Should people like this be helped?

Forums › Off topic › Should people like this be helped?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 13

5833 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1639

Trusted

Subscriber

#2081720 31-Aug-2018 00:16

Fred99:

No it's not "exactly" at all.

She had a twisted bowel - sure. That was operated on and a "dead" section of bowel was removed. That's really serious sh!t - and a high risk of peritonitis/sepsis for anybody. The "breathing problem" and kidney failure and probably need for induced coma also almost certainly due to sepsis - there's no doubt she's in deep trouble, and while there may be other complicating factors - there's no information about that, possible things being if for some reason she was immunocompromised due to medication or disease or whatever, perhaps undisclosed, and making her more susceptible to sepsis. But she could have ended up in exactly the condition she's in - with nothing preexisting and no complicating factors. Sh!t happens - insurers save us from bad luck like that - LOL.

People are making assumptions about whether she did or didn't have appropriate cover and whether she did or didn't disclose relevant preexisting conditions, but are basing that opinion on nothing much at all. I really don't know - nor does anybody else commenting here.

Agreed.

I'm always suspicious of the pre-existing condition (you didn't know you had) they use to weasel out of paying out on the claim. That's a huge hole....and you'll end up in court. But they have your money.....AND you're not going to sue them if lumbered with a huge debt they refused to cover. Nice business model. I always read the fine print and if I see crap like that.....it's a waste of money and a serious risk. Insurance is supposed to reduce risk....not increase it.

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2081733 31-Aug-2018 06:12

Fred99:
Batman:

tdgeek:

From what I recall she had a breathing problem, so while the twisted bowel was coverable, I gather the lengthy stay due to berating issues wasn't covered.

Exactly.

No it's not "exactly" at all.

She had a twisted bowel - sure. That was operated on and a "dead" section of bowel was removed. That's really serious sh!t - and a high risk of peritonitis/sepsis for anybody. The "breathing problem" and kidney failure and probably need for induced coma also almost certainly due to sepsis - there's no doubt she's in deep trouble, and while there may be other complicating factors - there's no information about that, possible things being if for some reason she was immunocompromised due to medication or disease or whatever, perhaps undisclosed, and making her more susceptible to sepsis. But she could have ended up in exactly the condition she's in - with nothing preexisting and no complicating factors. Sh!t happens - insurers save us from bad luck like that - LOL.

People are making assumptions about whether she did or didn't have appropriate cover and whether she did or didn't disclose relevant preexisting conditions, but are basing that opinion on nothing much at all. I really don't know - nor does anybody else commenting here.

Exactly!

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2081761 31-Aug-2018 07:44

Fred99:

People are making assumptions about whether she did or didn't have appropriate cover and whether she did or didn't disclose relevant preexisting conditions, but are basing that opinion on nothing much at all. I really don't know - nor does anybody else commenting here.

I based my opinion on the fact that it was stated that she had coverage but not enough coverage. Yes, unsure what coverage was lacked, whether it was the pre existing breathing issues and thus increased premium or something else. There are no complaints about the insurance company by them or anyone else, so that supports my opinion.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2081787 31-Aug-2018 09:40

An existing breathing problem does not a twisted bowel cause.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2081792 31-Aug-2018 09:47

Batman: An existing breathing problem does not a twisted bowel cause.

No one said that. It appears that the breathing issues have complicated the initial ailment. If that is the case as it seems to be, I would have thought travel insurance pays out the twisted bowel costs, but not any costs caused by excessive hospital care that resulted from the pre existing breathing issues. No one knows that, as no one has an issue with the insurance company, that may have happened.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2081797 31-Aug-2018 09:57

tdgeek:

Batman: An existing breathing problem does not a twisted bowel cause.

No one said that. It appears that the breathing issues have complicated the initial ailment. If that is the case as it seems to be, I would have thought travel insurance pays out the twisted bowel costs, but not any costs caused by excessive hospital care that resulted from the pre existing breathing issues. No one knows that, as no one has an issue with the insurance company, that may have happened.

Ah Insurance the deal made with the Devils Cartel

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2081939 31-Aug-2018 15:26

tdgeek:

Batman: An existing breathing problem does not a twisted bowel cause.

No one said that. It appears that the breathing issues have complicated the initial ailment. If that is the case as it seems to be, I would have thought travel insurance pays out the twisted bowel costs, but not any costs caused by excessive hospital care that resulted from the pre existing breathing issues. No one knows that, as no one has an issue with the insurance company, that may have happened.

The existing breathing issues likely have no predisposition to her condition.

She likely has multi-organ systems failure (MOSF) from critical illness as a complication of her twisted bowel.

[But without any more details we cannot confirm that.]

JimmyH

2898 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1554

#2082022 31-Aug-2018 18:48

It's a difficult issue.

I feel very sorry for them, and understand why people feel the urge to make the government step in. However, It is simply nuts to travel to countries without making sure that you have good health insurance (other than possibly some like the UK where NZ has reciprocal agreements with the NHS etc). Just like it's a risky proposition not to insure your car or house. The insurance is a cost of traveling and If you can't afford the insurance then, to be blunt, you can't afford the travel.

I have a fairly serious pre-existing condition. Whenever I travel overseas I take out insurance. I always declare that condition, which adds 50-60% to the cost of my insurance. You can find good insurers to cover these things, but sometimes you have to try more than one, and you do have to pay. I wouldn't dream of traveling offshore without making sure I have decent, and dare I say it erring on the side of gold-plated, travel insurance. It simply isn't worth the risk. Doubly so if you have a condition like mine which, if it flares up, is both serious and expensive.

But, on balance, I don't think the Government should pay. It would create an enormous moral hazard problem if the Government started stepping up to the plate and covering medical/evacuation costs because someone was either uninsured or hadn't taken out appropriate insurance. Who would bother paying for sometimes expensive insurance if that was the case and they knew the taxpayer would come to the rescue?

In this case, I think that the Government made the right call.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2082024 31-Aug-2018 18:58

Batman:

tdgeek:

Batman: An existing breathing problem does not a twisted bowel cause.

No one said that. It appears that the breathing issues have complicated the initial ailment. If that is the case as it seems to be, I would have thought travel insurance pays out the twisted bowel costs, but not any costs caused by excessive hospital care that resulted from the pre existing breathing issues. No one knows that, as no one has an issue with the insurance company, that may have happened.

The existing breathing issues likely have no predisposition to her condition.

She likely has multi-organ systems failure (MOSF) from critical illness as a complication of her twisted bowel.

[But without any more details we cannot confirm that.]

My point was that free of breathing issues, she may well have been a typical overseas treatment, and that it appears the lengthy stay may be due to that. As you say we are missing pieces of the puzzle, but as stated when the news first hit, insurance was there, but not enough coverage.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2082025 31-Aug-2018 19:02

tdgeek:

Batman:

tdgeek:

Batman: An existing breathing problem does not a twisted bowel cause.

No one said that. It appears that the breathing issues have complicated the initial ailment. If that is the case as it seems to be, I would have thought travel insurance pays out the twisted bowel costs, but not any costs caused by excessive hospital care that resulted from the pre existing breathing issues. No one knows that, as no one has an issue with the insurance company, that may have happened.

The existing breathing issues likely have no predisposition to her condition.

She likely has multi-organ systems failure (MOSF) from critical illness as a complication of her twisted bowel.

[But without any more details we cannot confirm that.]

My point was that free of breathing issues, she may well have been a typical overseas treatment, and that it appears the lengthy stay may be due to that. As you say we are missing pieces of the puzzle, but as stated when the news first hit, insurance was there, but not enough coverage.

It appears to me that the lengthy stay is due not to her existing breathing issue, but rather due to MOSF from twisted bowel, aka insurance is taking the easy way out by not obliging. But not enough information here. And a stranded family in the middle of nowehere vs a multinational giant, very easy for one to bully the other. But that is only my impression. I'd love to know what the insurance company is!

Sidestep

1019 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 567

Lifetime subscriber

#2082180 1-Sep-2018 06:32

Geektastic:

It depends on the insurance product. I have found that there is a marked difference between 'stack 'em high, sell 'em cheap' policies and better quality ones in terms of their readiness to pay out when the circumstances are shall we say a grey area.

The old saying, "pay peanuts, get monkeys" really does apply in insurance. Where insurers cut the benefits to the bone so that they can sell you "2 weeks cover for only $25!" or whatever, then they will be ruthless in what and when they pay because not paying, or paying less, is how they make money on those policies. If your premium was $250 for that 2 weeks and you claim, the response you get would probably be very different.

Insurance is more a form of betting than it is a scam.

Exactly.

I feel for these people, having been caught in a slightly similar situation in the early 00's.

In my case I purchased 'off the rack' Travel Insurance - as recommended by the Travel Agency where I purchased my tickets.
Had to provide a Medical Cert describing my pre-existing conditions, including previously broken bones - and fused, screwed and plated vertebrae.
The Insurance cost doubled, but I figured it was worth paying - I knew what emergency US medical care could do to me financially.

Off I went.. made it through the US uneventfully, into Canada.. then whacko.. got injured in an accident. Girlfriend shuttled me off to Emergency, where a MRI showed I needed surgery. Then things went sideways - the Hospital called my Insurer, described what had happened, they provisionally declined cover.
The reason - the accident happened in the pits at a track, so fell into their vague 'motorsports' exclusion - even though I wasn't competing.

Luckily the (University) hospital came back with a plan. I signed them all rights to recoverable damages, and agreed to make all efforts to claim etc etc.
They agreed to supply the theatre, anesthetist, support staff and ICU care for a flat rate, and -amazingly- lined up a visiting neurosurgeon to operate, for free, as resident training. They still required $45K up front, the majority of which my girlfriend raised - by maxing out her CC's and Line of Credit..

After a few days in ICU they moved me to a General ward and I took the opportunity to escape - against medical advice, but with help from the hospital - to my girfriend's place, where, with the assistance of visiting nurses (fudged by the hospital) she nursed me for several weeks until I was mobile and all the staples and stitches could be removed. The total cost came to nearly $50K (a year's income for me back then)

I've since become a Canadian Citizen, covered by basic Provincial healthcare, but when I travel, especially in the US, I now pay through the nose to make sure I'm fully covered (and I read all the fine print)

There was no Givealittle' back then, I think it's a great idea in theory, but likely it'll be the same group of people contributing over and over.
Plus it's easy to 'spin' a story to pull heartstrings when there may be far more deserving cases that need help.

What I'd like to see the Government should do is look at funding low interest loans (think student loan) to people who can prove they're in distress, and have made efforts to help themselves. I'd have jumped at that opportunity if it'd been available to me.

TLDR: Gov't could have a (fully reimbursable) loan fund for these situations.

BTW- Married the girfriend.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2082181 1-Sep-2018 06:45

I am ever eager to know which insurer the family went with

scuwp

3927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2510

#2082230 1-Sep-2018 09:51

Is there a doctor in the house? ... no seriously. There seems to be a lot of speculation based on innuendo and hearsay. Just wondering if the previous commentators have any kind of medical training or experience because this story has more holes than Swiss cheese.

I suspect that if the family felt the insurance companies decision was unfair they would be screaming it from the rooftops and the insurance company would be widely vilified in the media. The fact they haven't suggests to me they have accepted the companies decision is fair and reasonable according to the policy they had.

I do hope it works out for them.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

gzt

18685 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7826

Lifetime subscriber

#2082231 1-Sep-2018 09:59

Who knows. They may have very good reasons for not going down that road at the present time.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2082233 1-Sep-2018 10:01

scuwp:

Is there a doctor in the house? ... no seriously. There seems to be a lot of speculation based on innuendo and hearsay. Just wondering if the previous commentators have any kind of medical training or experience because this story has more holes than Swiss cheese.

I suspect that if the family felt the insurance companies decision was unfair they would be screaming it from the rooftops and the insurance company would be widely vilified in the media. The fact they haven't suggests to me they have accepted the companies decision is fair and reasonable according to the policy they had.

I do hope it works out for them.

Thats right, but in this case, the insurance company has not been raised at all. So, assume they are blameless

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 13