Balancing patient choice and restrictions: The ethics of preferred providers

Preferred provider arrangements are designed to guide patients toward specific healthcare professionals or services. While expert recommendations can enhance care quality, ethical concerns arise when these systems transition from promoting high-quality options to imposing limitations on patient choice. This article examines these differences and their implications for patients, providers, and the broader healthcare system.From recommendation to restrictionIn non-coercive models, preferred providers are presented as recommendations. For instance, a physician might refer a patient to a lab known for its turnaround time or template, or to a pharmacist with specialized expertise. Importantly, with these recommendations, patients retain the freedom to seek care from alternative providers without facing penalties or a loss of coverage. These models prioritize patient autonomy, focus on quality, and avoid creating barriers to care.Conversely, restrictive preferred provider systems employ financial penalties, limited coverage, or enforced provider changes to influence patient decisions. These tactics often prioritize the financial interests of insurers over patient outcomes. Furthermore, they mislead stakeholders by claiming cost-control benefits while maintaining high claim costs for plan sponsors and safeguarding insurer profit margins.Regulatory standards vs. coercionIn some jurisdictions, providers must meet specific qualifications or standards, such as oncology certifications or specialized compounding training in order to become preferred providers. These requirements are designed to ensure patient safety and provider competence, not to limit choice. Unlike coercive practices, they enhance care quality without penalizing patients who opt for alternative providers. Defining the ethical lineThe ethical distinction between guidance and restriction lies in the impact on patient autonomy. Non-coercive recommendations direct patients toward high-quality care while preserving their freedom to choose. Restrictive models, by contrast, use penalties and coverage limitations to control behavior, often subordinating patient welfare to financial incentives.ConclusionPreferred provider arrangements should aim to enhance patient autonomy by offering informed, expert guidance rather than imposing restrictive measures. Upholding patient choice, promoting transparency, and adhering to professional standards are essential to maintaining trust, ensuring high-quality care, and preserving the ethical foundations of the healthcare system.Michael Nashat, Pharm.D. R.Ph. is a pharmacist, healthcare executive, and strategic advisor with over 20 years of experience spanning pharmacy operations, pharmaceutical management, specialty pharmacy, compounding, drug plan management and patient care delivery. As managing partner of multiple pharmacies, he oversees financial, regulatory, and operational management.He co-founded TerrAscend Corp (TSX: TSND), where he held multiple leadership roles, including CEO, President, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Clinical Officer, and Chairman of the Board. Under his leadership, TerrAscend became the first cannabis company to operate across Canada, the U.S., and Europe, driving significant international growth, launching Canada’s first national cannabis tea brand, and securing German EU-GMP certification for medical cannabis exports.He also co-founded OnPharm United (previously OnPharm), which now supports over 600 independent pharmacies across Canada.He has served on the Board of the Ontario College of Pharmacists, the Ministry of Health Pharmacy Council, and various committees, including those with the Neighbourhood Pharmacy Association of Canada and the Ontario Pharmacists Association Economics Committee. Aly Háji is a healthcare regulatory lawyer who brings a pharmacist’s insight and a proven track record to every client engagement. At Ricketts Harris LLP, he focuses on complex disciplinary matters, complaints, and audits involving healthcare regulators, payors, and insurers—offering a strategic, empathetic approach that recognizes the unique challenges facing today’s pharmacy professionals.Aly’s depth of experience is rooted in a career that has spanned multiple facets of healthcare and law. He has served as a prosecutor for professional regulators, providing him with valuable perspective on the oversight process. Before earning degrees in Common Law, Civil Law, and an MBA from McGill University, and completing an LL.M at Cambridge University, Aly graduated with honours from the University of Toronto’s Bachelor of Science in Pharmacy program. He has also lectured at the Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, preparing future professionals to navigate a complex legal and regulatory environment.This unique blend of pharmacy training, regulatory prosecution experience, and academic involvement makes Aly a formidable advocate. Whether guiding clients through disciplinary hearings or addressing high-stakes audits, he provides practical, proactive counsel rooted in firsthand knowledge of healthcare practice and law—committed to safeguarding the reputations, rights, and professional futures of pharmacists and technicians.

Balancing patient choice and restrictions: The ethics of preferred providers

Register for free access or login.

Related Topics