The problem is that when such things happens, insurers have said - and won - in Court with:

"We are not denying or delaying care for our customer. We are, instead, only noting that we are not going to be the Responsible Party for paying for it. They are, as they have been all along, free to get the care they believe they need and pay for it themselves."

This brought to you by the same legal scholars that brought you theories such as "Everyone knows 'own' doesn't mean 'own'" and "It's okay to give the judge hearing your case tons of money because that's just gifts between friends as long as you don't explicitly say it's a bribe". Our legal system seems to be based around deciding on the outcome you want regardless of rationality or the law, talking nonsense long enough that it seems like there's intractable disagreement and then declaring your solution to be the common-sense middle ground.