Lying to insurance companies: The desire to deceive among physicians and the public

Rachel M. Werner, George Caleb Alexander, Angela Fagerlin, Peter A. Ubel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This study examines the public's and physicians' willingness to support deception of insurance companies in order to obtain necessary healthcare services and how this support varies based on perceptions of physicians' time pressures. Based on surveys of 700 prospective jurors and 1617 physicians, the public was more than twice as likely as physicians to sanction deception (26% versus 11%) and half as likely to believe that physicians have adequate time to appeal coverage decisions (22% versus 59%). The odds of public support for deception compared to that of physicians rose from 2.48 to 4.64 after controlling for differences in time perception. These findings highlight the ethical challenge facing physicians and patients in balancing patient advocacy with honesty in the setting of limited societal resources.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)53-59
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Bioethics
Volume4
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2004
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Insurance
Physicians
Deception
Time Perception
sanction
advocacy
health care
Patient Advocacy
resource
insurance
public
Delivery of Health Care

Keywords

  • Deception
  • Doctor-patient relationship
  • Ethics
  • Insurance coverage
  • Managed care
  • Misrepresentation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Lying to insurance companies : The desire to deceive among physicians and the public. / Werner, Rachel M.; Alexander, George Caleb; Fagerlin, Angela; Ubel, Peter A.

In: American Journal of Bioethics, Vol. 4, No. 4, 2004, p. 53-59.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Werner, Rachel M. ; Alexander, George Caleb ; Fagerlin, Angela ; Ubel, Peter A. / Lying to insurance companies : The desire to deceive among physicians and the public. In: American Journal of Bioethics. 2004 ; Vol. 4, No. 4. pp. 53-59.
@article{6086ae9ace5a4026a94aef455785a8ba,
title = "Lying to insurance companies: The desire to deceive among physicians and the public",
abstract = "This study examines the public's and physicians' willingness to support deception of insurance companies in order to obtain necessary healthcare services and how this support varies based on perceptions of physicians' time pressures. Based on surveys of 700 prospective jurors and 1617 physicians, the public was more than twice as likely as physicians to sanction deception (26{\%} versus 11{\%}) and half as likely to believe that physicians have adequate time to appeal coverage decisions (22{\%} versus 59{\%}). The odds of public support for deception compared to that of physicians rose from 2.48 to 4.64 after controlling for differences in time perception. These findings highlight the ethical challenge facing physicians and patients in balancing patient advocacy with honesty in the setting of limited societal resources.",
keywords = "Deception, Doctor-patient relationship, Ethics, Insurance coverage, Managed care, Misrepresentation",
author = "Werner, {Rachel M.} and Alexander, {George Caleb} and Angela Fagerlin and Ubel, {Peter A.}",
year = "2004",
doi = "10.1080/15265160490518566",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
pages = "53--59",
journal = "American Journal of Bioethics",
issn = "1526-5161",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Lying to insurance companies

T2 - The desire to deceive among physicians and the public

AU - Werner, Rachel M.

AU - Alexander, George Caleb

AU - Fagerlin, Angela

AU - Ubel, Peter A.

PY - 2004

Y1 - 2004

N2 - This study examines the public's and physicians' willingness to support deception of insurance companies in order to obtain necessary healthcare services and how this support varies based on perceptions of physicians' time pressures. Based on surveys of 700 prospective jurors and 1617 physicians, the public was more than twice as likely as physicians to sanction deception (26% versus 11%) and half as likely to believe that physicians have adequate time to appeal coverage decisions (22% versus 59%). The odds of public support for deception compared to that of physicians rose from 2.48 to 4.64 after controlling for differences in time perception. These findings highlight the ethical challenge facing physicians and patients in balancing patient advocacy with honesty in the setting of limited societal resources.

AB - This study examines the public's and physicians' willingness to support deception of insurance companies in order to obtain necessary healthcare services and how this support varies based on perceptions of physicians' time pressures. Based on surveys of 700 prospective jurors and 1617 physicians, the public was more than twice as likely as physicians to sanction deception (26% versus 11%) and half as likely to believe that physicians have adequate time to appeal coverage decisions (22% versus 59%). The odds of public support for deception compared to that of physicians rose from 2.48 to 4.64 after controlling for differences in time perception. These findings highlight the ethical challenge facing physicians and patients in balancing patient advocacy with honesty in the setting of limited societal resources.

KW - Deception

KW - Doctor-patient relationship

KW - Ethics

KW - Insurance coverage

KW - Managed care

KW - Misrepresentation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=28244478062&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=28244478062&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/15265160490518566

DO - 10.1080/15265160490518566

M3 - Article

C2 - 16192208

AN - SCOPUS:28244478062

VL - 4

SP - 53

EP - 59

JO - American Journal of Bioethics

JF - American Journal of Bioethics

SN - 1526-5161

IS - 4

ER -