Alright team, I’m bringing the opposite opinion to this thread. Bring your pitchforks.
Two things :
-
Hanlon’s razor. Consultants are not mensa candidates. They are ordinary people who sometimes do a shit job.
-
Complexity. Each state has its own wildly complex eligibility and availability rules. Each insurer within each state, equally so. As much as this article shits on Deloitte for having 20+ state contracts, that doesn’t mean 1 common platform / common solution. People within the fediverse - being somewhat more tech inclined - should have some empathy for this
I hate Deloitte as much as the next guy, but why no hatred for the politicians (or special interest groups comprised of insurers) that wrote opaque state-based legislation? Speaking of insurers, why no hate for them? Whether private or public - they literally have a vested interest in denying coverage…
If we are going to throw stones, let’s find the right villain.
The complexity is the point. The less people willing or able to jump through all the necessary hoops to receive their healthcare through the system, the less money they have to pay out. Adding more complexity in the form of yet another opaque approval system adds many more hoops to get through, which is actually the entire purpose of that system. Deloitte knew this going in.
Yes, I have sympathy for the individuals who have to build this system, however I have absolutely zero sympathy for the company that put it into practice.
Yes, the medicare system is needlessly complex, however Deloitte decided to replace manpower with cheaper automation which had the side effect of saving them work by increasing rejections.
The world also happens to be complex. Enough so that both things can be true.
