Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Telehealth company 1M/3M SHARED limits among all prescribers? Insight?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Telehealth company 1M/3M SHARED limits among all prescribers? Insight?

    So I have been working for a relatively small (~30 providers: MD/PA/NP, most working part time) telehealth addiction/psych practice for a while and I noticed recently that the malpractice insurance (a claims-made group policy that renews annually and has 1M/3M limits) has SHARED limits among all providers (MD/PA/NP). This alarmed me as the standard has always been 1M/3M for EACH provider. I asked the higher ups and legal department who state that they spoke to their malpractice insurance adviser (broker?) and they stated that although 1M/3M limits for each provider are the standard in traditional groups/hospital, the risk for large settlements or judgments in telemedicine is lower than traditional spaces and that this 1M/3M with shared limits is the standard for telemedicine. They state they will continue to revisit these limits and the policy as the company grows.

    What does everyone think of this? Is this common in telehealth-only practices? Anything I am overlooking?

    I should note that although this is concerning to me, I am not worried as a I have my own 1M/6M personal policy, however, I want to make sure my colleagues are adequately covered. Aside from this issue the company has been fantastic and I truly love working for them.

  • #2
    I would keep the individual policy.
    Psych is not a high risk field, but sharing the limit across more than one person seems dangerous.

    Comment


    • #3
      Shared meaning per claim? Are you actually sharing the patient care? Or supervising midlevel

      Comment


      • #4
        0% chance I’d agree to this. What happens if three other providers settle or lose cases for $1 million each during a year? Are you then left bare with no coverage?

        Comment


        • #5
          The whole point of insurance is to protect risk, whether it is not as common or not, is irrelevant.

          Comment


          • #6
            Thank you everyone for your comments. Just reinforces how this is not adequate coverage. Since I have my own individual policy with adequate limits (1M/6M), is there anything else that I am missing that could potentially cause me problems down the road (granted I maintain this individual policy).

            Also any advice on how to bring up the fact that this is not adequate coverage to my employer? Even if I am covered I want my colleagues to be covered adequately as well (and many might not have the knowledge to look into these things and make sure that things are being taken care of properly). After mentioning my concerns to my employer they essentially said that their external counsel feels this is adequate.

            Comment

            Working...
            X