Sen. Grooms introduced SB 359 which would prohibit an insurer from requiring an insured to obtain medicine via mail order or the Internet. It also prohibits them from charging a higher co-pay or deductible for insureds who don’t obtain medicine via mail order or the Internet.
The pharmaceutical market is so jacked up, I don’t know what the right policy is here. On the one hand, it’s rational for an insurer to only pay market prices; and if the same product is available at much cheaper prices via different distribution channels, it makes sense to require the use of those distribution channels.
On the other hand, with pharmaceuticals, I know it’s not that simple.
I tried that “save money by getting your scripts via mail in 3-month bulk quantities!” scheme several years ago. Late shipments, shipments stolen from my mailbox (enjoy the Verapamil, dood!) the nature of my meds making for the possibility that we could change something and I get stuck having paid for a couple of month’s worth of something i can no longer use made it a losing proposition for me. Since I use insulin, I have concerns about how they keep that cool in the summer and from freezing in the winter.
I would support a law forbidding my insurer from requiring me to go mail order.
Until we get better regulation of these compounding/mega-pharmacies I think this might be a valid law.
http://www.newschannel9.com/template/inews_wire/wires.regional.tn/31e9764f-www.newschannel9.com.shtml
I’m on Medicare, and my other insurer is Humana. Last year they literally harassed me, wanting me to order my drugs through their pharmacy, and have delivery by mail. I finally told them to quit calling me, which, I’m glad to say, they did.
Then, wouldn’t you know it, my local pharmacy did not have one of my medications on hand–for THREE days!
So, the upshot is, I’d like to see all drug stores in the the state be required to carry ‘required’ drugs, like insulin, on hand at all times. Period.