Two American health law academics argue that proposed Medicaid eligibility rules would increase the burden on patients and doctors while pushing more people out of insurance coverage.
The New England Journal of Medicine has published a Perspective piece in which Nicole Huberfeld, a professor of health law, and Paul R. Shafer, a health policy researcher, set out their case against new Medicaid eligibility requirements currently under discussion in the United States. The pair argue the rules would place administrative burdens on both patients trying to keep their coverage and the doctors treating them.
Their argument, posted by the journal’s official account, centres on three linked concerns: that the rules would make it harder for eligible people to stay enrolled, that they would threaten funding for hospitals, clinics and individual clinicians, and that the net result would be a rise in the number of US residents without any health insurance at all.
Medicaid is the US government programme that provides health cover to people on low incomes, including families, older adults, and people with disabilities. It is broadly comparable in purpose — though not in structure — to means-tested NHS entitlements in England.
The piece is framed as expert opinion rather than new research. Huberfeld and Shafer are putting forward an argument; the journal has not published a clinical trial or population study alongside it.
No helpline numbers or NHS guidance are relevant to this story.
Source: @NEJM