More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Wendell Potter

GET UPDATES FROM Wendell Potter
 

Keep Nataline's Spirit of Christmas Alive

Posted: 12/15/11 11:33 AM ET

It was four years ago today that I received a phone call from a Los Angeles TV reporter that would change my life, although I certainly didn't realize it at the time.

The reporter said she had been told that CIGNA, the big health insurer I worked for back then, was refusing to pay for a liver transplant for a 17-year-old girl, even though her doctors at UCLA believed it would save her life and her family's policy covered transplants.

I didn't pay much attention to the call at first because, as chief spokesman for the company, I had received many calls over the years from reporters seeking comment about benefit denials. We took them seriously, but usually didn't have to do more than tell the inquiring reporters we couldn't comment substantively because of patient confidentiality restrictions. If pressed, we'd email a statement to the reporter briefly noting that we covered procedures deemed medically necessary and that patients and their doctors could appeal a denial if they disagreed with a coverage decision.

More often than not, the reporter would either drop it or do a piece that was quickly forgotten and would largely go unnoticed outside of the local media market. I assumed the call from LA would be no different.

I couldn't have been more wrong.

Nataline Sarkisyan had been diagnosed with leukemia just weeks before her 14th birthday in 2004. Initial treatments were successful and the cancer went into remission. It came back two years later, however, and this time was more difficult to treat. She eventually had to have a bone marrow transplant, which CIGNA covered, but there were complications that damaged her liver. Her doctors felt, however, that she had better than a 60 percent chance of surviving five years or longer if she had a transplant.

Nataline's parents didn't realize it but, even though their policy covered transplants, her doctors had to get what is referred to in the insurance business as "prior approval" before going forward with the surgery. This means they essentially have to convince the insurer that the procedure is medically necessary -- and appropriate.

Anyone who believes that American doctors call the shots when it comes to providing medical care for their insured patients is sadly mistaken. Many folks, like Nataline's parents, are stunned to discover -- when they are helpless to do anything about it -- that insurance companies essentially have the power to make what amount to life and death decisions.

The doctors at UCLA hadn't clued Grigor and Hilda Sarkisyan in on the role that CIGNA would play in determining their daughter's fate. They hadn't felt the need to because they had performed many such transplants in the past and felt CIGNA would take their word for it -- along with the requisite documentation -- that Nataline was an appropriate candidate. A perfect match of a liver had been located, and Nataline was to be the lucky recipient.

Hilda was so confident Nataline would get the life-saving liver transplant that she arrived at the hospital wearing Christmas red to brighten Nataline's spirits. Christmas was Nataline's favorite holiday, and the transplant was going to be the best gift she would probably ever receive.

When Grigor and Hilda got to the hospital, however, the doctors took them aside and said they had had to cancel the surgery because CIGNA hadn't given them "clearance."

"What are you talking about?" Hilda told me later she asked the doctors. "What kind of clearance do you need?"

The doctors said they felt they could persuade CIGNA to give the needed "clearance" if they provided additional documentation about Nataline's health and suitability for the transplant. They were wrong. A CIGNA medical director 2,500 miles away said he did not agree with Nataline's doctors and felt the transplant would not be appropriate, that her chances of survival, in his opinion, were not as great as her treating physicians believed.

The Sarkisyans decided to try to shame CIGNA into covering the transplant and enlisted the support of the California Nurses Association and friends in the Los Angeles Armenian community. They were able to generate media interest in the case far beyond anything I had ever experienced before. That call from the LA TV reporter was the first of hundreds my staff and I would ultimately receive over the next few days.

The pressure worked. CIGNA agreed to cover the transplant at an estimated cost of $250,000 on December 20, 2007. Grigor and Hilda and their friends and families were overjoyed.

The Christmas joy was short-lived, however. So much time had passed since the original request was made that Nataline's health deteriorated to the point that she was no longer eligible for the transplant. She passed away just hours after CIGNA told the Sarkisyans it would pay for it. Five days before Christmas. When Nataline died, so did any desire I had to continue as a spokesman for the insurance industry. It certainly was not the only reason I left my job, but it was the final straw. I simply didn't have it in me to handle the PR around another case like Nataline's.

I was inspired to write about what happened four years ago when I received an email from a friend of the Sarkisyan family who I have come to know in recent years, Donna Smith, a spokesperson for National Nurses United, an advocacy group.

"On this anniversary," Donna wrote, "Nataline's mom will be as she has been for the past four years on December 20th -- quiet and alone with her thoughts and her memories.

"But in the fashion that has become Hilda Sarkisyan's style since then, she will turn tragedy into action again just two days prior to that anniversary. We can all help with that. We can use these moments to pause with the Sarkisyan family and remember why we all fight against corporate greed, and we can help."

Donna was writing to tell me that the Nataline Sarkisyan Foundation will be hosting a toy drive benefiting Children's Hospital Los Angeles this coming Sunday, December 18.

Hilda Sarkisyan was quoted in Donna's email as saying that, "Putting a smile on a child's little face who is suffering with all kinds of illnesses during this holiday season is what would make Nataline proud. With the support of our family, friends and community, we have collected hundreds of toys. We look forward to helping make hundreds of children smile."

If you can't attend the event in person but would like to donate a toy in Nataline's memory, go to natalinesarkisyan.com.

Thank you, Grigor and Hilda. And thank you, Nataline.

 
 
 

Follow Wendell Potter on Twitter: www.twitter.com/wendellpotter

It was four years ago today that I received a phone call from a Los Angeles TV reporter that would change my life, although I certainly didn't realize it at the time. The reporter said she had been t...
It was four years ago today that I received a phone call from a Los Angeles TV reporter that would change my life, although I certainly didn't realize it at the time. The reporter said she had been t...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 31
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
iridium53
Semper Fi
01:31 AM on 12/22/2011
Tea-Publicans like to talk a lot about "Death Panels."

With private insurance companies, they have nameless individuals, responsible for the company's profits and not accountable to any reasonable third party or rule set, making life and death decisions all the time.

CIGNA, and the unnamed individuals, decided their profits were more important than Nataline's life.

All so David Cordani and William Atwell can ride in better Gulfstreams.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NOTSUPERMOM
A waste of a perfectly good Yale education
10:15 PM on 12/15/2011
We all know that this sort of thing happens all the time, on both smaller and larger scale. And nothing comes of it. Those people are invisible, their deaths statistics. Mr. Potter, in your transformation from PR spinmeister to healthcare activist, you made Nataline's death meaningful. I don't celebrate Christmas, but your daily tribute to Nataline and others like her, through your ceaseless activism, is my idea of holiness. Keep spreading the message -- we're here and we want to know, both about Nataline's injustice and what we can do to change the system that allowed it.
02:10 PM on 12/15/2011
How much does saving the life of your loved one cost? How much? Anyone who's been to their doctor for any reason knows the insurance company is in charge regardless of what you and your doctor want to do. Anyone who says differently is lieing.
cdianek
An antibiotic-resistant micro-bio
01:46 PM on 12/15/2011
This story repeats itself daily, if not more often, in hospitals and other health care facilities across this country. It's so good to see one case get the national attention these heinous practices deserve.

Through all the hoopla and hyperbole leading up to the AHCA, its opponents would have the rest of us believe that rationed care and death panels were a sure certainty with its passage, when in truth both were already alive and well inside the walls of every insurer in this country. People didn't - and still don't - understand that if their health insurer rejected a brand name drug and approved its generic or over the counter equivalent, they became at that moment a victim of rationed care. Extrapolate that practice, and you have alive and functioning death panels, of which Nataline was a victim. Because these opponents have never seen it happen, they wrongly deduce it doesn't exist. And they are incorrect.

Measured, reasonable changes to the health care delivery in this country is what is needed to eliminate waste and fraud, and provide the best care for the most people. What we don't need is selective memory, willful ignorance, and head-in-the-sand hyperbole proclaiming the coming of what has been well in place for a very long time.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
01:43 PM on 12/15/2011
Single-payer systems would not cover this: an expensive operation that MIGHT extend a terminal patients life by five years. That's why Canada spends only 11% of GDP vs our 18%, they cover what is cost-effective.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ice4you
I hate ignorance Fox style
02:28 PM on 12/15/2011
Sorry but that is not true. I was born in a country with a universal helath care and this would have not even been an issue. She would have got her liver.
05:06 PM on 12/15/2011
Please cite evidence for your assertion. I'll cite mine: I am an American, but was living and working in Japan when I was diagnosed with leukemia. After an initial successful treatment by chemotherapy in a Japanese hospital, I relapsed a year later and had to have a bone marrow transplant. My Japanese doctors explained that the odds of my surviving 5 years after the transplant were less than 40%. The doctors and the national health insurance system never raised the scenario you claim, and a search for a donor began immediately. Being half Asian and half White, a suitable donor was not found in Japan, so the U.S. bone marrow bank was contacted, and a suitable American donor was located. My Japanese doctor collected the donor's stem cells himself and flew back to Japan and transplanted them to me the next day. Even though I benefitted from the American bone marrow network and facilities, the cost of the procedure under the Japanese single-payer system was 1/6 of what it would have cost had I been in the U.S. 3 years later, I'm back in the U.S., and while my after-care medical team in the U.S. is superb, a quarterly visit for a routine blood test and consultation costs more through my employer-provided insurance than the $100 MRIs did in Japan.
01:38 PM on 12/15/2011
I remember this case. This is a straw man argument. There was NO medical evidence that the liver transplant would help this young girl. In fact, there was more evidence to support the fact that a liver transplant would be more harmful because in leukemia cases there are additional complications.

But here's the most significant thing that Potter will never tell you. Had there been national health care, this girl would have still never gotten the liver transplant. Governments are at least as callous as business if not more so. Witness the fact that the State of Oregon will not pay for Tarceva for stage IV Lung Cancer patients, but almost every private health insurance with a prescription drug benefit will cover most of the cost.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ice4you
I hate ignorance Fox style
02:32 PM on 12/15/2011
So you would not have ask Cigna to pay if she was your daughter? I come from a country with universal healthcare and this would not have even been an issue. We even send people all over the world if there is a hope for cure specially children.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Wendell Potter
Analyst at the Center for Public Integrity, author
03:35 PM on 12/15/2011
You might remember this case, but obviously not well. To say there was NO medical evidence that the transplant might save Nataline's life is simply not true. We will never know, of course, if she would still be alive today if she had received the transplant, but her surgeons believed there was a better than even chance she would be. We also will never know if she would have received the transplant if she had been a citizen of Canada or France or even if she had been enrolled in a nonprofit plan like Kaiser Permanente. What we do know is that an executive at a for-profit insurer made the decision not to cover it.
07:14 PM on 12/15/2011
There is no evidence-based medicine protocol that calls for a liver transplant in a circumstance similar to Natalie's. While it is a heartbreaking situation, there has to be some responsibility to explore treatments that show some evidence of actually working. Given that AML is one of the complications of any liver transplant, any medical board would be justified in questioning the procedure would have any medical benefit whatsoever. Remember also that different doctors and hospitals indicated that they would not have performed a liver transplant on this young woman. There is a difference between medical procedures that have been demonstrated to have a benefit and just grasping at straws. I sympathize with her family, but this was not callous. And do you really think they would have done this in Great Britain? This is a country with the lowest cancer survival rate among all western nations because of all the tests and treatments they refuse to pay for because they are too expensive. NICE is far worse than any private insurer we have in the US today.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
01:36 PM on 12/15/2011
Whether or not a liver transplant for terminal patients is justified, I can't afford to pay for insurance that covers it, and ACA should not force me to buy it. __ It's obvious that medical science can come up with expensive treatments that extend our lives by a few months - but only by impoverishing us the rest of our lives. The average family policy is now $14K. That cost reduces standard of living, health and longevity. Modern medicine now has negative return, its cost is making us less healthy. That will continue until we pay for our own treatments, and choose what our insurance covers. __ Most of us don't have enough to live. Forcing us to paying to insure against a future liver transplant is inhumane.
02:51 PM on 12/15/2011
Apparently, you still work at Cigna
04:21 PM on 12/15/2011
I don't think you understand the ACA.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anne Rutherford
01:35 PM on 12/15/2011
Best practices are supposed to be the guidelines, but too frequently are not. I am currently on an independent appeal for $14K in medical bills for my husband. He needed surgery and was due to have it done on an outpatient basis. Two days before, his pulse and blood pressure crashed - all were within about 15 points of each other. Caregivers called 911, and EMT's came, plus advanced life support came. We took him from that hospital to one where surgery was scheduled, because it would have taken about a week to get new approvals and reschedule. WIthout the surgery, the problem would continue. Insurance company said, that's an outpatient procedure, no need for hospitalization. He was hospitalized for the infection, not the procedure. Two "reconsiderations" and denials later, I am on appeal through a state insurance law. If I get ruled against, it's medical bankruptcy for me! Death panel, thy name is BCBS, CIGNA, Aetna, and many others.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chaz
01:22 PM on 12/15/2011
More proof the Republican own the media.

The media especially Fox and Clear Channel (radio,rush,beck,hannit...) have convinced all Republicans that "Obama Care" has "death panels" (Sarah Palin) when in fact our current private health insurance system is the one with "death panels".

Keep watching Fox,listening to Clear Channel and electing R,conservatives,libertarians and especially baggers and keep getting screwed.

Single payer universal health care now!
HopeWFaith
We the People
12:49 PM on 12/15/2011
If you don't believe his article, watch this. You'll find out just how bad our healthcare decisions have become. Americans are actually going to foreign countries, just to get healthcare. They cannot afford it here in the US.

http://current.com/shows/vanguard/93534223_under-the-knife-abroad-vanguard-trailer.htm
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chaz
01:31 PM on 12/15/2011
HopeWFaith,

Great link. This is more proof the Republicans own the media. Can you imagine the world we would be living in if the media was just center and not extreme crazy right. Your link proves beyond any doubt the media is insane right.
Thanks very much for the link.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:46 PM on 12/15/2011
And why are the physicians not all up in arms ? Isn't it their job to save lives?
I very, very rarely see a doctor. Once in a decade maybe. Every time they prescribe me pills I do not need and did not ask for. They are completely under the control of the pharma and insurance corporations. Shame on them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cj7874
The truth will be drowned in a sea of irrevelance
03:21 PM on 12/15/2011
I completely agree. I always tell my doctors not to bother writing the prescriptions for the chemicals. When i ask for better alternative treatment for allergy other than steroids, they just shrug. Then charge me for the visit anyway.
photo
robadeaux
Your labels have expired....
12:41 PM on 12/15/2011
Doctors don't call the shots... but would have walked away from the girl and let her die, simply because the insurance carrier wouldn't spend any of the CEO's bonus... They wash their hands of the responsibility when they could do the operation anyway... kind of like Pontius Pilate.
How convenient.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:16 PM on 12/15/2011
Yeah, but then we have so many doctors on TV who make millions showing us our intestines and talking about "down there" and pushing some products on people, who cannot afford to go to the doctor.
I happened to watch an episode of Dr. Oz where he went to exploit poor people who were seeking help at a free clinic in LA. There were thousands and thousands who had not seen a doctor in years. He helped a few by humiliating them to expose themselves on TV and then went on to push his junk on people. And then he tried to convince people, that there is help for everybody. In which world is he living?
02:54 PM on 12/15/2011
Do you expect them to do every operation on every sick person that insurance companies won't cover.
photo
robadeaux
Your labels have expired....
05:13 PM on 12/15/2011
Not necessarily ever operation... not a face lift. But I only hold anyone to the standard I would hold for myself. And if I had it in my power to save that girl, I would. Insurance and anyone else who gets in the way be damned. But that's just me.
iridium53
Semper Fi
12:33 PM on 12/15/2011
Doctors rarely "call the shots."

For two years now my wife has suffered from an inflamatory bowel disease.
The doctor ordered medication.
The insurance company refused it - saying use the over the counter medication.
A two year argument that the medication ordered by the doctor, at $135 a month, projected for a three month period, was to expensive.

Last week she had emergency surgery because of the results of the refusal to allow the medication.

Four days in hospital. Surgery, etc.

Congress, Obama, et. al. have pushed us to be dependent upon for-profit healthcare insurance companies that are de facto death panels and whose penny-wise, pound-foolish policies are driving the cost of healthcare up.

Americans need to wake up to the damage for-profit healthcare insurers are doing to us and our economy. And, the damage that Tea-Publican ideology is doing to us all.

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/publications/reports/taming-the-deficit/
12:32 PM on 12/15/2011
This is why the "death panels" argument against government single-payer rings so hollow. People don't understand that commercial health insurance companies make these decisions not to cover costs all the time. Medicare actually does a much better, and more consistent, job of covering procedures ordered by docs.
05:42 PM on 12/15/2011
While working in Japan, I was asked to translate for an American woman who suffered a heart condition soon after moving to Japan and couldn't communicate with her Japanese doctors. She was on U.S. health insurance. The doctors were concerned about their experience with U.S.-insured patients in which their treatment recommendations were sometimes denied coverage because the devices or medications did not meet the U.S. insurer's approval. Sometimes, the denial came weeks laters. In the case I was called for, the Japanese doctors recommended a pacemaker be implanted immediately, but were worried that the woman's U.S. insurance company wouldn't approve the brand (which was a U.S.-made pacemaker). They weren't sure what to do for approval because this kind of thing never happens with Japanese patients. The woman had to wait till the next day to get confirmation from her U.S. insurer before the pacemaker could be implanted. The medication list had to be similarly pre-approved. The doctors privately asked me why we Americans would tolerate such a health care system. I ask myself the same question.