IHC policy called lopsided

A Utah lawmaker who supported legislation that lets doctors refuse to treat patients who won't agree to arbitrate disputes about care said he'll ask his fellow lawmakers to revisit the issue in the upcoming session.

"The way the law is right now, it's very lopsided in favor of IHC," said Sen. Parley Hellewell, R-Orem. "Arbitration is good and a lot of things should be done in arbitration — even medical arbitration — but when it's made mandatory and you have to sign it ahead of time, it's so lopsided it's not fair.

"I did vote for it. It was a mistake," said Hellewell, who said he'll sponsor legislation to eliminate the medical arbitration provisions passed last year.

Hellewell will be featured during a gathering sponsored by the Utah Citizen's Alliance on Thursday, Jan. 15, at 7 p.m. at 645 S. 200 East. The public is invited to discuss medical arbitration. For information, call Laree Miller at the alliance, 521-1749.

The law passed last session said that health-care providers can choose not to treat patients who will not sign agreements to settle any medical-care disputes through arbitration rather than malpractice lawsuits. It does not apply to those seeking emergency care.

Proponents of medical arbitration say it's a much faster, fairer, simpler way to resolve disputes. Some physicians were asking patients to sign the agreements long before lawmakers gave their stamp of approval.

But the issue didn't get much attention until Intermountain Health Care's physician group recently began asking all of its members' patients to sign agreements to seek arbitration. Those who balk need to find another physician, the agreement says. Once signed, the arbitration agreement applies to any care received throughout the IHC system. IHC officials said they're not asking people who are already undergoing a specific treatment course to sign an agreement relating to that care.

Both critics and fans of medical arbitration have been vocal, with "grass-roots" efforts springing up on both sides.

Hellewell said his as-yet-unfinished bill will "probably say you can do arbitration," but must be agreed to after a problem arises. Patients won't have to agree to arbitrate before problems with care occur, possibly with doctors they haven't even met yet.