I've been fortunate that I have not had to make too many visits to the doctor over the years, at least for anything significant.  But the dentist, that's a bit of a different story.  I've had a pretty colorful history when it comes to tooth #9...that's the front tooth, the left one.  I injured the tooth during a silly 16th birthday "hazing" gone awry, and years after the incident, I've had some pretty interesting visits to the dentist to repair, cosmetically alter, and in general, make fit for eating sandwiches.  For the most part, the majority of the costs of these procedures were covered by my insurance plans...until recently.  

Hoping to end emergency dentist visits and limited biting/chewing capability once and for all, I chose to go with an implant procedure.  I was informed that my provider would cover only a small portion of the total cost, and like many medical procedures, was certainly not insignificant.  Why would a procedure to limit "severe infection" from eating away at what was left of my root be covered so poorly?  More than enough to get me questioning the process and the reality of the patient-doctor-insurance provider relationship, I sat down with my Periodontist, my assumptions were validated and the absurd reality of my experience reinforced what we all know and can attest to:  Medical insurance certainly is not designed with a focus on the patient (user) but favorably skewed in the direction of the provider (A surprise to NO ONE.).  So I asked myself:

What if insurance providers took a more user-centered approach to coverage?