Health insurance leaves family on hook for $148K

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by leekohler, Jul 21, 2009.

  1. macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #1
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-tue-problem-insurance-0721jul21,0,5666288.column

    Wow- this is why we need reform. No one should have to go through this.

     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    InvalidUserID

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Location:
    Palo Alto, CA
    #2
    Nice to know insurance companies will always be there...

    ...

    ...

    ...

    ...

    ...to accept the premiums and then run when actually needed.
     
  3. thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #3
    I wonder what would have happened had The Problem Solver not called.
     
  4. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #4
    But what we are getting is not a solution to this issue, this is catastrophic care...

    Yeah what has happened is wrong and I do not doubt it will be fixed.


    The difference here is, at least her Doctors had the right to make the choice to give her treatment. In many countries with government controlled medicine Doctors with years of experience, seven or more years beyond college, can be overruled by a bureaucrat.


    What is being put forward in today's Congress needs to be stopped only because it isn't what we need but what they want, total control over an even larger and more invasive part of our economy.



    Look, anyone can find a dozen examples of insurance companies doing it wrong, but at least with an insurance company you have the government regulators on your side, if not the press. Who is going to be on your side when the government determines you don't need that operation right now because your surviving.... you can just wait.
     
  5. macrumors 604

    anjinha

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #5
    Care to share your source for that?

    Our healthcare system is nowhere near perfect, but I don't know a single case of someone who couldn't get treated when they needed too. It is true that some people might have to wait for surgery if they have a non urgent condition but people still have the choice to get treatment at a private hospital if they wish. Either way, they WILL get treated.
     
  6. macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #6
    There is absolutely no reason why you cannot have private health insurance and universal healthcare free at the point of delivery.
     
  7. macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #7
    So, under public health insurance we are at the mercy of government bureaucrats, but under private insurance at least we can count on government bureaucrats.
     
  8. macrumors 68030

    Heilage

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    #8
    Disclaimer:I don't have any detailed insight into the american welfare system.


    Is it just me, or does the insurance seem to never cover what people really need covered?
     
  9. macrumors 604

    anjinha

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #9
    That's what it seems like to me.
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    #10
    I probably have missed something in the 1000+ pages of the reform bill, but from what I hear, it sounds like everyone who actually likes their current health care situation will actually get to keep it the way it is: controlled by private insurance companies who get to call the shots.

    The public plan will just be one option, right?
     
  11. macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #11
    If you have insurance and this **** happens its pretty ****ed up. I have no problem with the government stepping in and putting a foot down against **** like this at all, in fact they should do a similar policy as they tried with the credit card companies and make the health insurance fully disclose these loopholes in layman's terms so everyone knows to go to a better insurance company.
     
  12. macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #12
    Not necessarily. Not under current law. This happens all the time, and there is often nothing people can do but declare bankruptcy. Which, even then may not help now, especially after bankruptcy "reform", which didn't get to the point of the biggest group who declare it - those who do so because of healthcare costs.

    Public outcry and pressure from the coming legislation may do something about this particular case, but it's still happening elsewhere.

    Patently false in most cases, but what about here where an insurance company bureaucrat can do the same thing? Uh, see above. In some cases, hospitals won't even do anything, especially when it's this expensive, if insurance won't pay for it because they know the people won't be able to. In this case, they thought they had approval, which was only afterwards denied. Are you ok with that as long as it isn't the gov doing it?

    Again, patently false. I can tell you're listening only to far right chatter, and haven't actually read the bill, nor legitimate analysis. There are many problems with the bill, but this it not one of them. Nowhere close. If anything, the current proposals seem to want to discourage public options and reward private insurance.

    'Nother swing and a miss. Very little gov regulation, and what little there is doesn't do anything to stop this type of things, if what is even enforced. Part of the new reform proposed does just that, which you seem to be against, even though it's completely watered down and full of loopholes so they can continue to just right on screwing people just like this.

    And if you think it's only a dozen, you're missing that it can be the rule overall, not the exception.

    Not an issue in the way you think it is. Definitely better than who helps you when an insurance companies does this, which despite what you seem to think is almost no one. Again, part of what is being proposed. The reason it's watered down so that could happen is because of people like you, who seem to be saying we should be doing almost nothing at all. Even though it's better than nothing, which is what the people that is designed for have. The side effect might be that companies like this will stop doing such things so much or else lose customers to the public plan, which compared to this, is going to look better. That's their fault. Maybe they should look again at their multi-billion dollar profits.

    If you like your insurance, and it doesn't do this, the public plan will do nothing but maybe lower your rates and stop this type of thing from being so common.

    Not always, but they make things much more difficult for people, and even when you have coverage, it can be hit and miss.

    Absolutely, but when you're the opposition and you have nothing, you have to throw something out there to convince them this type of thing isn't what's happening to them and hurting them so much, which we all see everyday.

    Then stall, delay, talk about costs while ignoring the cost savings, pretend new regulation they've already tried will fix everything when it won't do anything, then find a way to water down what little is left over a plan that wasn't great to begin with, but again, for those who have nothing or something like this, is a necessary evil.
     
  13. macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #13
    If they can afford it, if it will cover them, if it doesn't do the same thing because they all do...

    Meanwhile, the one of the major things about the new bill is that it does just that, which you oppose, while supporting those who water down what little is already there.
     
  14. macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #14
    you're right, who really needs income?

    May i please pay for Joe Six Pack son's college education too in full? I don't need any money, I need to give it away to people I don't know who will profit off my work
     
  15. macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #15
    If insurance companies go down I don't get to eat thanksgiving in a 12k sq ft house. Go ahead and pass your bill, I am going to be healthy for at least another 30 years to allow it to fail due to budget constraints and mismanagement.
     
  16. macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #16
    Anyone who wants better than what the gov offers, which isn't much unless you have nothing.

    So his kid, who doesn't have much through no fault of his own because of his parent(s) (even though it could be a much more complicated issue like illness or death, or even simply stupidity) should be able to work hard in school, get a combination of scholarships, student-aid, and loans he can actually pay back (even if he takes a lower paying job helping other poor people that doesn't pay much) and go to college which he might not otherwise actually be able to so he can be a productive member of society? Yeah, that would be horrible. Meanwhile, if you can afford it, you can send your kid to an even better school. Also helped by public money, no matter what kind of school it is. If you fall somewhere in the middle, your kids can usually still apply for scholarships, aid, gov backed loans too. Even those of us without kids, we benefit from having children in school too, from pre-elementary to college (all of which, even private get gov aid). That's what we do in a society, we all take care of each other. Some of us luckier, some of us work harder, but we all benefit.

    Or you could just sit around on welfare because it's SO easy for anyone to get and SO much better than working to earn more and have better lives, which is why everyone is on welfare, and we spend ALL that money on it, even though it isn't, they don't, and we don't.

    Um, what?
     
  17. macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #17
    The universal system is not going to work, everyone will be on public health a few years after and only a portion will be working productively enough to pay taxes for it (earn their keep). It just doesn't seem like a very productive system to me at all, especially with no incentives to be healthy. Kind of like social security, except it starts out paying immediately and you don't necessarily have to pay in.
     
  18. macrumors 604

    anjinha

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #18
    At this point in the U.S., considering its healthcare system, people have every reason to try their best to be healthy: insurance companies are unreliable, expensive and sometimes even any insurance is very hard to get. Some people go bankrupt from not being able to pay their medical bills. Still, Americans are fatter and in poorer shape and health than lots of other countries that have universal healthcare.

    Explain that.
     
  19. macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #19
    do you have first hand experience with US health insurance?

    I do and its not bad at all

    in fact, I would call it excellent in the services it provides
     
  20. macrumors 68000

    Demosthenes X

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    #20
    Is that why the USA spends more per capita on health care than anyone else in the world, but ranks 37th in the world for overall performance, and 72nd for general health? Guess who ranked first: France. A country with public health care.
     
  21. macrumors 604

    anjinha

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #21
    It's good until they deny you coverage for absolutely no reason...
     
  22. macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #22
    There is always a reason....

    Stop demonizing insurance companies. If you agree to a policy and it states what it covers you have no right to complain as you agreed to it
     
  23. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Location:
    An octopus's garden
    #23
    Frankly, I would rather not have to deal with health insurance companies at all. I'm lucky that my insurance is extremely good and, because I'm in a university town, the medical attention I get is exceptionally good. However, insurance companies are like any other service company and if there is a problem, you will never get a straight answer and will end up spending hours on the phone and pouring over every word of your contract until you can find the bit that supports your argument.

    The problem is that no person should ever have to worry about 6,5,4,3,2 figure bills for health care unless, of course, they opt to. It is inhumane - unfortunately, the US medical system is inhumane. Insurance companies are just the tip of the iceberg.
     
  24. macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #24
    We probably spend more on education too and we still lag behind on that every year, public education. We still have some of the most prestigious colleges in the world, we also have some of the best doctors and pharmaceutical companies in the world.

    Guess where 62 percent of your drugs originated from since 1940? I would say that should put us up in the ranks a bit since all other countries are benefiting from it. Oh second place is Switzerland with 6.8%

    90% of those drugs the US produced were, you guessed it, name-brand profit making companies. Damn private companies putting in all that money to save lives. We should have hoarded the drugs for a while to get ourselves up a few ranks in performance. :rolleyes:

    The US's problem in performance has nothing to do with health care, it has to do with lack of caring for themselves. We have a 30% obesity rate, france has 9%. Lets not go into how a doctor is going to magically motivate you to lose weight and be more healthy.
     
  25. macrumors 604

    anjinha

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #25
    But you said yourself that with universal healthcare people don't have as much incentive to try to keep healthy because they don't pay more if they get sick... But the truth is that France has only a 9% obesity rate and generally better health even though they have universal care, so the exact opposite of the U.S., where people have to pay a lot if they get sick but they still don't try to eat better to get healthier...
     

Share This Page