Salta al contenuto principale

It's official. After 3 months of back and forth, a major medical provider has elected to drop me as a patient for not having a Google or Apple device.

It is unclear if this is legal, but it is very clearly discriminatory and unethical.

Any tech journalists or lawyers interested in this?

I would like to do anything I can to ensure this never happens to anyone else.

Questa voce è stata modificata (1 anno fa)
in reply to Lance R. Vick

Jennifer
Jennifer
• •
what?? Why on earth would you need an Apple or Google device?
in reply to Jennifer

Ben Aveling
Ben Aveling
• •
@Jennifer Guessing, but suspect their device needs an ap and those are the only supported platforms.
@lrvick
@Lance R. Vick @Jennifer
in reply to Ben Aveling

Lance R. Vick
Lance R. Vick
• •

@BenAveling @Jennifer There are no medical devices involved.

They said they only willing to communicate, schedule, and exchange medical information with patients with their apple/google mobile app moving forward, even if it means terminating relationships with existing patients.

I even offered to show up in person for every communication, and they refused.

@Ben Aveling @Jennifer
Questa voce è stata modificata (1 anno fa)
in reply to Jennifer

Thomas Phinney
Thomas Phinney
• •
@Jennifer I am imagining that the org is using some kind of patient service system that (1) is required, and (2) only works on iOS and Android, but has no web option. (Or if it does, they are not using it.)
@Jennifer
in reply to Thomas Phinney

Lance R. Vick
Lance R. Vick
• •

@tphinney @Jennifer Exactly this, and they chose to introduce it months after I became a patient, having known from the outset that I do not have or want a Google or Apple device.

I gave up my smartphone 3 years ago, and am a lot happier being disconnected when I am not at my desk. It would seem some don't consider this a valid lifestyle choice.

This is the first time anyone has refused me services for not having a phone.

@Thomas Phinney @Jennifer
in reply to Lance R. Vick

Naomi P
Naomi P
• •
@ProPublica has an ongoing series about problems with health care; they might be interested?
@ProPublica
in reply to Lance R. Vick

Molly Cantrell-Kraig 🍷
Molly Cantrell-Kraig 🍷
• •

if it’s some sort of IoT device related to your health monitoring, it should be provided by your care team independent of surveillance capitalism.

#LawFedi #health #insurance #tech

#tech #health #insurance #lawfedi
in reply to Molly Cantrell-Kraig 🍷

joel b
joel b
• •
I'll never forget when my mother finally got hearing aids and was so pleased with them and her quality of life only to have the IoT enshittification raise the rent on "Hearing as a Service" and she had to give them up. I've not seen her that depressed before in living memory.
in reply to Lance R. Vick

Adam Shostack :donor: :rebelverified:
Adam Shostack :donor: :rebelverified:
• •
@glennf If no one’s mentioned this yet: you should talk to your state insurance commissioner
@Glenn Fleishman
in reply to Glenn Fleishman

M C von Schratz 🏳️‍⚧️
M C von Schratz 🏳️‍⚧️
• •
@glennf @adamshostack since this is used for communications and OP is not ingesting the phone, it would not be FDA. HHS would be a better match, or arguably CFPB.
This is discriminatory but potentially not protected. I don’t know health law. Regardless, medical care shouldn’t be locked behind a EULA and noise-making is probably the best route. Best of luck!
@Glenn Fleishman @Adam Shostack :donor: :rebelverified:
in reply to Glenn Fleishman

Mre. Dartigen [maker mode]
Mre. Dartigen [maker mode]
• •

@nezumih It's not a device issue, it seems it's the clinic itself. Is there a US body that oversees medical providers or administration processes? They'd be the people to go to. Or any insurance regulators - they might not be the exact party causing the issue, but they might be able to point OP to who to make the complaint to.

In most cases here, as far as I'm aware, you have to start with making a formal (in writing) complaint to the clinic first though. I'm presuming OP already has.

@M C von Schratz 🏳️‍⚧️
in reply to Lance R. Vick

joelcrump
joelcrump
• •
I hate to play devil's advocate, here, because I do sense a bit of arbitrariness in their decision, but is it so onerous to get a smartphone? I was skeptical of them myself, being an old computer nerd, but found them invaluable when I eventually used them.
in reply to joelcrump

Mre. Dartigen [maker mode]
Mre. Dartigen [maker mode]
• •

Adding to other points made, a smartphone also means another device to have to remember and use, keep charged, etc. Accessibility on Android and iOS still has a ton of issues, and these are often at their worst during set up - OP hasn't mentioned these, but they're worth considering in a healthcare context.

If it's over an app as well, you can't just buy the cheapest Android phone, because odds are that won't have the power or the right version to run it (as I learned the hard way once). So that means extra cost in having to buy a sufficiently new model to run that app.

And given how many apps are just a wrapper for a Web page, there is almost no absolute reason for requiring an Android or iOS device specifically - people have mentioned Linux phones and devices too. And hell, Windows exists too. All of these can access a Web page just fine.

Plus, OP was initially told the app was optional.

Questa voce è stata modificata (1 anno fa)
in reply to joelcrump

Elena ``of Valhalla''
Elena ``of Valhalla''
•

@joelcrump @Lance R. Vick yes, it is onerous: it requires one to sign up for an account on a service that is designed to collect personal data, with one of the entities that are actively working to ruin computing.

assuming an android or iOS phone with access to the respective app market, as implied by OP's story: I do have a linux phone which does not require such an account and it's really useful, but also wouldn't run that kind of app.

And then there is the whole “accessing sensible stuff from a device that is routinely carried around and easily stolen”

@Lance R. Vick @joelcrump
in reply to Lance R. Vick

Nico Rikken
Nico Rikken
• •
In Europe we see forcing of duopoly-apps for online identification to banking and government services. Health insurance is likely to be part of it too. At @fsfe @floriansnow started building an overview in an email discussion: lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discu… We cannot wait until for every type of service one remains having no app. There have to be legal guarantees on providing service to people that reject to give up their privacy and control to Apple or Google. So please find a journalist.

The Discussion February 2024 Archive by thread

lists.fsfe.org
@Florian Snow

Questo sito utilizza cookie per riconosce gli utenti loggati e quelli che tornano a visitare. Proseguendo la navigazione su questo sito, accetti l'utilizzo di questi cookie.

⇧