|
|
NEWS
RECALLS
COMPLAINT FORM
SCAM ALERTS
RESOURCES
Small Claims Guide Class Actions Lemon Laws FAQ Newsletters |
Share |
| Automotive Education Employment Electronics Family Finance Health Homeowners Insurance Pets Shopping Travel |
|
|
|
![]() |
Suit Seeks Medicare Coverage of 'Off-Label' DrugsSeniors going without needed medication, suit charges |
|||||||||||||
|
November 26, 2007
“Too many people are being forced to go without needed medications because of the Bush Administration’s misreading of the Medicare Part D statute,” said Robert M. Hayes, president of the Medicare Rights Center, a national consumer advocacy group. “The administration is defying the intent of Congress, and keeping people from the medicine they need by its refusal to allow coverage of prescriptions that patients’ doctors insist are needed.” Medicare Part D is outpatient prescription drug coverage only available through private insurance companies. According to the suit filed in federal district court in Manhattan, “Many people with Medicare were actually better off before the drug benefit was introduced” in 2006. The suit attacks the administration’s regulations that bar private drug plans from covering medically necessary prescriptions that are not approved for a specific use by the Food and Drug Administration. The complaint notes that in the United States over 20 percent of prescriptions written for the 500 most commonly used drugs are for off-label uses. “Without coverage of off-label prescriptions,” the suits alleges, “people face increased suffering. And Medicare often bears increased costs because of the need for more drastic care, such as emergency hospitalizations, that results when people do not receive the medicines that they need.” The plaintiff, a 66-year-old widow, was first diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 1971. She had a recurrence in 1987, and has been taking Cetrotide, a commonly prescribed medication, since 1999 to treat and limit her cancer. Prior to January 2006, the drug was covered by the plaintiff’s employer’s insurance plan. After the implementation of the Medicare drug benefit, her retiree drug coverage was moved to a Medicare Part D private plan, and within weeks the plan denied coverage of Cetrotide, stating that the drug was “not covered under Medicare Part D.” The case brings three counts against the defendant, Health and Human Services Secretary Michael O. Leavitt:
The suit seeks reimbursement of the more than $100,000 the plaintiff has paid out of pocket to date. Report Your Experience
|
|||||||||||||
Advertisement
|
|
Custom Search
|
||||
|
AUTOMOTIVE Dealers Manufacturers Service Extended Warranties Lemon Laws Recalls Tires Transporters FAMILY Aging Children, Parenting Recalls Dating Education Entertainment Pets Weddings |
FINANCE Annuities Banks Credit Cards Debt Collection Debt Counseling Insurance Investing Loans Mortgages Payday Loans Student Loans Tax Prep HEALTH Doctors Drugs, Pharmacies Health Clubs Hearing Care Hospitals Nursing Homes Nutrition, Diets Vision Care Weight Loss |
HOUSE & HOME Appliances Cookware Furniture Home Improvements Lawn & Garden Movers Pools & Spas Realtors, Rental Agents Recalls Utilities ELECTRONICS Cable TV/DBS Cameras Cell Phones Computers Home Electronics Internet Access Local Phone Service Long Distance VoIP |
SHOPPING In-Home Online Retail Stores Sporting Goods Supermarkets Telemarketers TRAVEL Airlines Bus Lines Car Rental Cruises Hotels Travel Agents Trains RESOURCES Class Actions Complaint Form Small Claims Guide Lemon Laws |
CONSUMER NEWS Latest News Automotive Telecom Financial Health Homeowners Scams Seniors Travel More ... RECALLS Automotive Children's Products Drugs Food Household Products Sporting Goods ABOUT US FAQ Privacy Policy Advertise With Us Newsroom Syndication Terms of Use |
Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use
Copyright © 2003-2009 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. All Rights Reserved. The contents of this site may not be republished, reprinted, rewritten or recirculated without written permission. |
|