I have never particularly liked you, but I didn't realise you were this hateful
Stephen Send a noteboard - 21/11/2014 05:48:11 PM
View original post
View original postlet's all remember that this couple's financial problems as a result of complications in the mother's pregnancy while on vacation in the US is the type of system the GOP would have us return to with their talk of repeal of Obamacare. this couple did exactly as they should have by traveling with health insurance to the US since we don't provide universal health care, but their coverage considered the woman's pregnancy as a pre-existing condition in order to not have to pay the expensive hospital stay resulting from an unforeseen complication in her pregnancy. since they bought their plan individually rather than through the federal healthcare exchange, the insurance company can use this loophole to deny their coverage through "pre-existing conditions" and stick them with the remainder of the bill.
View original postIt WAS a pre-existing condition! She was pregnant when they bought the insurance. That is a well-known issue, that insurance companies often do not cover pre-exiting conditions, unless they charge much higher rates. The point of insurance is protection against unforeseen expenses, not to stick someone else with the bill. No other kind of insurance routinely pays for expenses incurred prior to taking on the client. Try going out and getting car insurance, and then asking Gieco or State Farm to pay for the accident you had the day before. Or try to get life insurance for a dead person. Try to insure a home that just burned down, or a cargo ship that has sunk. All this talk about evil health insurance companies denying preexisting conditions is just moralistic disguising of attempted fraud.
View original postAn insurance policy is a contract. Either a pair of idiot Canucks bought a policy that did not cover the pregnancy, or the insurance company is failing to fulfill their contract, in which case they have an actionable position. What is much more likely is that they bought insurance against accidents or illnesses that might occur on their vacation, while stupidly accepting their doctor's assurances that there would be no problems with their pregnancy.
View original post
Saskatchewan couple considering bankruptcy after $1M medical bill
View original postMarlene Leung, CTVNews.ca
View original postPublished Wednesday, November 19, 2014 9:05AM EST
View original postLast Updated Wednesday, November 19, 2014 6:56PM EST
View original postA Saskatchewan couple is considering filing for bankruptcy after being hit with a medical bill of nearly $1 million, incurred after their daughter was prematurely born during a trip to the U.S. last year.
View original postDarren Kimmel and Jennifer Huculak were hit with a bill of $950,000 after Huculak gave birth to their daughter Reece last year in Hawaii.
View original postThe two flew to Hawaii for a holiday in October 2013 when Huculak was six months pregnant. Before they flew out, Huculak was cleared to travel and the couple purchased Blue Cross Insurance.
View original post Two days into the trip, Huculak's water broke and she spent the next six weeks on bed rest in a Hawaiian hospital. Her daughter was born nine weeks early and spent two months in intensive care.
So much for that superior Canadian health care system. They cleared that woman for travel, and look what happens. View original post
Despite having purchased medical insurance before their trip, provider Blue Cross has denied their claim, arguing that Huculak had a pre-existing condition and was considered a high-risk pregnancy.
View original postBut Huculak says she was never considered "high-risk," although she did have a bladder infection that led to some bleeding.
View original postBecause Canadians, like so many other socialized medical systems juke the stats and use different terminology to conceal their failures. Canadians have a low infant mortality rate, because they label infant deaths as stillbirths, if the birth weight is low enough. They probably use similar terminology gimmicks to explain away high risk pregnancies so as to avoid the expense of increased care such pregnancies entail.
View original post
"I was never told by any doctor that I was a high-risk pregnancy,"
And yet, something went wrong. I am more inclined to believe a diagnosis of high risk pregnancy than the opinion of the doctor who told her it was okay to fly to Hawaii two days before she almost lost her baby. View original post
she told CTV's Canada AM in an interview on Wednesday morning. "I had a bladder infection at four months that caused some hemorrhaging, but I was treated and everything was cleared up."
View original postIn a statement to CTV Saskatoon, Blue Cross said the following about the couple's case: "We review each claim carefully and are confident that our decision to decline this claim was done in a considered manner based on the contract terms, the situation which resulted in this emergency medical claim, and a review of recent medical history."
So, prove them wrong. Preferably using some standard other than melodramatic pity, and wishful thinking. View original post
In a Dec. 16, 2013 letter to the Hawaiian medical centre,
Hawaii has medical centers, not centres. Saskatchewan Blue Cross also stated that the baby was not eligible for coverage, and that Huculak’s travel policy had expired on Nov. 9 -- while she was in hospital.
Ooops. Shouldn't have skimped and bought the cheap temporary policy. If you buy a cheaper car without airbags, you don't get to do your crash over and skip the spinal injury. If you buy a sandwich from a shady diner, you don't get to replace it with a better one when you get food poisoning. View original post
The province is kicking in about $20,000 towards the massive bill.
So much for universal health care. Why aren't they taking care of their citizens?View original post
But since going public with the story, Kimmel and Huculak says they've been "overwhelmed" by offers of donations – many coming from complete strangers.
View original post"It's absolutely overwhelming that people you don't know have been phoning and wanting to donate stuff," Kimmel said. "It's something we never expected."
View original postBut Huculak says that they're not looking for private donations.
View original post"At this point, we're not really accepting anything from private people, that's not what we're looking for. We didn't do this for that reason," she told CTV Saskatoon Tuesday.
View original postFor now, they are just trying to figure out what to do about the bill.
View original post"We're probably leaning towards bankruptcy, I suppose, unless we can figure out another way," Kimmel said.
View original post'We did our due diligence'
Not well enough.View original post
Kimmel and Huculak said that when they purchased their insurance they spoke with a Blue Cross representative who assured them that they would be covered.
View original postKimmel said looking back, there's nothing they could have done to have further protected themselves.
View original post"I think we did our due diligence. We answered the questions that we were asked when we purchased the policy; we answered them honestly," he said. "We purchase insurance for these reasons, for when accidents happen. And then when they get denied it causes quite a problem."
View original postOh, all right then. Because no one EVER denies fault that rightfully belongs to them. No one EVER claims they checked something thoroughly, when in fact they overlooked something that bit them in the ass. Here's a thought, why don't we see what the policy actually is, rather than what a couple of people unfamiliar with the practice of buying health insurance claims it is.
View original postThis article, like just about every one moondog references, does not offer support for its claims. It portrays the parents as saying "We were covered," and the insurance company as saying "No they were not." We also have the couple claiming there was nothing wrong with their pregnancy despite a history of complications. It is literally a case of he-said, she-said, with no evidence offered in support of either side, no neutral or objective opinions or perspectives given, and nothing but arbitrary emotional identification in support of the couple's claim.
"I mean, if everyone had a soul, there would be no contrast by which we could appreciate it. For giving us this perspective, we thank you." - Nate
Canadian couple considering bankruptcy after $1 million bill for US hospital stay
- 20/11/2014 07:56:18 PM
1227 Views
Let's embrace the health care system that failed to diagnose a high risk pregnancy!
- 21/11/2014 01:23:21 AM
697 Views
I have never particularly liked you, but I didn't realise you were this hateful
- 21/11/2014 05:48:11 PM
753 Views
Well, then I see no point to not telling you that Santa Claus isn't real. Sorry.
- 22/11/2014 01:11:03 AM
820 Views
Absolute mindblowing insanity.
- 21/11/2014 05:49:25 PM
649 Views
How can you say they did precisely the right thing, when you don't know precisely what they did?
- 22/11/2014 01:15:32 AM
707 Views
So here's a question....
- 21/11/2014 10:34:55 PM
729 Views
Reasonable bills should be paid.
- 22/11/2014 12:26:14 AM
713 Views
My only criticism is the couple's refusal to accept aid.
- 22/11/2014 02:08:28 AM
680 Views
This case does littel to nothing to advance the argument on health care
- 24/11/2014 04:41:13 PM
731 Views
Well
- 29/11/2014 05:05:10 PM
662 Views
not saying it isnt an issue just that it has nothing to do with obama care
- 30/11/2014 01:38:53 PM
596 Views
Ah.
- 30/11/2014 09:32:54 PM
611 Views
I widsh this country could have a real discussion on healthcare reform
- 30/11/2014 11:52:15 PM
631 Views
Seems to me the problem is with the 'doctors getting sued' issue.
- 23/11/2014 07:27:07 AM
641 Views
nope. but thanks for playing!
- 25/11/2014 11:01:10 PM
691 Views
Nevertheless, he is right - no country with a single payer system has a tort system like the USA's.
- 30/11/2014 10:23:43 PM
642 Views
I only know Louisiana torts, but malpractice damages are capped at 500,000 in this state.
- 02/12/2014 04:17:05 AM
686 Views