Health experts warn of great GP divide

Last week I popped into my local GP for an appointment. Fortunately, I have no serious health problems, and this was just a check-up on the basics such as blood pressure. With all things in pretty good order, I left the consultation room feeling relatively happy.

However, had another measurement been taken when I was given the bill, a spike in my blood pressure may have shown up. It wasn’t so much the amount – $92 – that took me aback, but the rebate.

“You’ll be getting back $42.85,” said the administrator at the clinic’s front desk. I thanked them with what I hope was a smile, but that smile may have been accompanied by a raised eyebrow. Having done the quick mental arithmetic, I said to myself, “That’s less than half of the total bill coming back to me.”

To be fair, my GP is based in Melbourne’s inner suburbs, so may not be the cheapest going around. But the discrepancy – or ‘gap’ as it’s known – has certainly grown over my lifetime. That got me wondering: “Do any private health funds cover the gap for a standard GP consultation?”

Traditionally, the answer to that has been ‘no’, for one very important reason – it has been illegal. But things are changing in that space, with health insurer Bupa leading the way.

GP costs and insurers – the future landscape

Bupa recently began trialling a scheme in which it offers three GP visits a year to customers, free of charge. It has not broken the law by doing so, though. The insurer was granted special approval by the federal Health Department to initiate the trial. This approval exempts Bupa from a current law prohibiting private insurers from covering some out-of-hospital medical services, including GP visits.

It does come with some catches, though. The offer is only available to clients with extras cover, and the appointments are ‘virtual – either via phone or online. Bupa has about a million customers with extras cover, so that’s potentially millions of virtual GP appointments.

In June, 9 News reported other private insurers plan to run similar trials, perhaps setting the scene for the future. With premiums rising at a rate beyond inflation, this provides another avenue for insurers to gain or retain customers.

For those with cover, Bupa’s virtual GP provides an extra option, but are such schemes good for Australia’s health system?

Pros and cons

Not everyone thinks Bupa’s trial is necessarily a good move. One such person is Elizabeth Deveny, chief executive of the Consumers Health Forum of Australia. Ms Deveny is concerned that such schemes could create a society in which access to healthcare is determined by wealth.

“I think Australians all want everyone to get a fair go with their healthcare,” she said. The divides that already exist between those with and without private cover would deepen and continue to grow,” Ms Deveny said.

On the other hand, customers taking up Bupa’s offer ease the burden on an already strained Australian GP community. That’s the theory at least, but Ms Deveny is not convinced that translates into practice. She believes the impact would be minimal.

Dr Nicole Higgins, president of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, has similar concerns. “General practice care must be universal,” she said. “The last thing we want is a two-tier healthcare system that leads to some people receiving superior care and others missing out.”

Dr Higgins acknowledged that schemes such as Bupa’s provide short-term relief for a health system under strain. However, longer-term solutions through greater government investment are required, she believes.

“This is not a sustainable, long-term solution to resolving issues concerning access to general practice care,” she said. “We need greater investment in general practice care and measures to boost the GP workforce.”

Do you have private health cover? Would you use virtual GP appointments? Let us know via the comments section below.

Also read: Medical costs drive Aussies away from GPs

Disclaimer: This article contains general information about health issues and is not advice. For health advice, consult your medical practitioner.

Andrew Gigacz
Andrew Gigaczhttps://www.patreon.com/AndrewGigacz
Andrew has developed knowledge of the retirement landscape, including retirement income and government entitlements, as well as issues affecting older Australians moving into or living in retirement. He's an accomplished writer with a passion for health and human stories.

2 COMMENTS

  1. Yeah well. Before the inept interference courtesy of the honourable Bob Hawke’s (MHRIP) administration with the then perfectly healthy health system in 1983, we actually had a reasonable private health scheme, which I contributed to. This permitted me and any member of my family to attend a GP, Dentist or hospital with no out-of-pocket expences. Then, in 1983, along comes Mr Hawke and co, and bang goes our quite healthy health system, to be replaced with the forerunner of our present-day Medicare. Why couldn’t they simply leave things alone?

  2. I agree David, but since then all governments have continued the downward spiral of our health system. If you are wealthy you can afford to see Doctors/Specialists, if not, tough. Now all we ever seem to do is pay for private health insurance or go without. Thanks to Labor AND liberal governments.

- Our Partners -

DON'T MISS

- Advertisment -
- Advertisment -