Gatorsports.com 
Forums Gatorsports Forums Politics A woman who's been raped? Good luck getting insurance.
Forums Gatorsports Forums Politics A woman who's been raped? Good luck getting insurance.|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
Heisman Gator |
I hate to contradict L-Boy because he's a lot smarter than I am but this situation seems rather obvious IMHO.Whether these kinds of acts should be insured may be another question but I'm like you and wouldn't want to be paying for it with my insurance premiums.Does that make me a conservative?I hope not. |
|||
|
Heisman Gator |
No, it makes you an advocate of personal responsibility, which isn’t (shouldn’t) be a dem or pub issue. |
|||
|
|
Heisman Gator |
Well said.Is this the new Rob? Or are you saving all the insulting stuff for next years elections. |
|||
|
|
Heisman Gator |
I can play this game. So what! They can want all they want. If you cannot produce enough value to pay for it, live on the generosity of what others give you. Oh, and don't complain about it either!  Darn, that was painful. |
|||
|
Head Ball Coach |
OK - I went back and read the article, and had missed the drinking herself into a stupor part of this. ( So no OP, I am clearly not smarter than you) The article didn't outright say that, but it can pretty well be inferred. So I missed that - my apologies to Cats for missing that pertinent fact - it does change the discussion SOMEWHAT. Having said that, we all make poor decisions - I imagine many of us on this board of been drunk to the point of extreme stupidity at least once in our lives, and obviously she paid disproportionately for those poor decisions with the ensueing rape. That being said, I don't see the link of how this should enter into the health insurance conversation AT ALL. The principle is still the same. I still don't get what this personal accountability discussion has to do with THIS particular case, unless the assertion is that she is partially at fault and as such should be subject to additional insurance scrutiny. Everybody denies saying that, but if so why they hell is this personal responsibility argument coming up as an argument in this issue?
|
|||
|
|
True Gator |
I think there's also a failure to completely take into account the consequences the woman has already suffered for her poor judgment. She was raped and contracted HIV, two things she'll have to live with for the rest of her life. Denial of insurance seems more like pouring salt into the wound rather than enabling personal responsiblity.
I wonder if a woman would view her case with more empathy than the all male posters here. |
|||
|
Heisman Gator |
She did not contract HIV. I know this is cold, but right now this story doesn't pass muster. The story says, she "feared that she might have been sexually assaulted after two men slipped her a knockout drug." It goes on to say, "Turner had let the men buy her drinks at a bar in Fort Lauderdale. The next thing she knew, she said, she was lying on a roadside with cuts and bruises that indicated she had been raped." There's no evidence that she was examined for rape or for traces of any drugs someone may have introduced into her system. There's really no evidence from the story that she even left the bar with the men in question, or that she was in their car. Only that she woke up on the side of the road with cuts and bruises that indicated she'd been raped. But it doesn't say who, if anyone, made the determination that her injuries were consistent with rape. Interesting. Now if she was indeed drugged and raped, then this story is very damning of the insurance company who denied her coverage. But let's go on the evidence we have so far, and put ourselves in the shoes of the insurance company. She was dropped for non-payment. Her story (link) is that she paid her January and February on the first of the month, but the insurance company dropped her, saying they hadn't received payment. Of course, they may well be lying. But if she did mail her payment on time, why didn't she take action against the insurance company? Especially if she was an agent or underwriter? You'd think she'd have called the state insurance commissioner and raised hell. In any case, she then applies for coverage and the insurance company raises questions about her HIV medication. She explained the assault, but if there wasn't any police or medical report to back up her story, it's not surprising that she found it difficult to get coverage. If I were uninsured and taking HIV meds (or meds for high-cholesterol for that matter), I can see why I might find it hard to get insurance. --------------------------------------------------- “A tenacious hold on trivial fact is the secret of my genius” - Agathon the Seer |
|||
|
|
Heisman Gator |
Honestly, these arguments are just nonsense. How can you justify these statements? Its amazing to me this country and these alleged "christians." I guess we should provide health care based on the world view of catsigator. Anything you deem a "risk" well we're going to charge that person more. Just nonsense. It is unworkable, unrealistic, and unnecessary. What is your vice cats so that we can tax you more? What other country doles out health care based on the "personal responsibility" of the patient? Jesus, your followers are bizarre. |
|||
|
|
Heisman Gator |
In my last post, I kept completely clear of the "personal accountability" and risk-management arguments, nor did I bring religion into this at all. The fact of the matter is that if insurance companies can't exclude at least some pre-existing conditions, then people will just wait until they have, say, a gall-bladder attack to purchase insurance. --------------------------------------------------- “A tenacious hold on trivial fact is the secret of my genius” - Agathon the Seer |
|||
|
|
Heisman Gator |
The quote that I used essentially condones making it difficult for people to get health insurance. Please tell me why- if you were taking HIV meds (or meds for your high cholesterol)- that it should be more difficult for you to get health insurance?
Sorry, i just dont agree with your POV. I hope its in the minority in this country. As for religion, I brought it into the discussion. I dont see how you can hold your viewpoints and still consider yourself a Christian. |
|||
|
|
Heisman Gator |
I already gave the answer. If insurance companies can't exclude at least some pre-existing conditions, then people will just wait until they have a condition they can't pay for and acquire coverage. It would be like waiting until you had an accident to get auto-insurance. The entire system would collapse. Which is why the current bills are mandating coverage in exchange for covering pre-existing conditions. --------------------------------------------------- “A tenacious hold on trivial fact is the secret of my genius” - Agathon the Seer |
|||
|
|
True Gator |
I can see where you're coming from, but she does say she fought it all the way to the top, but basicallly had no way to prove she had sent the checks. That doesn't mean the insurance company is lying, but there could have been a clerical error. It happens all the time. In addition, she mentions going to a doctor who recommended she go on "anti-HIv medication," so someone did examine her. Fortunately she was in a position whee she could afford, somehow, to pay her medical expenses on her own. One question that comes to mind is what happens if you're working for a company, you file a claim under the health insurance the company provides and the insurance comapny denies it for a preexisting condition such as this. How does that affect your job? When I worked for Hearst a managing editor had been let go during his probation period after it was learned his wife had just been diagnosed with cnacer. This happened before I started work there so who knows for sure, but most people believed the company had fired him becasue they didn't want to take the insurance hit. Looking a bit firther it doea appear that women take it on the chin when it comes to health insurance: "But, as NWLC uncovered in our groundbreaking report, women are regularly denied coverage for “pre-existing conditions” including pregnancy, a previous C-Section or past domestic abuse. Insurance companies charge women as much as 48% more for individual health care coverage than men. And it is expensive, difficult and in some states impossible for women to find coverage for maternity care when purchasing their own health insurance plan." |
|||
|
|
Head Ball Coach |
You are correct - there is the possibility that certain facts were omitted, etc. However, given what I have read, it is still very plausible that someone could get raped, take preventative HIV, and get denied insurance. Whether that is what happened in this case becomes a secondary issue. Your post, although not intending to, to me shows the problem with the current system of health insurance. IF she had done all these various things correctly, MAYBE she could have kept her insurance - including not going to bar, not getting picked up, filing report with police, getting better documentation from doctors, making her insurance payment on time, etc. I doubt that insurance policies typically get cancelled in 30 days, but if there is significant medical pending or new risk, it wouldn't surprise me if they cancel at the first legal opportunity to do so. So in summary it doesn't surprise me that "free market" health care would behave this way, which in my mind illustrates the whole problem with how we allocate health care.
|
|||
|
|
Heisman Gator |
The issue I have is we don't know for sure why she was dropped. We're making assumptions, based on a story with very little direct evidence and doing a lot of question-begging - then saying the system is broken based on several giant leaps in reasoning, IMO. She never even comes out and says she was actually assaulted. Nor does any story say she was examined for assault. Only that when she told a doctor she was assaulted, she was advised to take HIV medication. It looks to me like the critical mistake was letting her insurance lapse in the first place. She says she made the payments, but even that statement is a bit unclear. The Huffington Post article fails to mention that at all, and her story in other articles seems almost deliberately obtuse on the circumstances surrounding her being dropped. The system may be broken, but nothing I've seen in this story demonstrates that to the degree of certainty many here seem to have. If you want to argue that pre-existing conditions should be covered, fine. As I've said, my understanding is that's what's going to happen and in exchange, coverage will be mandatory. But as it is now, it's not unreasonable to do some excluding of pre-existing conditions. Otherwise, a great number of people would simply wait until they got sick to get insurance. If the woman in question was dropped BECAUSE she took what would seem to be a common sense course of action, that's indefensible. The story I read said she was 60 days out on her payments. If the insurance company had been in error, why didn't she raise hell, especially if she had been "in the industry." If she simply decided not to pay her premiums, then later applied for insurance and was turned down, I'd say she bears some, though maybe not all, of the responsibility. Problem is, we don't know if she really paid her claims on time or not. I had a similar issue when I first got married. We got insurance and shortly thereafter my wife got pregnant and needed gall-bladder surgery. The insurance company tried to deny the surgery claim, because the agent involved hadn't sent our initial check in until several weeks after he received it from us. I told them they could take it up with the state insurance commissioner. Not long after, the claims were paid. --------------------------------------------------- “A tenacious hold on trivial fact is the secret of my genius” - Agathon the Seer |
|||
|
|
Head Ball Coach |
Your points on the fuzziness of some of the facts is valid - but in my mind this still shows a flaw in the system. Several quoted sources in the article state this kind of stuff does happen. Whether the insurance company acted within the rules, ethically or morally is open for debate, and is not clear to me. But the fact that we are even discussing this to me shows the problem - in this case, if the girl needed treatment, she should get it. The alternative is a potential rape victim walks out the door and eventually develops AIDS, and maybe spreads it to others. Whether she exercised good judgment by bar hopping and potentially binge drinking is secondary to this. As to your personal example, I am glad you got it resolved, but you were able to resolve it probably because you are smart and know how to navigate such obstacles. I have overcome numerous obstacles to get properly reimbursed on a lot of my families claims. However, I have to imagine that there some out there who are not quite as capable fighting the bureacracy, or as I would characterize intentional obstacles presented by insurance companies.
|
|||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
|
Gatorsports.com Forums Gatorsports Forums Politics A woman who's been raped? Good luck getting insurance.
Forums Gatorsports Forums Politics A woman who's been raped? Good luck getting insurance.