![handle is hein.journals/healaw28 and id is 1 raw text is:
Reimbursing Clinicians for
A dvance -Care -Planning
Consultations: The Saga of
a Healthcare Reform
Provision ................................
Chair's Coki ................. 2
U nsweet Revenge: Whistleblower
Protection Under The False
Claims Act .................... . 12
Section News .........................18
New Members .........................
New Opportunities for Innovati
Healthcare Partnerships with
Indian Tribes and Tribal
Organizations ........................
Skype Sessions: Emerging
Legal Issues in Tele-Mental
Health Services ......................
The Precision Medicine
Initiative: Background and
Issues for Participating
]Heahhcare Organizations .....
Section Calendar ....... Back Co,
20
Janet Dolgin, Esq.
Maurice A. Deane School of Law
at Hofstra UmIversitt5
Hofsra Nordt Shore-LIJ School
of Medicine
Hempstead, NY
Introduction
Advance care planning is par of
ve good healthcare. Thus, paying clinicians
to talk with patients about advance
care p1ianlning miakes sense: i- enhances
25 advance core planning and thereby
serves to effect ,ood h-teaicare. IF
end-of-life discussions were an experi-,
mental drug, writes Atul Qawande in
32 his recent book, Being Mortal, the
FDA would approve it.'
Yet efforts to provide for reim-
bursement to clinicians 'or time and
38 attention given to advance-care-plan-
i1g2 Conversat ios with Medicare
ver patients have been stymied since 2009
(at least until quite receniyiv) by the
politics of heaitlc are reform. It seems
now -hot Medicare wili move forward
by relying on regulatory processes to
offer reimbursement for this care. This
will be an important development
toward better healtbcare for Medicare
patients and could provide a model on
Volume 28, Nuiber 1,
October 2015
which other healthcare insurers, not
already offering a similar reimburse-
inent opportunity, might rely in
creating comparable coverage plans.
An early House biBf in the process
that led to the Patient Protrection and
Affordable Care Act (PPACA)3
provided for Medicare's paying for
advance-care-planning cosuirations.4
However, the implications of the pro-
vision were reshaped as part ,f the
national debate about halhcare reform
itself part of a larger national debate
about a slew of mt, ers implicating per-
sonhood, family, and reproduction, as
well as dying and death.' As a result, the
provision was onitted front PPACA.
This article briefly descries stare-
law provisions for advance care
planning. 1. then reviews the message
put Forth bv a set of conservative voices
in 2009, aimed at undermining the
provisi on to, pav cminicians F}r advarice-
care-planning consultations with
Medicare patients. The article contex-
tualizes that: response within the
ideological debate about Obamacare
that shook the nation during the Sum-
iner o7 2009. It, then examines efforts
to reviviy the deleted provision that
had proposed reimbursing clinicians for
cc,-nt'nnned tn pagz 3
EIMBUR SING CLINICIANS FOR
ADVANCE.CARE.PLANNING
CONSULTATIONS: THE SAGA OF A
HEALTHCARE REFORM PROVISION
THI
~AW Y L](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/healaw28&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most