DAVAO CITY – A councilor appealed before the city council, local government, and concerned sectors on Tuesday, September 17, to advocate for the speedy removal of the Philippine Health Insurance Corp.’s controversial single period of confinement policy.
BRAGA (FB)
The single period of confinement policy dictates that a patient’s admission and readmission from the same illness or procedure within a 90-calendar day period shall only be compensated with a cause rate benefit by PhilHealth.
Councilor Pilar Braga, chairman of the Committee on Education, Culture and Arts, and Sciences and Technology, pointed out in a privileged speech that healthcare is everyone’s right. She said the government must uphold this right, especially for the vulnerable.
Braga said the PhilHealth’s single period of confinement policy restricts members from receiving multiple readmission benefits within 90 days for the same illness, which hinders the patient from receiving complete healthcare.
“Illnesses are unpredictable. They do not adhere to the timeline nor respect the financial restraint of families. For many of our people, particularly the marginalized, a recurring illness can quickly turn into a financial burden, exacerbating their already difficult circumstances,” Braga said.
She said PhilHealth’s policy restricting members to one case rate benefit within 90 days for the same illness or procedure penalizes those whose health collapses unpredictably. She added that the lack of healthcare access only worsens the impoverished communities' plight.
Braga said while treatments like blood transfusions, chemotherapy, and dialysis are exempted, most health conditions are still restricted by this single period of confinement policy, which goes against the very principles of the Universal Health Care Act (UHC).
The councilor emphasized that the UHC Act, embodied in Republic Act 11223, mandates that all Filipinos have equitable healthcare access and that no one should be left behind. She said the policy places unreasonable limitations on healthcare access and readmissions.
Braga believed she was not alone in this sentiment since Sen. Christopher “Bong” Go earlier questioned the fairness and validity of the policy in a Senate inquiry. She said though PhilHealth President and CEO Emmanuel Ledesma Jr. vowed to review the policy, more must be done.
During the Senate Health Committee hearing on September 10, Ledesma bared that President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. had directed the remittance of the P89.9 billion from PhilHealth’s funds to the National Treasury during a Cabinet meeting.
The Supreme Court scheduled oral arguments on January 14, 2025, on petitions filed on August 2 by Sen. Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III, former Finance Undersecretary Cielo Magno, and the Philippine Medical Association, challenging the transfer of PhilHealth's excess funds.
They challenged the provisions of the General Appropriations Act of 2024 and the Department of Finance Circular 003-2023. They also requested the SC to issue a Temporary Restraining Order to block the transfer of the funds from PhilHealth to the National Treasury.
“We must take a stand regarding PhilHealth’s single period of confinement policy. Removing this policy would ensure that all Filipinos – regardless of income, status, or health condition – have access to the uninterrupted healthcare they rightfully deserve,” Braga said.
She said removing the policy would benefit low-income families, who often face the ear-piercing consequences of the restriction, and would bring PhilHealth’s services into better alignment with the UHC Act, ensuring that the healthcare system remains non-restrictive and inclusive.
Braga encouraged her fellow councilors, the local government, and all concerned sectors to join her and urged PhilHeath to allow multiple case rate benefits within 90 days for the same illness, and continuously review any policy that hinders access to essential healthcare.