美国私人医疗保险合同中的医疗服务提供者除外条款

Michael M Costello
{"title":"美国私人医疗保险合同中的医疗服务提供者除外条款","authors":"Michael M Costello","doi":"10.14738/abr.124.16773","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Two national newspaper articles published in the Fall of 2018 addressed the issue of private health insurance provider contracts that act to exclude specific health systems from health plan networks. Inevitably, the question arises: Are such agreements illegal restraints of trade actionable under federal and state antitrust laws? A long-standing tenet of antifrust law is that it exists to protect competition not competitors. Excluding providers may be a legitimate outgrowth of the contracting process and therefore legal. However, an examination of the contracting process may reveal anticompetitive intent to restrain trade. The specific facts surrounding provider exclusion must be analyzed carefully in an effort to determine if there is illegal restraint of trade.","PeriodicalId":72277,"journal":{"name":"Archives of business research","volume":"7 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Provider Exclusion in US Private Health Insurance Contract\",\"authors\":\"Michael M Costello\",\"doi\":\"10.14738/abr.124.16773\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Two national newspaper articles published in the Fall of 2018 addressed the issue of private health insurance provider contracts that act to exclude specific health systems from health plan networks. Inevitably, the question arises: Are such agreements illegal restraints of trade actionable under federal and state antitrust laws? A long-standing tenet of antifrust law is that it exists to protect competition not competitors. Excluding providers may be a legitimate outgrowth of the contracting process and therefore legal. However, an examination of the contracting process may reveal anticompetitive intent to restrain trade. The specific facts surrounding provider exclusion must be analyzed carefully in an effort to determine if there is illegal restraint of trade.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72277,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of business research\",\"volume\":\"7 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of business research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.124.16773\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of business research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.124.16773","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2018 年秋季,全国性报纸发表了两篇文章,探讨了私人医疗保险提供商合同将特定医疗系统排除在医疗计划网络之外的问题。问题不可避免地产生了:根据联邦和各州的反垄断法,此类协议是否属于非法限制贸易行为?反垄断法的一个长期信条是,它的存在是为了保护竞争而不是竞争对手。将提供商排除在外可能是缔约过程的合法产物,因此是合法的。然而,对签约过程的审查可能会发现限制贸易的反竞争意图。必须仔细分析与排除医疗服务提供者有关的具体事实,以确定是否存在非法限制贸易的行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Provider Exclusion in US Private Health Insurance Contract
Two national newspaper articles published in the Fall of 2018 addressed the issue of private health insurance provider contracts that act to exclude specific health systems from health plan networks. Inevitably, the question arises: Are such agreements illegal restraints of trade actionable under federal and state antitrust laws? A long-standing tenet of antifrust law is that it exists to protect competition not competitors. Excluding providers may be a legitimate outgrowth of the contracting process and therefore legal. However, an examination of the contracting process may reveal anticompetitive intent to restrain trade. The specific facts surrounding provider exclusion must be analyzed carefully in an effort to determine if there is illegal restraint of trade.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Health and Safety Training to Include Disaster Response: Building Better Resiliency Through Union Leadership. Unlocking Retail Success: Empowering Decision-Making with Advanced Sales Forecast Models Trends in The Study of Administration Professional Agent Perspectives on Representing WNBA Athletes in the United States A Comparison of Three Asian English Textbooks by Correspondence Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1