In February, Hawai‘i’s parole board granted the now-52-year-old compassionate release, which allows prisoners to receive early probation to seek .

But without a long-term care facility willing to accept him, Alameda has not been able to leave.

As of June, at least three other prisoners granted release to tend to their medical needs were living indefinitely in the infirmary after long-term care facilities were unwilling to accept them, primarily because of their criminal backgrounds, the state parole authority said.

“This is a challenge across the country,” said Molly Crane, an attorney for FAMM, which advocates for .

Every state allows for prisoners, though HawaiÊ»i is the only one without a specific law, relying instead on an internal policy. The prisoners who typically qualify for compassionate release can’t care for themselves or have terminal illnesses and may need an assisted living center, a nursing home, or hospice.

But many long-term care facilities nationwide decline to take such prisoners, leaving them incarcerated for months — or years — after they were granted release.

In , a study found that rejections from nursing homes soared after they were told that a patient was coming from prison. , prisoners with extensive medical needs stayed an average of 200 days after being granted parole, because of denials from long-term care centers. And in , prisoners granted parole sued the state when they couldn’t get placed in nursing homes.

President Donald Trump’s signature One Big Beautiful Bill Act further strains long-term care providers’ ability to take people from incarceration. Prisoners don’t qualify for Medicaid, so parolees after they’re granted the release. The law, enacted last summer, reduces the window in which facilities can get reimbursed from three months to before they apply. That means facilities risk not getting paid for new Medicaid patients whose applications are not submitted within the reduced timeframe.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services “encourages providers and beneficiaries to prioritize timely application submission to maximize coverage,” CMS spokesperson Timothy Foster said.

‘Risk Is Just Too High’

Most nursing homes nationwide already have a waiting list for new residents, according to a by the American Health Care Association and the National Center for Assisted Living. Those waitlists are another hurdle to getting prisoners placed, said Bob Merce, a former attorney who advocates for prisoners’ compassionate release.

“We tell the nursing homes that most of the people who we are talking about cannot hurt somebody,” Merce said.

Some of the prisoners staying at the Halawa infirmary in June couldn’t walk or dress themselves. One man couldn’t recall what his illness was. Another with brain cancer couldn’t coherently respond to questions.

Sean Sanada, the OÊ»ahu Region CEO with the HawaiÊ»i Health Systems Corp., oversees the region’s two state-funded long-term care facilities, Leahi Hospital and Maluhia. Sanada said that the health system has reviewed dozens of compassionate release referrals but has never accepted any of them.

Sanada said the facilities don’t discriminate based on where the resident comes from. His main concerns, he said, were his staff’s safety and the lack of resources to adequately care for the patient.

“The risk is just too high in most of those instances,” Sanada said.

Violent incidents in long-term care facilities have been well documented. A observing 14 assisted living facilities found that in just one month, 15% of residents experienced resident-to-resident aggression.

When long-term care facilities refuse to accept prisoners who have been granted compassionate release, it leaves state taxpayers footing a larger bill. The annual cost to incarcerate an individual in Hawai‘i with complex needs is up to eight times the $112,505 average of housing one person in prison, according to FAMM. In comparison, the average Medicaid reimbursement for a long-term care patient at a Hawaiʻi Health Systems Corp. facility is about .

Four states — Connecticut, Georgia, Massachusetts, and Vermont — contract with nursing facilities to take prisoners who are granted compassionate release, according to FAMM.

The iCare Health Network’s MissionCare Health, which operates nursing homes for people coming out of prison, secured contracts in three of those states. David Skoczulek, iCare’s vice president of business development and communication, estimated that its rates are $100 to $350 a day more per patient than the average nursing home rates in the states where they operate.

In Hawaiʻi, the correctional department determines recommendations to send to the parole board, which decides whether to grant the release. Prisoners who are granted the early probation can be released to family members who commit to caring for them or to a long-term care facility.

Corey Reincke, head of the HawaiÊ»i Paroling Authority, said that in his 24-year career he couldn’t recall getting anyone placed into a long-term care facility without family intervening, for instance by contacting facilities themselves.

“Parole has to find a facility that can meet their medical needs and is also willing to take them,” Reincke said. “That’s where we’re hitting the roadblocks.”

For one parolee, Reincke called more than 100 care homes, he said, but they all declined to accept the patient, over safety concerns. According to a 2024 state report, while HawaiÊ»i’s long-term care facilities use about workforce strains make it difficult to maintain even those levels.

HawaiÊ»i Prisoners’ Refuge: Family

Last year, 69-year-old Paul Kupihea died at a hospital five days after the state granted him compassionate release to his family. He died before he could get on a flight to his home island.

In July 2025, Lahela Kruse, the mother of Kupihea’s child, received a call from a Honolulu hospital informing her that his condition had become severe. By then he had been diagnosed with an incurable form of cancer and had been in and out of the hospital while still in custody.

Kruse and their daughter flew to Oʻahu to see him and were shocked when they saw how sick he was. Their daughter agreed to take him into her home in Hilo, on Hawaiʻi Island, despite not having a relationship with him for most of her life.

“She knew he was sick,” Kruse said. “I told her that, but she didn’t know the severity of it. I didn’t truly know.”

Her daughter’s willingness to take him prompted his compassionate release. But Kruse said the notification about Kupihea’s illness came too late.

FAMM’s Crane has been working on expanding compassionate release laws in states to allow for more prisoners to qualify and strengthen transparency in the process. HawaiÊ»i lawmakers have tried for years to pass bills on compassionate release, but none has succeeded.

Crane said without a law that outlines a formal process and who qualifies, even family support isn’t enough. Prisoners can still face life-threatening delays, she said.

“The absence of a compassionate release statute means that people who need compassionate release languish and even die in prison,” Crane said.

In Alameda’s cell, two beds stood about 3 feet apart, with a seatless metal toilet in the corner and a window looking out on a concrete wall. The smell of bleach permeated the room. Alameda said he hoped to see his daughter soon. She recently turned 5.

“I made some mistakes in my life,” said Alameda, who has been incarcerated since 2024 for drug possession, driving a stolen vehicle, and jumping bail. “I tried when my daughter was born, but I know I’ll change, because she needs me out of here.”

Merce, the former attorney, is still trying to find a place for Alameda, who committed no violent crimes. Merce became aware of prisoners’ struggles through his work as a trial lawyer. He said he has helped about 15 prisoners leave HawaiÊ»i correctional facilities for medical treatment.

He said he’s seen cases in which people have waited years to get out.

“The ones that stick with me, though,” Merce said, “are the ones that I never found placements for.”

This article first appeared on ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News and is republished here under a .

Can’t see the audio player? Visit kffhealthnews.org to listen.

Cara Anthony tries to convince her HealthQ co-host Blake Farmer that there are benefits to embracing the caregiver identity when helping an aging parent.

When his father was diagnosed with gallbladder cancer in 2025, William Morrison immediately went into caregiving mode.

“We were in the hospital every day,” he said. “I was really playing the intermediary between the medical staff and our family and kind of helping have those conversations and push for those answers.”

One in 10 Americans say they are a caregiver for a parent 65 or older, . And many people in the sandwich generation — those who have both children and aging parents — start their caregiving journeys like Morrison: stepping up during a medical crisis and becoming a family caregiver essentially overnight.

For other people, taking on the role and identity of a caregiver happens more slowly.

Researchers and experts say the spectrum of caregiving is broader than many people realize and that embracing the caregiver title before there’s a crisis can make a significant difference in this phase of life.

Worry Comes First

Being a caregiver can start long before you go to a doctor appointment with a loved one or move your parents into your house. “Oftentimes what we see out in the world is a very limited definition of who a family caregiver is,” said Denise Brown, a caregiving coach and the founder of Caregiving Years Training Academy in Illinois. Being a caregiver is “not necessarily around defining caregiving by tasks and chores, but about that emotional impact.”

Brown created a framework that defines caregiving as a . She said the first stage — the “expectant caregiver” — begins the moment you start to feel concerned about a loved one.

“ You look into the future and you think, ‘Oh, I think someone’s going to need help in the family,’” Brown said.

When you start to get actively involved in a loved one’s care, that triggers the second stage, what Brown calls the “freshman caregiver”: “You’re learning the lay of the land. You’re learning the language of all the systems that you now manage. The best thing to do in this stage is to get comfortable experimenting.”

Caring for Parents Brings Different Stressors

The kind of care that Morrison provided — responding to an immediate medical crisis — catapulted him into the third stage of caregiving, the “entrenched caregiver.” By the time you hit this point, Brown said, “you can feel completely overwhelmed and swallowed up by the experience.”

that the stress is especially acute for people taking care of parents. The role reversal stresses the relationship: Caregivers who focus solely on children don’t deal with the tension linked to shifting power dynamics and other changes that happen when an adult child starts to care for a parent.

Burnout, defined by physical and psychological fatigue, was higher among caregivers of aging parents than among caregivers caring only for children. And for caregivers in the “sandwich generation,” who were taking care of both children and aging parents, personal burnout scores were even higher.

The Title Makes a Difference

Many people who perform care tasks don’t consider themselves caregivers, , but those who do are more likely to access support services and feel a sense of community with other caregivers.

“Anyone in a caregiving situation deserves support and help,” Brown said.

Embracing the role of caregiver early also allows you to have “really good conversations with people in your life” about their desires — and yours — as you enter this phase, Brown said.

Morrison, whose father died earlier this year, is about to enter his own sandwich generation era: He and his wife are expecting a baby boy in August, and he’s been stepping in to help his mom with housework and administrative tasks.

Morrison and his wife have already had conversations about making time for themselves and each other after their son is born. Morrison also wants to be more intentional with his own health, even if that means just going for walks.

People and Policy

Beyond the emotional strain, caregiving comes with substantial costs. On average, caregivers spend more than $7,000 a year on medical and other expenses to support a loved one, according to in 2021.

Some efforts aim to mitigate the financial burden. In most states, family members can get paid to take care of relatives who qualify for Medicaid. But state Medicaid programs face new pressure from federal cuts, and some states have pulled back funding for home-care programs designed to help residents with disabilities.

Meanwhile, a handful of states for unpaid caregivers. For example, starting in 2027, Connecticut will allow family caregivers who make less than $50,000, or couples who make under $100,000, to apply for a tax credit up to $2,000.

This installment is part of HealthQ’s reporting on caregiving among the sandwich generation. For more, check out the series archive.

This article first appeared on ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News and is republished here under a .

More than 80 of his customers who were enrolled in the same Medicare supplemental plan from the insurer Chubb got hit last August with a 45% increase.

“In my 49 years of doing biz as a broker, I’ve never seen a premium increase be effective immediately on everyone, instead of on their policy anniversary,” said Jaggi, whose brokerage scrambled to find more affordable options for clients. The policies pick up deductibles and other costs not covered in traditional Medicare, and without one there is no upper limit on how much a consumer might owe each year.

While 45% was an unusually big jump, Jaggi and other brokers say double-digit premium increases for Medicare supplemental, or Medigap, policies are becoming the norm.

A Chubb spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment on the increase.

More than 12 million people — of those in traditional Medicare — buy a Medigap policy. Others rely on some sort of retiree employer coverage or a different backup. About 13% of people in traditional Medicare don’t have supplemental coverage, according to KFF, meaning they could be vulnerable to large costs if they have a serious illness.

In the supplemental market, following big increases last year, rates appear to be rising again. In early 2026 filings with state insurance commissioners from Aetna, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Cigna, Humana, Mutual of Omaha, and UnitedHealthcare, rate increases for Plan G policies — the most commonly purchased supplement type — ranged from just in the first quarter, according to Nebraska-based consulting firm Telos Actuarial.

“While this is a small dataset across a select number of states, it’s an indication that carriers are looking to correct their premium rates in light of upward pressure on their claims experience,” said Brett Mushett, a consulting actuary with Telos.

Climbing Numbers

Premium rates vary based on the type of coverage chosen, where a beneficiary lives, and their age. For Plan G coverage, beneficiaries paid an in 2023, according to KFF. That amount has likely risen since.

“In some states, like Ohio, Medicare supplements for years would have a 3% to 5% year-over-year increase. Now it’s 10% to 15%,” said Amanda Brewton, owner of Medicare Answers Now, a marketing organization whose clients are sales agents.

In Alaska, Premera Blue Cross raised the premiums on its Plan G policies by nearly 12% for this year, according to rate sheets provided to ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News by insurance agent Patricia Mack, who said another insurer raised rates by nearly 13%.

For example, a 65-year-old woman who last year would have been charged $172 a month for a Plan G policy would now face a monthly rate of $192, said Mack, who owns Alaska Insurance Benefits in Wasilla.

Premera spokesperson Courtney Wallace said in an email that Medicare makes changes to deductible and copayment rates each year, which affects supplemental plans that cover those increasing amounts.

Wallace also noted that the insurer saw higher medical service use among its members, “which further drove claims costs and ultimately impacted premiums.”

Agents and policy experts blame a range of factors for rising premiums: an increase in the use of medical services by beneficiaries; the aging of the population; increases in labor and medical costs; rules in some states governing Medigap plans; and people’s enrolling in — or getting out of — private Medicare Advantage plans.

“Five years ago, it was exceedingly uncommon to have a carrier with a rate increase of more than 10%. Now it’s very uncommon to see a rate increase below 10%, and it’s not uncommon to see it over 20%,” said Chalen Jackson, vice president for government affairs at Integrity, a Dallas-based company that sells life and health insurance.

Jaggi, who co-owns Jaggi Petry Insurance & Investments in Forsyth, Illinois, along with his daughter, said he eventually found other options for many of those 80-plus clients with the large increase, which came from an insurer that had previously been the lowest-cost option. But it wasn’t easy — and continuing increases are expected.

“These are unbelievable increases,” said Jaggi, who said he is seeing premium hikes exceeding 15% this year across a range of insurers.

Policy experts have outlined possible solutions, including for Congress to cap out-of-pocket costs for Medicare beneficiaries or subsidize the purchase of Medigap coverage.

“Traditional Medicare is the only federal health insurance program without an out-of-pocket cap,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) wrote in an email, adding that the program “needs to be updated and strengthened to protect the Medicare guarantee for American seniors.”

But making changes to Medicare that require congressional approval is unlikely in the current legislative environment, especially because adding an out-of-pocket cap would add costs to the federal budget.

How This Plays Out

People generally qualify for Medicare when they turn 65. Beneficiaries after they initially enroll in the traditional fee-for-service program to purchase a Medigap plan at standard rates without having to answer health-related questions.

Strict rules then kick in around when beneficiaries can enroll in or switch Medigap coverage and options become much more limited, with each one generally involving trade-offs or tough choices.

have what’s known as a “birthday rule,” which requires insurers once a year to allow people enrolled in a Medigap plan to change to different supplemental coverage — usually around their birthdays — without being medically underwritten. Those rules can help consumers, including those with health conditions, to switch.

An additional — Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, and New York — require insurers to offer at least one Medigap policy to all applicants either year-round or during an annual enrollment period, depending on the state. Changes are allowed no matter the person’s health.

Another option for those facing high Medigap costs is to leave traditional Medicare and enroll in a private-sector Medicare Advantage plan, which have out-of-pocket caps. But joining one means beneficiaries must generally rely on a set of in-network doctors and hospitals. And if they change their mind and want to go back to traditional Medicare, they have only a 12-month window in which to purchase a Medigap plan without passing health questions. After that, it can be more difficult.

“A lot of people don’t know that if they are in Medicare Advantage for a year, they can get turned down by a Medigap plan or charged really high premiums because of a preexisting condition, which for many people effectively traps them in MA plans,” said , a research associate at the liberal Center for American Progress and co-author of a on the issue.

There are some exceptions. For example, if a Medicare Advantage plan withdraws from a market or leaves the Medicare program, its enrollees can qualify for a supplemental plan without being asked health questions or charged more for having preexisting conditions.

For this year alone, about 2.6 million people when their insurer pulled out of their markets, according to KFF, and more than a million lost coverage for 2025. Many switched to other MA plans, but “somewhere around 440,000 of those people did go to a Medicare supplement policy,” sometimes because there was no other MA plan in their area, said George Dippel, president of Deft Research, a Minneapolis-based market research organization focused on insurance for older people. Deft is part of Integrity, the Dallas company.

Some Medicare experts note that anytime insurers enroll people whose health status they can’t consider — whether because of birthday rules or because their Medicare Advantage plan left the market and thus qualified them for an exemption from medical underwriting — it potentially exposes them to more health care utilization and higher costs, making them more likely to increase premiums across the board to offset the possible financial hit.

Another option mentioned by brokers for people looking to lower their costs is to consider one of the two types of Medigap plans that come with a deductible, which is currently just under $3,000 for a year. Those plans charge far lower monthly premiums than Medigap plans that pick up a much larger portion of annual amounts people must pay toward their Medicare services.

Still, “a lot of people are not comfortable with a $3,000 deductible,” Mack said.

This article first appeared on ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News and is republished here under a .

But there’s a catch: If people want to move to original Medicare and buy a supplemental Medigap insurance plan to cover some out-of-pocket costs, they may not be able to. Medigap insurers can generally refuse coverage to applicants whose medical history or current health problems might make them expensive to cover, a process called medical underwriting.

“We really want people to factor that in,” said , managing policy attorney at the Center for Medicare Advocacy. “If someone is in a Medicare Advantage plan for several years and then wants to switch to original Medicare, they may find they can’t switch and also get a Medigap plan.”

There are many reasons people might want to trade their MA plan for traditional Medicare. Although MA managed-care plans are typically cheaper and offer benefits not available in original Medicare, such as coverage for vision and hearing services, they have smaller provider networks than the original program and, sometimes, extensive prior authorization requirements.

In addition, as Medicare Advantage plan in recent years, a growing number of plans are pulling out of areas they used to serve, leaving members with fewer options. This year, an estimated 1 in 10 MA plan members will be forced out of their plans for this reason, according to a in February.

“We saw some Medicare Advantage plans that just left the market completely and stopped issuing plans,” said Emily Whicheloe, education director at the Medicare Rights Center.

For those considering a switch to original Medicare, getting a Medigap plan can be tricky. Federal law provides a one-time, for people 65 or older and newly covered by Medicare Part B to sign up for any Medigap plan without underwriting. After that initial sign-up period ends, however, there are fewer coverage guarantees.

But some do exist. Here are a few key circumstances and time frames when people are guaranteed a Medigap plan without having to undergo underwriting:

• People who live in Connecticut, Massachusetts, or New York can sign up for a Medigap policy without underwriting. In Maine, there is a one-month window each year when Medigap insurers must offer Plan A to all comers without underwriting. (Plan A provides less comprehensive coverage than some of the other standardized plan types.)
• People who sign up for a Medicare Advantage plan when they are first eligible for Medicare Part A at age 65 can switch to original Medicare within the first year and buy a Medigap plan too. This is sometimes called the “.”
• If a Medicare Advantage plan leaves Medicare or in an area, affected enrollees can switch to original Medicare and buy a Medigap plan either 60 days before or up to 63 days after their MA coverage ends. During this special enrollment period, they can’t be turned down or charged more based on their health.
• If an individual and no longer has access to their Medicare Advantage plan providers, they can switch to original Medicare and apply for a Medigap policy either 60 days before or up to 63 days after their MA coverage ends. That typically happens when someone notifies the plan of their permanent move or the plan discovers it, said , a training, policy, and technical assistance consultant at California Health Advocates who specializes in Medicare and Medigap coverage.

There are other circumstances when someone might qualify for a special enrollment period under federal rules, and states may have additional qualifying events that are more generous than federal standards.

Patient advocates emphasize that it’s often useful to work with a counselor at the , or SHIP, for free, unbiased help figuring out Medigap coverage options. SHIP counselors can help applicants identify potential avenues to qualify for Medigap coverage without underwriting at both the federal and state levels.

People who don’t qualify for a guaranteed right to a Medigap plan without underwriting may still be approved for coverage. Premiums may be higher, however, and plans may impose a waiting period of up to six months for coverage of preexisting medical conditions in certain circumstances.

Beware: More Underwriting

In recent years, some Medigap insurers have spent a growing percentage of premiums on medical claims, putting pressure on profits, Burns said. “Medigap insurers’ underwriting has tightened up considerably recently,” she said.

The list of health conditions that Medigap insurers might deny coverage for is long, including Alzheimer’s disease, asthma, cancer, congestive heart disease, diabetes with complications, end-stage renal disease, high blood pressure, and stroke, among others, according to a of leading insurers’ applications.

When people apply for a Medigap plan that will be medically underwritten, they will typically be asked to fill out a health questionnaire, said , a principal and consulting actuary at Milliman who is a Society of Actuaries fellow. Increasingly, insurers are requesting that people agree to a prescription drug background check, Ortner said.

“Oftentimes, that prescription drug history may be the primary driver of a decision as it relates to underwriting,” he said, rather than a physical exam or medical records review.

Insurers don’t all have the same underwriting rules, however. Here again, a SHIP counselor may be useful for pointing people to specific companies that accept applicants with a particular medical diagnosis, or have different waiting periods or coverage exclusions.

“They have access to a Medigap comparison tool in addition to what is existing on that can give you a very good estimate of what you may pay for those Medigap plans,” said , associate director of health coverage and benefits at the National Council on Aging.

This article first appeared on ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News and is republished here under a .

During procedures, he seemed “hesitant, not sure of how to go on to the next step without being prompted” by assistants, said Mark Katlic, director of the Aging Surgeon Program at Sinai Hospital in Baltimore.

The chief of surgery, concerned about the doctor’s cognition, “would not sign off on his credentials to practice surgery unless he went through an evaluation,” Katlic said.

Since 2015, when Sinai inaugurated a screening program for surgeons 75 and older, about 30 from around the country have undergone its comprehensive two-day physical and cognitive assessment. This surgeon “did not come of his own accord,” Katlic recalled.

But he came. The tests revealed mild cognitive impairment, often but not necessarily a precursor to dementia. The neuropsychologist’s report advised that the surgeon’s difficulties were “likely to impact his ability to practice medicine as he is doing presently, e.g. conducting complex surgical procedures.”

That didn’t mean the surgeon had to retire; a variety of accommodations would allow him to continue in other roles. “He retained a lifetime of knowledge that had not been impacted by cognitive changes,” Katlic said. The hospital “took him out of the OR, but he continued to see patients in the clinic.”

Such incidents are likely to become more common as America’s physician workforce ages rapidly. In 2005, more than 11% of doctors who were seeing patients were 65 or older, the American Medical Association said. Last year, the proportion reached 22.4%, with nearly 203,000 older practitioners.

Given physician shortages, especially in rural areas and key specialties like primary care, nobody wants to drive out veteran doctors with skills and experience.

Yet researchers have documented “a starting in their mid-60s,” said Thomas Gallagher, an internist and bioethicist at the University of Washington who has studied late-career trajectories.

At older ages, reaction times slow; knowledge can become outdated. Cognitive scores vary greatly, however. “Some practitioners continue to do as well as they did in their 40s and 50s, and others really start to struggle,” Gallagher said.

A few health organizations have responded by establishing mandating that older doctors be screened for cognitive and physical deficits.

UVA Health at the University of Virginia began its program in 2011 and has screened about 200 older practitioners. Only in four cases did the results significantly change a doctor’s practice or privileges.

Stanford Health Care launched its late-career program the following year. Penn Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania also put in place a testing program.

Nobody has tracked how many exist; Gallagher guesstimated as many as 200. But given that the United States has more than 6,000 hospitals, those with late-career programs constitute “a vast minority,” he said.

The number may actually have shrunk. A federal lawsuit, along with the profession’s lingering reluctance, appears to have put the effort to regularly assess older doctors’ abilities in limbo.

Late-career programs typically require those 70 and older to be evaluated before their privileges and credentials are renewed, with confirmatory testing for those whose initial results indicate problems. Thereafter, older doctors undergo regular rescreening, usually every year or two.

It’s fair to say such efforts proved unpopular among their intended targets. Doctors frequently insist that “‘I’ll know when it’s time to stand down,’” said Rocco Orlando, senior strategic adviser to Hartford HealthCare, which operates eight Connecticut hospitals and began its late-career practitioner program in 2018. “It turns out not to be true.”

When Hartford HealthCare published data from the first two years of its late-career program, it reported that of the 160 practitioners 70 and older who were screened, .

That mirrored results from Yale New Haven Hospital, which instituted mandatory cognitive screening for medical staff members starting at age 70. Among the first 141 Yale clinicians who underwent testing, that were likely to impair their ability to practice medicine independently,” a study reported.

Proponents of late-career screening argued that such programs could prevent harm to patients while steering impaired doctors to less demanding assignments or, in some cases, toward retirement.

“I thought as we got the word out nationally, this would be something we could encourage across the country,” Orlando said, noting that Hartford’s program cost only $50,000 to $60,000 a year.

Instead, he has seen “zero progress” in recent years. “Probably we’ve gone backward,” he said.

A key reason: In 2020, the federal over its testing efforts, charging age and disability discrimination. The legal action continues (the EEOC declined to comment on its status), as does the hospital’s late-career program.

But the suit led several other organizations to pause or shut down their programs, including those at Hartford HealthCare and at Driscoll Children’s Hospital in Corpus Christi, Texas, while few new ones have emerged.

“It made lots of organizations uncomfortable about sticking their necks out,” Gallagher said.

Instituting later-career programs has always been an uphill effort. “Doctors don’t like to be regulated,” Katlic acknowledged. Late-career programs have “in some cases been very controversial, and they’ve been blocked by influential physicians,” he said.

As health systems wait to see what happens in federal court, most national medical organizations have recommended only voluntary screening and peer reporting.

“Neither works very well at all,” Gallagher said. “Physicians are hesitant to share their concerns about their colleagues,” which can involve “challenging power dynamics.”

As for voluntary evaluation, since cognitive decline can affect doctors’ (or anyone’s) self-awareness, “they’re the last to know that they’re not themselves,” he added.

In a recent , Gallagher and his co-authors recommended procedural policies to promote fairness in late-career screening, based on an analysis of such programs and interviews with their leaders.

“How can we design these programs in a way that’s fair and that therefore physicians are more apt to participate in?” he said. The authors emphasized the need for confidentiality and safeguards, such as an appeals process.

“There are all sorts of accommodations” for doctors whose assessments indicate the need for different roles, Gallagher noted. They could adopt less onerous schedules or handle routine procedures while leaving complex six-hour surgeries to their colleagues. They might transition to teaching, mentoring, and consulting.

Yet a substantial number of older doctors head for the exits and retire rather than face a mandated evaluation, he said.

The future, therefore, might involve programs that regularly screen every practitioner. That would be inefficient (few doctors in their 40s will flunk a cognitive test) and, with current tests, time-consuming and consequently expensive. But it would avoid charges of age discrimination.

Faster reliable cognitive tests, reportedly in the research pipeline, may be one way to proceed. In the meantime, Orlando said, changing the culture of health care organizations requires encouraging peer reporting and commending “the people who have the courage to speak up.”

“If you see something, say something,” he continued, referring to health care professionals who witness doctors (of any age) faltering. “We are overly protective of our own. We need to step back and say, ‘No, we’re about protecting our patients.’”

The New Old Age is produced through a partnership with .

This article first appeared on ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News and is republished here under a .

California, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and have set caps on health care spending in a bid to rein in the intense financial pressure felt by many families, individuals, and employers who every year face increases in premiums, deductibles, and other health-related expenses.

Hospitals and other health care providers are citing Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed by President Donald Trump in July, as one more reason to challenge those limits.

The law is expected to reduce federal Medicaid spending by over a decade, which mathematically should help the overall health care system meet the caps. But the law is also expected to increase the number of uninsured Americans, mostly Medicaid beneficiaries, by an estimated . Health care analysts predict hospitals and other providers will raise prices to cover the double whammy of lost Medicaid revenue and the cost of caring for an influx of newly uninsured patients.

Whether regulators in some states will allow providers to justify higher prices and exceed the spending caps is unclear. Only can penalize providers financially if they fail to meet targets.

“Are we going to say, ‘That’s OK’? Or are we going to say, ‘Well, you exceeded the target. We’re still going to penalize you for that’?” said Richard Pan, a former state lawmaker and a member of the California Office of Health Care Affordability’s board. “That has not yet been decided.”

The California Hospital Association, the industry’s main state lobbying group, in October asking a state court to strike down the spending caps, which it argued fail to account for all the cost pressures hospitals face. Those pressures, it said, include an aging, sicker population; the of labor; expensive advances in medical technology; large capital outlays on required seismic retrofitting; and changes in federal policy, including the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The hospital group’s lawsuit also asserted that the state affordability office, by hastily imposing ill-considered cost-cutting targets, was undermining its other key mission of improving health care access, quality, and equity.

California’s affordability office last year set a five-year target to cap statewide spending growth, starting at 3.5% in 2025 and declining to 3% by 2029. The annual caps apply to a wide range of health care entities, including hospitals, medical groups, insurers, and other payers.

Earlier this year, it imposed much lower spending growth caps — starting at 1.8% in 2026 and declining to 1.6% by 2029 — for .

“The spending caps set by politically appointed bureaucrats could force cuts that result in many Californians traveling farther for care, facing longer emergency room wait times, experiencing more overcrowding, and losing access to critical services,” Carmela Coyle, the hospital association’s president and CEO, said in an October press release.

The California attorney general’s office, which will represent the affordability agency, has not yet filed a response to the hospital group’s complaint and did not respond to a request for comment.

Hospitals’ Pushback

California is not the only state taking a close look at hospital prices, which are widely considered a of health care costs.

“States, armed with information that points to payments to hospitals as a driver of what is way beyond affordable commercial premiums, have begun to take increasingly targeted actions focused on commercial hospital prices,” said Michael Bailit, founder of the Needham, Massachusetts-based consultancy , which has advised multiple states, including California, on ways to tame health care spending. “It is not surprising that the hospital industry is going to oppose such state actions.” 

In its lawsuit, the California Hospital Association said the affordability office’s own report showed that pharmaceutical and insurance companies are largely responsible for high costs.

Hospitals in some states with cost growth limits, including and , have expressed objections similar to the ones raised in the California lawsuit. They could follow their counterparts in California if their lawsuit succeeds, said Peter Lee, who led California’s Affordable Care Act marketplace, Covered California, for and is now a at Stanford Medicine’s Clinical Excellence Research Center.

Lee said the work of California’s affordability office and similar agencies in other states is just about the only systemwide effort being made to cut health care costs. They are basically saying, “‘Look, health care is taking money away from education, it is taking money away from the environment, it is taking money away from everything in the public sector, and in the private sector it is taking money away from wages,’” he said. “‘We don’t know how you, the health system, are going to do it, but it is your job not just to provide quality but to lower costs. Here’s the target.’”

To be sure, achieving the cost savings that California and those other states are seeking is no easy lift. It will ultimately require persuading large, financially powerful players that compete fiercely for health care dollars to adopt a different mindset and begin cooperating to reduce costs instead. And that, in many cases, will mean lower revenue.

But the status quo, as many people know all too well, means continued financial pain for millions.

In early 2020, Estevan Rodriguez, a bartender at California’s Monterey Beach Hotel, had surgery for a staph infection in his leg. The bill came to nearly $168,000. His insurance paid most of it, but he still owed $5,665, which took him two years to pay, more than $200 every month. “It may not be a lot to some people, but it was a lot to me,” Rodriguez said.

He said he dropped his Hulu subscription, switched to a lower-cost cellphone, and got cheaper car insurance. He started going to food banks rather than the grocery store, he said, and had a lot less time with his kids, because he was constantly working to pay off the hospital bill.

, where Rodriguez had his surgery, is one of the seven hospitals identified by California’s affordability office as high-cost. A attributed high hospital prices in Monterey County to a lack of market competition “rather than higher operating costs or superior quality of care.”

The Monterey hospital referred a request for comment about its “high-cost” designation to the California Hospital Association. CHA spokesperson Jan Emerson-Shea declined to comment beyond the language of the lawsuit and Coyle’s press release statement.

Reduced Competition

Health care analysts worry the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will reduce market competition even further by stressing already weak hospitals, leading some to shut services, merge with larger health systems, or close. One study estimates are at risk of closing nationwide.

Less competition, in addition to fewer Medicaid dollars and an increase in uninsured patients, will only strengthen the incentive of health systems with the requisite market clout to raise their commercial prices, increasing premiums for employers and individuals.

“We think commercial prices will continue to increase as health care providers, and hospitals in particular, will seek to preserve or increase their revenue,” said Rachel Block, a program officer at the Milbank Memorial Fund, a foundation that focuses on health equity.

That in turn could pose a challenge to state affordability regulators tasked with overseeing compliance with growth targets for health care spending.

California’s affordability office is required to consider mitigating factors, including changes in federal and state laws. But some of its board members have expressed skepticism about letting hospitals offset Medicaid losses with higher commercial prices.

“There’s a lot of talk about using HR 1 and other federal policies as an excuse to raise prices on commercial payers,” Ian Lewis, an affordability office board member and policy director for UNITE HERE Local 2, a hospitality workers union in the Bay Area, said at the agency’s , referring to the One Big Beautiful Bill. “There’s no more blood to be squeezed from this stone.”

This article first appeared on ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News and is republished here under a .

The ambulances frequently travel back and forth to in Asheville, the largest and most central hospital in the region. Trips can take more than two hours, according to Mark Snelson, director of , the local emergency medical service.

“When we get busy and all three of them are gone, we have no ambulances in our county,” he said.

Snelson and others in Madison County aren’t seeking more ambulances. They want a hospital closer than Mission. And the state agrees. In 2022, North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services officials said Madison and three other mountain counties needed 67 more acute care hospital beds. The state raised that to 93 beds in 2024, then to 222 by Oct. 15.

But the only indication of a new hospital thus far is a 25-acre field of graded dirt with a sign planted beside the highway reading “FUTURE HOME OF AdventHealth Weaverville.”

For the past three years, Mission Hospital’s owner has contested Florida-headquartered ’s attempt to build the hospital on land bought for $7.5 million in rural Weaverville, just minutes south of Madison County. It was , an event that would have defied the of rural hospital closures.

The irony is that the very law that calls for the new hospital — the state’s certificate of need, or CON, law — has been used to prevent further construction. Such laws are intended to cap unfettered health care expansion by allowing new hospitals and expansions only when a state can document a need for them. But the legal process has tied up the proposed Weaverville hospital in court, just as other such laws have done with projects in ; ; and .

All states had certificate of need laws until 1987, when the federal government repealed a mandate requiring them. Today, North Carolina is one of with the laws still on the books. Twelve others have repealed them or let them expire, and some, and , have significantly weakened theirs amid concerns they limit health care access and boost costs. President Donald Trump’s Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice are among those questioning the need for the laws.

In North Carolina, too, opposition to the state’s certificate of need law has surfaced in both the General Assembly, where a has been dormant since April, and more prominently in the state Superior Court.

But some , health care economists, and certificate of need lawyers argue that, though the laws create bureaucracy that can delay projects, that’s not justification to do away with them.

The principle behind certificates of need is to hold at bay what is unnecessary expansion and price inflation brought on by a free market, which makes health care more expensive for everyone.

“If the principle is worth preserving, don’t abandon the principle,” said , a health care attorney with the Benesch law firm and former counsel for . “Improve the process to allow the principle to flourish.”

Who Should Fill the Need?

Mission Health is the largest health care network and the largest employer in the Tar Heel State’s share of the Appalachians. Nashville-based bought the century-old, nonprofit, six-hospital system for $1.5 billion in 2019, converting it to a for-profit operation that serves an 18-county region. (The Dogwood Health Trust, a nonprofit established as part of HCA’s purchase of Mission Health, helps fund ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News’ coverage.)

Though AdventHealth already owns one hospital in the North Carolina mountains about a 30-minute drive from the Weaverville site, its bid to build a new one represents a threat to HCA’s stronghold. Mission argues it is best positioned to meet the needs the state says exist in the Madison County region.

“Not all acute care beds are the same,” Mission Health spokesperson Nancy Lindell said. “Instead of adding more beds at facilities that are unable to provide the complex medical and surgical care needed, the region would be better served by expanding bed capacity at Mission Hospital.”

An eastern North Carolina eye surgeon’s against the state’s health agency and top state officials alleged the state’s certificate of need law “has nothing to do with protecting the health or safety of real patients.” The ophthalmologist, Jay Singleton, has argued the law prevented him from performing surgeries at his own center because the state didn’t see a need to duplicate services already provided at the local hospital, where he was obligated to operate.

In early November, Republican state Treasurer Brad Briner, the , and several academics who study such laws nationally filed amicus briefs supporting Singleton’s case and urging a judge to reject the state’s attempt to dismiss it.

“I’ve characterized CON law as a permission slip to compete,” said , a George Mason University economics and law professor who co-authored the brief. “It’s as if, when a McDonald’s wanted to open up a shop next to Burger King, they have to go to the state regulator to ask if that’s OK.”

Stratmann argued that, instead of , more competition would give hospitals and providers greater leverage in negotiating with insurance companies.

That view aligns with a stance the federal government has held for almost 40 years. With varying degrees of fervor under Democratic and Republican leadership, the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice have argued that the laws are anticompetitive and bad for consumers. The Justice Department did not respond to questions about its current position, and the FTC declined to comment on the record.

“CON laws create barriers to entry and expansion, limit consumer choice, and stifle innovation,” the Federal Trade Commission wrote in an April letter to Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee, a Democrat, as the state’s legislature considered, but ultimately abandoned, amendments to its certificate of need law. “For these reasons, the Agencies have consistently suggested that states repeal or retrench their CON laws.”

‘It’s Personal’

In a to Trump and congressional leaders, Senate Democrats named five North Carolina hospitals on a list of rural hospitals in danger of closing if the president’s then-pending spending and tax-cut legislation, called the One Big Beautiful Bill, became law, citing research from the .

Two of the five North Carolina hospitals on that list, and , are part of the Mission Health system. Both had three consecutive years of negative profit margins, like hundreds of others on the list. Lindell, the Mission Health spokesperson, said HCA is committed to keeping those two facilities open.

Even so, Madison County Health Department Director Tammy Cody said the needs in the region remain and the certificate of need appeals process has slowed down getting help.

“This isn’t theoretical — it’s personal,” she said. “Every delay means a mother in labor risks a longer ride, an elder with chest pain waits longer for help, or a worker injured on the job faces unnecessary complications.”

AdventHealth spokesperson Victoria Dunkle said the hospital system supports the state’s law partly because it “protects rural access to health care and ensures the community has a voice in the process.” The legal process has kept families waiting, she said, but AdventHealth plans to move forward with the Weaverville hospital “as soon as possible.”

Snelson, the ambulance service director, voiced a question many in the region have asked since the hope of a new rural hospital surfaced.

“Why is it a bad thing for another hospital to come in here to take some of the stress off of Mission?” he asked. “Within a day of it opening, it’s going to be full.”

This article first appeared on ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News and is republished here under a .

And even well-insured patients receive unaffordable bills in this era of high-deductible health plans, narrow insurance networks, and 20% cost sharing.

Health systems, doctor groups, and insurers are merging and coalescing into ever-bigger giants. While these mergers are good for business, studies show the escalating consolidation in health care is driving up prices, harming patient outcomes, and decreasing choice for people who need care. A recent study found that six years after hospitals acquired other hospitals, they had by 12.9%, with hospitals that engaged in multiple acquisitions raising their prices by 16.3%.

These new deals are “mutually enforced monopolization,” said Barak Richman, the Alexander Hamilton professor of business law at George Washington University. “It’s not competition. It’s more like collusion. They don’t care about price.”

Those market factors contributed to a landscape where a dose of the antiviral Paxlovid given in a hospital ; magnetic resonance imaging ; and joint replacements .

President Donald Trump has talked about the burden of health care costs since his first campaign, but he has signaled that his administration’s regulators are less inclined than his predecessor’s to intervene in health mergers.

This summer, President Joe Biden’s that all federal agencies make sure markets remain competitive, reversing course from Biden’s more expansive interpretation of antitrust law. And in a scathing statement upon taking over the Federal Trade Commission, Trump-appointed chair Andrew Ferguson , implying that she had overstepped the agency’s legal authority, as well as criticizing what he called her “clumsy” and “breathless” rhetoric and her focus on the incursion of private equity into health care.

What this will mean in practice is unclear.

In an interview with ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News, Daniel Guarnera, the director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition, said that the leadership at the FTC and the Justice Department has endorsed guidelines issued by the Biden administration, which he characterized as a “framing device” for companies contemplating a merger.

The expanded , issued in 2023, focused for the first time on a wide variety of new types of anti-competitive practices that had become common in health care, such as hospitals and private equity firms buying doctors’ practices and insurers owning what are known as specialty pharmacies to dispense complicated and often expensive drugs.

Guarnera noted that regulators’ strongest enforcement tool is convincing a judge that mergers violate the Clayton Antitrust Act, a statute that is the foundation of antitrust law. But administrations can interpret this statute differently, and it’s unclear what cases the Trump administration’s FTC will choose to bring.

“The Biden administration tried to be more innovative,” said a professor of health services, policy, and practice at Brown University’s School of Public Health. “The Trump administration has signaled a more traditional approach — that it’s unwilling to push the envelope.”

In the battle for profits between insurers and providers, each side insists it needs to grow bigger to hold sway in the negotiations that determine health care prices. But evidence shows the prices that make sense in industry-level dealmaking have little to do with the actual value of the services involved. Instead, they’re merely a data point in large-scale calculations that, at best, reflect the power balance between opposing parties.

Under Trump, the FTC has already sued to block two mergers of medical-device makers and has continued the Biden administration’s challenges of individual drug patents.

“Helping improve the health care system though ensuring that there is more and better competition are very, very high priorities for us at the FTC,” Guarnera said, noting that health care has “enormous effects on both Americans’ pocketbooks as well as well-being.”

But it is far more difficult to take on the more massive entities, and though the number of new mergers dipped as companies navigated the uncertain effects of tariffs and interest rates, consolidation continues.

A recent identified “28 large health systems growing bigger,” noting, “This is not an exhaustive list.”

For example, in May, Northwell Health of New York Connecticut’s Nuvance to become a 28-hospital behemoth with over 1,000 outpatient clinics. That was a more traditional merger, where hospitals in the same region joined to extend their reach and increase their market power.

Meanwhile, companies are creating powerhouses not previously seen in health care, by racking up smaller purchases that aren’t expensive enough to trigger federal review. They include what are known as vertical mergers, which combine companies that provide different functions in the same industry — most commonly, hospital systems or insurers buying doctors’ practices or specialty pharmacies.

For instance, UnitedHealth Group, the , now owns health insurance plans; physician practices and other providers; data and analytics services; payment processors; a pharmacy benefits manager; and pharmacies themselves. Jonathan Kanter, the competition czar in Biden’s Justice Department, has likened the UnitedHealth amalgamation to Amazon.

Likewise, hospital systems and private companies — often private equity firms — are increasingly expanding their reach to different regions, gobbling up hospitals, medical practices, and surgery centers. This kind of consolidation, known as a , allows companies to accumulate huge collections of doctors — and significant market power — across the country in particular specialties, such as gastroenterology, ophthalmology, pediatrics, or obstetrics.

Research shows a change in ownership means a change in prices. While pediatrics and obstetrics have traditionally been poorly paid specialties, for instance, they represent a land of opportunity to investors because parents are willing to pay more when it comes to care for their kids.

It used to be relatively simple for regulators to discern when a hospital that merged with its nearby competitor gained monopoly power, rendering it anti-competitive and driving up prices. Health researchers say these new, more complicated types of deals, creating a more complex interplay between insurers and medical providers, have made that tipping point to define.

In health care, even more traditional, vertical consolidation can be problematic, Richman said. “Economic theory says it could be innocuous, like a suit manufacturer opening a store, even though studies show in health care it’s dangerous — higher prices, poorer quality, less choice,” he said.

For example, patients who have Cigna health plans and need an array of more expensive, often injectable prescriptions must use Accredo, the specialty pharmacy in 2018, even though a different pharmacy may have a better price.

Economists have developed computer modeling to predict when patients will experience higher prices and less choice because of these new types of consolidation. But judges who could nix the transactions are so far “not convinced,” said Daniel Arnold, a health economist at Brown’s School of Public Health.

Experts such as Fuse Brown say new laws and enforcement tools are needed.

“The old laws,” she said, “are just not calibrated to the complexity and novel types of mergers.”

This article first appeared on ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News and is republished here under a .

Some of these community health centers may have to cut medical and administrative staff or reduce services. Some could eventually close. The result, their advocates warn, may be added pressure on already crowded hospital emergency rooms.

“This is the worst time in all the years I have been working in health care,” said , president and CEO of , a network of that serves more than 144,000 patients in Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties in California. “We are facing federal cuts and extreme state cuts that will impact services.”

St. John’s and other federally qualified health centers offer primary care and a wide range of other services free of charge or on a sliding fee scale. Nationwide, they see in the country’s most underserved areas.

The federal funds come through two primary routes, both of which face challenges: grants paid in part through the and reimbursements for patients’ care through programs like Medicaid, which provides health insurance for low-income people and people with disabilities. Medicaid is jointly funded by states and the federal government.

Congress has approved the grant money in dribs and drabs recently. In March, lawmakers extended the funds until Sept. 30. That money expired after the Republican-controlled Congress did not pass a funding law, leading to a government shutdown.

Advocates say the health centers need long-term funding to help them plan with more certainty, ideally through a multiyear fund.

received $4.4 billion in grants in early 2024. The National Association of Community Health Centers is advocating for in grants annually for two years to keep the centers fully functional.

The health center safety net faces “multiple layers of challenges,” said , vice president of policy and regulatory affairs for the association.

that Republicans call the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” will significantly cut Medicaid, raising the second set of threats for health centers.

Medicaid of the $46.7 billion in health center revenue in 2023.

Advocates said lower Medicaid payments will exacerbate a gap between funding and operational costs.

Funding for workforce programs also is needed to support the delivery of health care services as centers struggle to hire and retain workers, said , director of the Geiger Gibson Program in Community Health at George Washington University.

The of this type opened in places such as Massachusetts in the 1960s. Congress typically has funded them with bipartisan support, with minor fluctuations.

The struggle this year began when the Trump administration through a January memo, which prevented some centers from receiving already approved grant money. As a consequence, some health centers in states such as Virginia .

The upcoming cuts also are set to arrive at a time when patients will face new demands and challenges. The Medicaid changes in President Donald Trump’s tax-and-spending law include requirements for Medicaid enrollees to report their work or other service hours to keep their benefits.

Meanwhile, the Biden administration and Congress provided consumers to help pay for Affordable Care Act health insurance are set to expire at the end of the year. Some consumers’ costs will spike if Congress doesn’t renew them.

One reason the government shut down is that Democrats want to extend the tax credits, which protect consumers from higher insurance costs. The Republican funding bill did not include an extension; Republican congressional leaders say the issue should be addressed separately.

Consumers “will need more support than ever,” said Jacobs, noting that Medicaid cuts and the expiration of the higher tax credits will both “potentially throw people out of coverage.”

Ninety percent of the centers’ patients have incomes that are twice the or less, and .

“We are also receiving 300 calls per day from patients concerned about their coverage,” said Mangia, from St. John’s.

Republicans are not directly targeting the centers, although they supported the Medicaid cuts that will affect the clinics’ finances. Many Republicans say Medicaid spending has ballooned and that reducing the program’s growth will make it more sustainable.

State and Local Support

While advocating for longer-term federal funding, the centers also are looking to their community and local governments for backing.

Some states already took action while finalizing their annual budgets. , and allocated money for centers. , , and also provided support for the health centers.

The question is how long the money will last.

While some states boosted their support of the centers, others are going in the opposite direction. Anticipating the impact of Medicaid cuts, states such as California made to the program.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office, the federal Department of Health and Human Services, and the federal Health Resources and Services Administration did not respond to requests for comment.

In Los Angeles, Mangia said, one potential solution is to work with partners at the county level, noting that L.A. County has about 10 million residents.

“We can tax ourselves to increase funding for health care services,” he said.

Health center leaders are building a coalition that “hopefully” will include the main stakeholders in the county’s health care system — community health centers, clinics, hospitals, doctors, health plans, unions — to begin the process to fill out a ballot petition, Mangia said. The goal: Put the question about taxes for health centers on the ballot and let voters decide.

“We are learning that the federal government and the state government are not reliable when it comes to continuing to fund health care,” Mangia said.

This article first appeared on ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø News and is republished here under a .