Insurance Company Accused of Pressuring Medical Staff to Change Patients' Status to "Do Not Resuscitate"

Q: How long will it take to read this news story?

The story "Insurance Company Accused of Pressuring Medical Staff to Change Patients&#039; Status to &quot;Do Not Resuscitate&quot;" has 498 words across 21 sentences, which will take approximately 3 - 5 minutes for the average person to read.

Q: Which news outlet covered this story?

The story "Insurance Company Accused of Pressuring Medical Staff to Change Patients&#039; Status to &quot;Do Not Resuscitate&quot;" was covered 19 hours ago by Futurism, a news publisher based in United States.

Q: How trustworthy is 'Futurism' news outlet?

Futurism is a fully independent (privately-owned) news outlet established in 1997 that covers mostly technology news. The outlet is headquartered in United States and publishes an average of 9 news stories per day. It's most recent story was published 18 hours ago.

Q: What do people currently think of this news story?

The sentiment for this story is currently Neutral, indicating that people are not responding positively or negatively to this news.

Q: How do I report this news for inaccuracy?

You can report an inaccurate news publication to us via our contact page. Please also include the news #ID number and the URL to this story.<ul><li>News ID: #28895274</li><li>URL: https://encashes.beamstart.com/news/insurance-company-accused-of-pressuring-1747869578</li></ul>

Futurism 19h ago

Insurance Company Accused of Pressuring Medical Staff to Change Patients' Status to "Do Not Resuscitate" - Futurism

Quick Summary:

As The Guardian reports, UnitedHealth repeatedly pressed nurse practitioners to change their status to "do not resuscitate" even when patients had "clearly expressed a desire that all available treatments be used to keep them alive".

UnitedHealth, the largest healthcare insurer in the United States, went to extreme lengths to deny care to seniors and cut costs to pad out its profit margins.

"They’re pretending to make it look like it’s in the best interest of the member," one practitioner told the British newspaper."But it’s really not".