And I thought MY insurance company was incompetent and malicious.

[naamah_darling]

Rape is a "pre-existing condition." Enjoy maybe getting AIDS.Sometimes I want to resign from the human race just for the pleasure of saying "I have nothing in common with you shitfuckers. I hope you die in agony. Alone. Except for those 3d6 priapic wild pigs

Comments

[kwhiteshark]

And yet people will still claim, even after reading this, that there is nothing wrong with the healthcare system. The same system where domestic abuse is also considered a pre-existing condition.
Shit like this just makes me sick.

spot on

[dnivie]

I never got that part. I read stories like this regularily. First some horrible consequence of the current US healthcare-system is described. Everyone agrees that's horrible.

Then people jump straight to attacking the insurer in question, even when, like here, it's not really about one insurer, it's about the entire system.

"pre-existing-condition" is idiotic anyway: everyone needs adequate healthcare, zero exceptions.

Still, you don't see people calling for socialized medicine. And I don't know why not. When you compare to the countries that do have that (I'm talking rich countries comparable to USA here, not Cuba!), then it appears to be BOTH cheaper AND better, so what's the catch ?

There's -precisely- two requirements for full healthcare-coverage here in Norway: 1) Legally in the country. 2) Non-transient stay. (i.e. planned or actual stay longer than a year) That's -it-, no it don't matter a pair of dingos kidneys if you where ever raped or not.

[siamesegoth2]

*shakes head* I'd ask how they sleep at night but as far as they are concerned people are not people, they are numbers. I don't know enough about Healthcare in the US but since this whole reform thing was brought into the spotlight I'm fast learning that no matter what the ins and outs are, it's a shitty looking system

[cissa]

Amazingly- it's getting worse. There is now a Plan to pay doctors a fixed amount per year per patient, whether or not they provide any care for the patient. Obviously this means that doctors' profits will depend substantially on NOT doing any thing at all for their patients.

This is being promoted because it is so 'efficient".Yep- it's very efficient indeed to take money for people and not provide them with any care- SO much cheaper than, y'know, treating them when they need it!

[siamesegoth2]

I should be shocked, but I'm not I think that's the worst thing. A freind of mine in the US had surgery and needed to take Lovenox as did I for a month after surgery. Total cost of My lovenox was roughly 500 Euros and was fully paid for , total cost of the same drug for her was 3000 and was told she had to pay for it herself, she fought them down and ended up paying only half the amount. When she asked her Doctor for help, he pretty much shrugged and said, Sorry my hands are tied. Meaning I have your cash now lady and the cash from this visit too, so up yours and have a nice day. What I couldn't get my head round was the fact there was a 2500 difference between us for the same amount of the same bloody medication. That's a lot of cash, in any currency.

[sea_of_flame]

Oh my...gawd bless the NHS, warts & all. Private healthcare is fucked up (at times, etc)

Seriously, I'm boggling at the idea of being dependent on a for-proft org for health treatment -and that's me speaking as a accountant working for a great big profit-loving global corp that's merrily justifying its planned merger with another monster in front of the anti-trust/monopolies&mergers people! Profit is my bread & butter...

Gimme value for money/the 3 E's (economy, efficiency, effectiveness), not shareholder satisfaction :)

[nomnivore]

That is truly sickening.

[mordath]

Evil. Completely, unequivocally, 100% to-the-bone evil. Insurance companies are my bane, and I'm glad to see they're finally getting a fraction of the uncomfortable spotlight they deserve.