3News » Home
Full Story

Drug not publicly funded, so insurer refuses to pay out

2 comments | Post Comment email Email printer friendly Print    Text Size:
aA
aA
aA

video
Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:00a.m.

Raewyn Whitelaw has cancer. She is in remission, and there is a drug that can keep her in remission longer – but the public health system does not fund that drug.

Her health insurer will, right? Wrong.

Southern Cross Healthcare won't. Their excuse - the public health system does not fund the drug. But if it did, she would not need health insurance.

Ms Whitelaw's life has been marked by one milestone after another, including making it to her daughter's wedding six months after being diagnosed with cancer in her lymphatic system.

"Once I started my chemo, and I knew that the wedding was coming up, I felt that I had a purpose so I carried on," she says.

Then came the birth of her grandson a month later.

"I think you just look at them and think, really you've got to be there for them, don't ya."

She first suspected something was wrong when she found a lump in her neck.

"I had a biopsy done on it, and it changed my whole life that day, you know," says Ms Whitelaw.

She went through five difficult months of chemotherapy.

"Pretty traumatic. I lost lots of weight and I dropped down to 45 kilos, which was fairly thin."

Once she finished chemo, her doctor advised maintenance treatment with a drug called Rituximab to improve her chances of keeping the cancer away. But it is not publicly funded in New Zealand if you have only had cancer once, so she had to go to Australia for the first bout of private treatment.

"The specialist in Melbourne said it's just a wonderful drug, and he said, 'We can contain your cancer like we can contain somebody with diabetes for a long time.' So for me, that gave me a positive outlook on life because I certainly didn't have one."

The rest of her Rituximab treatment was at a private clinic in Palmerston North, costing $4000 every three months. So far she has paid around $35,000 for treatment.

Ms Whitelaw went to her health insurer, Southern Cross, to cover the private treatment.

"Non-Hodgkins lymphoma is not curable, but this drug would make it containable and give me a reasonable life for a few more years," says Ms Whitelaw. "That's why I took insurance out - I thought I'm safe, I've got this insurance."

Despite her doctor recommending Rituximab, Southern Cross rejected her request for cover.

In a statement, it says it "relies on Pharmac guidelines to guide which drugs we fund", and believes "the public health system should remain New Zealanders' first port of call for cancer treatment".

"They're prepared to take the money off me all these years, but when I need it they're not there to help me," says Ms Whitelaw.

Her lawyer Helen Monckton says surely the point of health insurance is for instances like this.

"I would have thought that Southern Cross should be taking up the slack because that's why you have a health policy," says Ms Monckton.

Ms Whitelaw has had health cover for 15 years, and she made sure it included cover for cancer drugs. She has paid Southern Cross around $18,000 dollars over the years.

"I just think it's a complete waste of money, being with them," she says. "They have helped me in the past on the odd occasions that I've needed them, but when you really need them the most, that's when they've let me down."

Her oncologist at Waikato Hospital even wrote to Southern Cross appealing for them to cover her. In a letter, Dr Kuper said Ms Whitelaw got health insurance to cover shortfalls like this in the public health service, and it would be remiss of them not to cover her.

She says Rituximab is standard care across the world, as it increases the chances of survival.

"I took insurance out to cover myself in later years and now I find it's Pharmac that it seems I've taken my insurance out with, not Southern Cross," says Ms Whitelaw.

In a case of very bad timing, Pharmac will tomorrow (July 1) start funding Rituximab for people with non-Hodgkins lymphoma for the first time - people just like Ms Whitelaw.

So once again, she has slipped through the net.

"Once I started the Rituximab, I really did have a really positive outlook on life, and I've never looked back really since then," says Ms Whitelaw. "I just feel so well and I just do everything I can do and I treat every day as a new day, 'cause you just never know when you're never gonna be here."

But Ms Whitelaw has personally paid the $35,000 bill to get her life back.

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Comments [2]

Geoff
03 Jul 2009 7:13p.m.

Hi,


I was an employee for a Southern Cross hospital when I began to develop a rash-like condition on the skin of my hands. I took it to my superiors and they referred me to a dermatologist on their payroll, part of their may be the fault of a handwash used at the hospital, as I had already had a RAST covering most common hospital chemicals. However, the dermatologist told me it looked like a latex allergy (to the gloves). I reminded him that I had already had a RAST test for latex during my induction into the hospital, which I passed. He told me to get another one, which I also passed. Still insisting I had a latex allergy, he first made me wear non-latex gloves for a period of about a week, and then no gloves at all... With no change. So, logically, he put me down as having a latex allergy on his report. When I got the letter I'd been waiting for from CareAdvantage, I figured out why. If you have an allergy as the cause of your problem, you don't get covered. Period.

With incidents like Mike's and Raewyns, it seems to me that Southern Cross are with you all the way unless they actually have to provide money.

Mike
01 Jul 2009 12:42p.m.

Hi Raewyn
We had a similar experience with Southern Cross over my wifes Taxotere chemo treatment for breast cancer. We took our case to the Insurance Ombudsman with no result, as the wording in the fine print of the policy(buried at a level that you would have needed several law degrees to comprehend) gave them an out, and believe me, they took it. In the end, it cost us $20k for a better drug than the standard treatment at $8k. I would have been happy for Southern Cross to have contributed the $8k, but they refused. Shame on you Southern Cross! The only reason we haven't changed companies is because no other company will touch us now. I now strongly recommend all health insurance buyers check their policies out thoroughly, or alternatively buy a trauma cover policy off any insurance company. Good luck Raewyn, we wish you all the best!

Post a comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide here
Name:
Email: (Won't be published)
Comment:



3News Video 3News Audio