If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Lohud.com)   Police officer's three-year-old daughter can eat only one thing -- a doctor-prescribed formula. What does the insurance company do? A) Gleefully refuse coverage, B) Cackle as they swim in their giant pool of fifties and hundreds, or C) Both   (lohud.com) divider line 524
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

21073 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Dec 2007 at 4:57 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



524 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-12-28 05:23:42 PM
trappedspirit: Running an insurance company is a gamble. You are gambling that you wont have enough claims to bankrupt the company.


Again, no it is not. At least not any more of a gamble than running any business. You clearly have no idea how the insurance industry works. There is an entire profession of people, known as actuaries, whose job it is to classify risk and assign values to it. Insurance companies also buy reinsurance from other insurance companies to cover their own losses.

 
2007-12-28 05:24:00 PM
Their first priority (as with all business) is to their policyholders (customers), not their stockholders (greedy ratbastard leeches)...

FAIL

All business has a primary responsibility to their shareholders. Everything else is secondary.

This is why health care insurance companies should not be for profit entities. They should be only not for profits as the Blue Crosses once were and as a dwindling number of them now are.

For profit entities and affordable health care don't mix for the precise reason that their first responsibility is to their shareholders, not to their subscribers.
 
2007-12-28 05:24:54 PM
This is true selfishness. Her parents can't see that every day of her life is going to be horrifically painful, or if they do they don't care.

This is just as wrong as refusing to allow a terminally ill person the right to suicide. Her parents are responsible for her: her life, her suffering, and her eventual death.
 
2007-12-28 05:25:11 PM
Potent_Potable:

//Not having kids
/To save myself from this kind of unbearable pain of making such a choice


THIS. Only most can't/don't/won't think this far ahead. Queue the "family history of illness "X", let's make babies..."
 
2007-12-28 05:25:14 PM
trappedspirit: Yeah, just ask Katrina victims.

The hits keep on coming.

Befuddled: Maybe the insurance should be on the hook for the difference between this special formula and what it would normally cost to feed this kid.

You and your reasonable suggestions....

"This is madness"
"No.... This... Is....FAAAAARRRRRKKKKKK!!!!"
 
2007-12-28 05:25:29 PM
I don't like the insurance companies having worked in the field, but they don't have to pay. If the policy doesn't cover (insert item here) why should they? If you have an insurance policy that say doesn't cover ER visits, should they pay for it anyway? No, because you get the coverage you pay for, plain and simple.

He should take this up with HR, or whoever handles the insurance policies at his company to see if this can get added to the policy. If this is a policy that he purchased on his own he is both stupid and should take it up with his agent to get this covered.

/Yes I have kids, 3 of them
 
2007-12-28 05:25:46 PM
FTFA
Jessie Devane works three times a week as a temporary nurse
Looks like someone needs to get a FULLTIME job while keeping her Parttime one
 
2007-12-28 05:26:17 PM
trappedspirit: Rational Exuberance: trappedspirit: damiangerous: if you think insurance is "gambling" you're doing it wrong.

Running an insurance company is a gamble. You are gambling that you wont have enough claims to bankrupt the company.

If you put it like that, then all business gambling. Insurance is risk management - and they hire actuaries to figure out statistics on different things. Gambling implies an uninformed decision. There is a lot that is quite certain about insurance, when you aggregate all the data.

Yeah, just ask Katrina victims.


Actually, Katrina is an excellent example. Flood insurance is federal, not private. So we had a battle between the private insureres (who insured general homeowner and wind), and the government over who covers it. If flood insurance were private, the premiums would have been higher - because it is really farking risky to live in places like that. Government flood insurance until very recently didn't adjust for risk - you could keep rebuiling that beachfront house over and over again without paying a dime.
 
2007-12-28 05:27:08 PM
susler: All business has a primary responsibility to their shareholders. Everything else is secondary.

Your turn to FAIL.

Some businesses are sole proprietorships. No shareholders.

/Hadouken!!!
 
2007-12-28 05:27:19 PM
You people must not have kids. Also, not very medically adept. A lot of kids have severe allergies as infants, and need a specialized formula. As they grow, they can and in many cases do get better to the point of living a very normal life.

My wife is a NICU nurse, and has seen it many times over.

But, sure, why not, let the little kid die. It's cost effective.

You people re nothing less than evil.
 
2007-12-28 05:27:28 PM
This country is not going to get any better until most of the lawyers and nearly all of the insurance company executives are hanging in the streets like sides of Mussolini.
 
2007-12-28 05:27:48 PM
The feeding tube that they say is the alternative, would be hidden by her clothing, therefore should be used if the parents can't afford the formula. It's not like the insurance company is saying let the child die, just that there is another, less expensive way.
/Yes, I have children
//No, I don't work for an insurance company.
 
2007-12-28 05:27:52 PM
susler: All business has a primary responsibility to their shareholders. Everything else is secondary.

This is why health care insurance companies should not be for profit entities. They should be only not for profits as the Blue Crosses once were and as a dwindling number of them now are.

For profit entities and affordable health care don't mix for the precise reason that their first responsibility is to their shareholders, not to their subscribers.



IT IS A NOT FOR PROFIT ENTITY
 
2007-12-28 05:27:52 PM
If nature wants her dead, and we should just let her die, should we also stop trying to help people with cancer?
 
2007-12-28 05:28:21 PM
spaceninjax: I don't like the insurance companies having worked in the field, but they don't have to pay. If the policy doesn't cover (insert item here) why should they? If you have an insurance policy that say doesn't cover ER visits, should they pay for it anyway? No, because you get the coverage you pay for, plain and simple.

That's one of the reasons things need to change... big time.
 
2007-12-28 05:28:26 PM
Ok you morons who say she shouldn't live, what happens if it was your daughter? What would you say then?
What about cancer? Should we refuse chemo, radiation, and surgery just because they will probably die anyways?
We have the technology to keep her alive, so why not do it? This isn't the goddamn 1800's.
Whoever says they should let her die is an ignorant fool who has had no experience with these kinds of situations and should not offer any opinions on the matter.
 
2007-12-28 05:29:19 PM
damiangerous: trappedspirit: Running an insurance company is a gamble. You are gambling that you wont have enough claims to bankrupt the company.
Again, no it is not. At least not any more of a gamble than running any business. You clearly have no idea how the insurance industry works. There is an entire profession of people, known as actuaries, whose job it is to classify risk and assign values to it. Insurance companies also buy reinsurance from other insurance companies to cover their own losses.


Yeah, right. No gamble. Come back to Earth. A good outbreak could leave some of these companies belly up. And unlike most other business, you'd really miss this one.
 
2007-12-28 05:29:39 PM
mongbiohazard

...she was still a newborn she should have been euthanized. How civilized are we really...

Jesus freaking Christ!

I wonder how many of you "let 'er die, durrrrr....gene pool...durrr" people are under the age of 13?

Also, if you think this is God telling these people they shouldn't breed...what is God telling you by making you completely unattractive to the opposite sex, thereby limiting your human contact to trolling Fark?
 
2007-12-28 05:29:59 PM
spaceninjax: I don't like the insurance companies having worked in the field, but they don't have to pay. If the policy doesn't cover (insert item here) why should they? If you have an insurance policy that say doesn't cover ER visits, should they pay for it anyway? No, because you get the coverage you pay for, plain and simple.

This is what people don't understand about insurance. When you pick a policy, you are picking what risks you choose to assume and what risks you want the insurance company to assume. The more risks you want them to cover, the higher the premium. You don't get it both ways - not having to pay the higher premiums of more risk coverage with being covered if something happens.
 
2007-12-28 05:30:18 PM
What no one's mentioned: The plan in which they are enrolled is self-insured, meaning that the decision about what's covered and what's not is made by the employer, not the insurance company, and the insurance company gets no monetary benefit at all from this decision.
 
2007-12-28 05:30:22 PM
Shadowknight: You people must not have kids. Also, not very medically adept. A lot of kids have severe allergies as infants, and need a specialized formula. As they grow, they can and in many cases do get better to the point of living a very normal life.

You haven't been on Fark for very long, have you? We think that the kid will grow accustomed to the free treatment, and will refuse to get better. It's like The Welfare; it makes people who accept it evil and lazy. That's why I have to have 37 shotguns in my living room.

God bless 'Murica!!!
 
2007-12-28 05:30:31 PM
trappedspirit: Certainly this raises the question of what quality of robust gene pool humanity ends up with when more and more abnormalities can be dealt with allowing what would have been otherwise a terminating gene line to mature and combine back with the populace.

I Agree with you and give me doughnuts
 
2007-12-28 05:30:38 PM
give me doughnuts: Have they considered euthanasia?
Being allergic to nuts or bananas is one thing, this kid is allergic to FOOD. This is a subtle hint that this kid isn't supposed to live.


To you and those like you (and a tip of the hat to RiverKing).

Whoopty? Is that you? Come home, son, we and the rest of the village think we've saved enough money (since the insurance wouldn't cover it) to finally get your head removed from where it's stuck.

/Please, son
//We're beggin' ya
///Please
 
2007-12-28 05:30:46 PM
If the cop writes speeding tickets when he knows good and well there is no legitimate reason to write a ticket other than to stuff the city/county/state coffers... I don't give a fark!

Otherwise, I hate health insurance companies...they are the Nazi's of USA, casting life and death decisions so the CEO and executives can shovel away the money into their gold plated yachts!
 
2007-12-28 05:31:32 PM
My child had a similar problem. He can only drink human blood - can't eat any food or drink water. Also direct sunlight will kill him and he doesn't like going to Church.

Yet my insurance won't cover his care. They recommend garlic pills.

Help!
 
2007-12-28 05:31:51 PM
The_Gallant_Gallstone: spaceninjax: I don't like the insurance companies having worked in the field, but they don't have to pay. If the policy doesn't cover (insert item here) why should they? If you have an insurance policy that say doesn't cover ER visits, should they pay for it anyway? No, because you get the coverage you pay for, plain and simple.

That's one of the reasons things need to change... big time.


Even in a universal coverage plan, you wouldn't cover EVERYTHING. Resources are still limited, you have to cut off coverage at some point. You'd have to ration things - with waiting lists.
 
2007-12-28 05:32:10 PM
Wonder how many of you farktards would make these statements to the parents?
 
2007-12-28 05:32:11 PM
Kludge: mongbiohazard

...she was still a newborn she should have been euthanized. How civilized are we really...


It's cool to kill them as soon as they exit the birth canal, but don't you dare wait a second sooner!

SusanIvanova: The plan in which they are enrolled is self-insured, meaning that the decision about what's covered and what's not is made by the employer, not the insurance company, and the insurance company gets no monetary benefit at all from this decision.

It's been mentioned, just not by any of our resident bad-ass TF Superstars.
 
2007-12-28 05:32:17 PM
The_Gallant_Gallstone: Your turn to FAIL.
Some businesses are sole proprietorships. No shareholders.
/Hadouken!!!


That's an interesting idea of fail. "Shareholders" is a short way of saying "all the people who have ownership interest in a company". In a sole proprietorship there is a single person who has ownership interest, therefore the company has a primary responsibility to that person.

 
2007-12-28 05:33:41 PM
Rational Exuberance: trappedspirit: Rational Exuberance: trappedspirit: damiangerous: if you think insurance is "gambling" you're doing it wrong.

Running an insurance company is a gamble. You are gambling that you wont have enough claims to bankrupt the company.

If you put it like that, then all business gambling. Insurance is risk management - and they hire actuaries to figure out statistics on different things. Gambling implies an uninformed decision. There is a lot that is quite certain about insurance, when you aggregate all the data.

Yeah, just ask Katrina victims.

Actually, Katrina is an excellent example. Flood insurance is federal, not private. So we had a battle between the private insureres (who insured general homeowner and wind), and the government over who covers it. If flood insurance were private, the premiums would have been higher - because it is really farking risky to live in places like that. Government flood insurance until very recently didn't adjust for risk - you could keep rebuiling that beachfront house over and over again without paying a dime.


I was talking more about the possibility of catastrophic damage causing simultaneous claims stretching an insurance company's ability to pay. The flood thing was pretty cut and dry in my opinion.
 
2007-12-28 05:33:53 PM
Insurance is gambling, and the House always wins.
 
2007-12-28 05:33:53 PM
toobsok: Ok you morons who say she shouldn't live, what happens if it was your daughter? What would you say then?
What about cancer? Should we refuse chemo, radiation, and surgery just because they will probably die anyways?
We have the technology to keep her alive, so why not do it? This isn't the goddamn 1800's.
Whoever says they should let her die is an ignorant fool who has had no experience with these kinds of situations and should not offer any opinions on the matter.


Some morons know enough to make an educated decision prior to having said daughter. Keeping her alive to what existence, so she can feed herself through a ziploc bag in her stomach. Mmmmm. Still don't care enough.
 
2007-12-28 05:34:24 PM
I'm going to have to play Devil's Advocate here, and say that if its really that bad, the poor kid probably shouldn't continue to live.

A genetic defect that serious at 3 years old, the rest of her life is just farked. Not too far in the past, she'd have died and that would be that.

There are some lives not worth living.
 
2007-12-28 05:34:35 PM
There is no insurance company involved here. It's a self-insured city plan. The plan administrator would pay for a sex trip to Thailand to cure impotence if told to by the city.
 
2007-12-28 05:34:49 PM
Will they please let Darwin do his job?

/It was such a good idea they spawned another with the same problem?
//Did they offer to write a check to the insurance company for the value of regular food they don't have to buy for the kids?
 
2007-12-28 05:35:09 PM
Some unoriginal internet tough guys in this thread. Yeah, we get it, you're edgy and controversial because you can say cruel ignorant stuff on the internet. I'm sure a 3 year old's suffering somehow diminishes the pain and misery of your existence. We all get it. The same jackasses make their presence known in every thread where basic compassion or decency are in question and show just how badass they are by taking the sociopath route. Do you think anyone is impressed with you? Do you think making idiotic comments will somehow alleviate the voretex of suck, loneliness, and despair that is your existence? It won't. You might get 5 minutes of attention from people who want to rub your nose in the excrement you spew, treating you like the animal you are because negative reinforcement is the only way people of your intellectual development are able to learn (and you guys tend to prove just how ineffective that technique is). Then, you can gleefully masturbate because your existence, as a festering tumor on the ass of philanthropy and common decency, has been validated for another 24 hours. I feel you're psychologically broken beyond fixing. Just like a horse with a broken leg, your life is nothing but pain and misery and like a rabid dog, you try to infect everyone you come in contact with. I'm sorry you have to continue to exist. It's a shame we all have to be punished (yourselves included) with your ongoing gas exchanges.
 
2007-12-28 05:35:36 PM
Insurance companies are evil and insurance is basically a scam.

As to all of you saying this child is not meant to live, how many of your mothers had to have cesarean sections? Any insulin-dependent diabetics among you? Alright...how many of you have needed antibiotics to get over a serious illness? How many of you have had your appendix or gallbladder out?

I could go on here but are you getting my point? I would venture to say that many of us wouldn't be around without medical help. The child seems to be doing well on the formula, pears, and rice right now and, who knows, there may be better treatments for her in the future. None of us has the right to say who lives and who dies. It is in the power of modern medicine to keep this child not just alive but thriving, albeit on a limited diet. It is criminal to deny her that.
 
2007-12-28 05:35:36 PM
neomatt: Wonder how many of you farktards would make these statements to the parents?

Truth hurts sometimes.
 
2007-12-28 05:35:45 PM
trappedspirit: I was talking more about the possibility of catastrophic damage causing simultaneous claims stretching an insurance company's ability to pay. The flood thing was pretty cut and dry in my opinion.

Which is why nearly every insurance company has reinsurance, to prepare for that very possibility. Another insurance company to insure them in case of a catastrophe.
 
2007-12-28 05:35:49 PM
mdbirt: Otherwise, I hate health insurance companies...they are the Nazi's of USA, casting life and death decisions so the CEO and executives can shovel away the money into their gold plated yachts!

While this particular incident doesn't really impugn the health insurance companies, your attitude on their avarice is right on. Support single payer universal health care; vote for the candidates who support it. It's the only way to get health care out of the morass of greed.
 
2007-12-28 05:36:04 PM
I_ROUTE: trappedspirit: Certainly this raises the question of what quality of robust gene pool humanity ends up with when more and more abnormalities can be dealt with allowing what would have been otherwise a terminating gene line to mature and combine back with the populace.

I Agree with you and give me doughnuts


Only thing is, I'm not sure how much research had been done to examine 2nd or 3rd generations of this. It could lead to x-men like abilities for all I know. Maybe this is just the first mutation in preparing that gene line for 'fire-breath'.
 
2007-12-28 05:37:41 PM
BeatenHorse: I'm going to have to play Devil's Advocate here, and say that if its really that bad, the poor kid probably shouldn't continue to live.

A genetic defect that serious at 3 years old, the rest of her life is just farked. Not too far in the past, she'd have died and that would be that.

There are some lives not worth living.


Ever heard of diabetes? Should we just let all of them die?
 
2007-12-28 05:37:49 PM
ashinmytomatoes: Insurance companies are evil and insurance is basically a scam.

Like, ALL insurance? Homeowners', Renters', Auto, everything?

It's easy to call something evil when you don't understand anything about them or why they exist. Or even what their purpose actually is.
 
2007-12-28 05:39:10 PM
My son was born with a rare heart defect. After two successful surgeries, he wouldn't eat anything from a bottle. We chose to have a feeding tube put in. Eventually, he started taking the bottle as usual then quit. He goes in cycles. The feeding tube is much quicker and less messier than a bottle. It also makes it very convenient to give him all of his medicines. I suggest this family look into the feeding tube.
 
2007-12-28 05:39:24 PM
damiangerous: The_Gallant_Gallstone: Your turn to FAIL.
Some businesses are sole proprietorships. No shareholders.
/Hadouken!!!

That's an interesting idea of fail. "Shareholders" is a short way of saying "all the people who have ownership interest in a company". In a sole proprietorship there is a single person who has ownership interest, therefore the company has a primary responsibility to that person.


Words are elastic, but not that elastic. It doesn't really matter though, the attitude of "I'm responsible for myself, screw my fellow man" is going the way of the dodo. I think $4.50 for a gallon of gas, coupled with the return of our neglected Iraqi veterans will be enough to cause some real change.
 
2007-12-28 05:39:51 PM
CokeBear: FTFA: The disease was rarely seen before 1995 but now about one child in 10,000 has it.This is the real story here. Where did this disease come from? Which chemical that we are spewing into the atmosphere is doing this to our kids?


I wonder if it has to do with the available treatments for this disease, that did not exist before. Now these kids are able to survive and pass on the defective genes to children of their own in the future. I think its wrong to say they need to die, but they should not be allowed to have children of their own.
 
2007-12-28 05:40:03 PM
Must be CIGNA at work again.
 
2007-12-28 05:40:22 PM
vudukungfu: TFA missed teh Who what where and when.
Which insurance Company is it?
Surely they can put that out there.
Then we have a choice as to do business with them or not.
Or does the media protect teh rich, and just publish the details of the poor?


FTFA
"The family had been getting coverage for Elecare because of an error", said Helen Sweeny, the administrator of the self-insured medical benefits fund run by the Superior Officers Council.
 
2007-12-28 05:40:53 PM
Rational Exuberance: Like, ALL insurance? Homeowners', Renters', Auto, everything?

It's easy to call something evil when you don't understand anything about them or why they exist. Or even what their purpose actually is.


Insurance is not inherently evil, but the health insurance companies enjoy a stranglehold on the industry that needs to be loosened.
 
2007-12-28 05:41:35 PM
why are they so against a feeding tube? as the child gets older, it will take more and more formula. It seems to be they are just prolonging the inevitable. and using a bottle to bypass the taste buds sounds like an excuse to me.
 
Displayed 50 of 524 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report