That's because health insurance is not health care. We don't exactly send insurance policies to a humanitarian crisis, do we? Once you stop conflating health care and health insurance, the solution is obvious. Either socialized medicine (where you essentially enslave doctors and force them to treat patients) or get rid of insurance entirely and audit everything in the health care industry and regulate it for expenses and level of care. There is literally no other solution except letting two people have a consensual agreement for payment for services rendered and we already have that.
Either socialized medicine (where you essentially enslave doctors and force them to treat patients)
What do you mean by socialized? NHS doctors in the UK a pretty well paid.
In socialism, the government controls the means of service and production. By making a system where health care is basically "free", the cost is actually subsidized by a government regulated program. In order to do this and ensure fairness, no doctor can refuse a patient. For any reason. You are taking that control you gave the government over health care and forcing a doctor to treat a patient regardless of whether or not they want to, whether or not a patient is compliant, and whether or not a patient is abusive to the doctor. The doctor cannot refuse to do the work. The word for this is "slavery".
So, to sum that up, you are suggesting that slavery of a serviceman or produce is an acceptable choice. It is not.
Taking this analogy further though, if you house is on fire, you're never able to buy insurance again. Also tough luck if you lose your job and insurance and then happen to get diagnosed with cancer in between insurance coverage.
I'm not sure what the correct solution to this is, but it is clear healthcare is phuked.