re-affirmed is accordance with AAP policy, so it expired on August 31, 2017. The AAP has not replaced the failed 2012 policy statement so it now has no official policy regarding male circumcision.
United States Medicaid is one of the largest third-party payers for medically-unnecessary, non-therapeutic circumcision.[2]
The American Academy of Pediatrics created its failed 2012 policy statement (expired in 2017) specifically to preserve and protect third party payment to medical doctors.
Contents
Third-party payment policy in English-speaking nations
Most English-speaking nations do not provide financial support for harmful, non-therapeutic circumcision:
- The United Kingdom created the National Health Service (NHS) in 1948. The NHS is not an insurance programme; it actually is a healthcare institution that provides a full range of medical services. It did not then and does not now provide non-therapeutic circumcision.[3] Dave et al. (2003) reported a prevalence of circumcision of 15.8% in the United Kingdom.[4]
- Afsari et al. (2002) reported New Zealand Health does not support circumcision without a medical indication.[5] The New Zealand Medical Association estimated in 2001 that about one percent of Caucasian boys in New Zealand were being circumcised, but nearly 100 percent of Tongan, Samoan, and Jewish boys are being circumcised.[6]
See also
External links
The Foreskin Industry
, Acroposthion. Retrieved 2 March 2020.
References
- ↑ Hill, George (April 2021).
Circumcision Incidence in Mississippi
, Research Gate. Retrieved 14 April 2021.
Quote:Depending on the accuracy of the assumptions, these figures may indicate that cessation of Medicaid payments and other third-party payments is a highly effective way to reduce the incidence of trauma of harmful non-therapeutic circumcision and to improve male health and well-being. (1) (PDF) Circumcision Incidence in Mississippi. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350799429_Circumcision_Incidence_in_Mississippi [accessed Apr 14 2021].
- ↑
Adler PW. Is it lawful to use Medicaid to pay for circumcision?. Journal of Law and Medicine. 2011; 19: 335-353. Retrieved 8 November 2019.
- ↑ (20 November 2018).
Circumcision in boys
, National Health Service. Retrieved 17 January 2025. - ↑ Dave SS, Fenton KA, Mercer CH, Erens B, Wellings K, Johnson AM. Male circumcision in Britain: findings from a national probability sample survey. Sex Trans Infect. December 2003; 79(6): 499-500. PMID. PMC. DOI. Retrieved 18 January 2025.
- ↑ Afsari, Mahnaz, Beasley, Spencer W., Moate, Kiki, Hecket, Karen. Attitudes of Pacific parents to circumcision of boys. Pac Health Dialog. March 2002; 9(1): 29-31. PMID. Retrieved 18 January 2025.
- ↑
Bone, Alistair (17 November 2001)."The First Cut", The Listener. Retrieved 24 January 2020.
