My question is why aren't the parents just as mad with the hospital, surgeons, and nurses as they are with the insurance company?
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/CancerPreventionAndTreatment/story?id=4038257&page=1
CIGNA initially decided not to cover the transplant, there offices were protested and they later changed their decision. Unfortunately for this girl and her family, she passed away.
What I don't get is why in these cases we go after the insurance companies, when the doctors and the hospital are being just as greedy and heartless as the insurance company.
The insurance company is a third-party. 99% of the people will never know you, meet you or take a personal stand for your cause.
The hospital knows your story, knows the direness of the situation and yet we never, ever go after tehm?
Why is that? What about the hippocratic oath taht doctors are sworn to uphold? They could have saved this girls life, but they were not willing to do so. Why aren't they sued?
2007-12-21 08:48:28 · 9 answers · asked by Phil M 7 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Where did I say that hospitals should do it for free?
In "one case" like this one, I can guarantee you that the hospital has made 100 times the profit off of this family than the insurance company has.
I asked why aren't they JUST AS MAD at the hospital. Not more mad or why are they blaming "xyz."
I would encourage you to think first too before responding emotionally.
2007-12-21 09:02:56 · update #1
and in all fairness, in cases like these the hospitals and the doctors actually do make quite a handsome profit, but the insurance companies in these cases actually lose money on these particular customers. You see, this family at a max may pay 5-6K a year. Her she's 17, so we'll go with a total family bill of $102,000 over 17 years. If you factor in roughly 10K for child birth, annual checkups, etc.
They may have paid premiums for the entire family to pay for this ONE procedure. Everything else the ins company has paid for is coming out of their own pockets, not this families.
The Hospital on the other hand makes a nice hefty profit everytime this family walks through the door.
Including her death.
So tell me again who is doing what for free to stay open.
2007-12-21 09:09:13 · update #2
Joe, if the doctors were lobbying for this operation, why not take the next humane step and do the operation and worry about the financing on the back end of this ordeal?
The doctors literally let this girl die while waiting to make sure "their check would clear."
While I blame CIGNA, I also blame the hospital as well as any and all staff who sat idly by and let this happen.
You can't have it both ways, it was a purely financial decision....on the part of CIGNA and the Hospital.
2007-12-21 09:19:08 · update #3
Skycat, thats truly horrible.
2007-12-21 09:20:38 · update #4
I'm glad i found your post I'm hopeing everyone will get on the phone and call there congressman over this the insurance company should of put this young Lady's health first and for most. this kind of crap has to stop we could be the next victim and congress can pass some sort of law or rights for us we shouldnt have to worry about not being able to get a organ transplant or surgery they are not god
2007-12-21 18:13:16 · answer #1 · answered by dan m 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Hippocratic oath has no meaning nowadays. Doctors and hospitals are just as greedy as the Insurance Companies.
When was the last time that you needed medical attention? Maybe you aren't aware of the medical establishments values nowadays: no pay, no service. Certainly not in the exceptionally expensive case you delineated.
Whenever I call a medical professional - and this includes dentists, eye doctors, whatever - the first thing they want to know, is if I have insurance; and take the data before making an appointment.
If you have a co-pay, this must be paid prior to the professional seeing you. If it's an emergency, you go to any hospital and they have to treat you; but if it isn't, you have to go to a subsidized facility, and wait for hours and hours; and then you're not sure about the quality of the treatment.
What astounds me about your question, is that you are astounded.
Wotan
2007-12-21 14:30:41 · answer #2 · answered by Alberich 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because the doctors and the hospital were advising the insurance company that the girl needed the operation.
It was a purely financial decision on the part of CIGNA that killed off this young girl.
They were looking at how much profit they would lose rather than looking at how they could save the life of a young American child.
The American health care system is broken and it is taking the entire American economy down with it.
2007-12-21 09:13:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
This reminds me of a horrible incident. While sitting in a doctors office in Texas and a man ran inside carrying his limp lifeless child who had a chicken bone lodged deep in his throat. The receptionist ordered the doctor to the lobby in a panic. The first thing the doctor did was ask for his insurance and means to pay. The man was empty handed and out of his mind in worry. We all pulled money out of our pockets while the doctor refused to save this kids life. The boy died in front of us. I left the waiting room and picketed in front of his office the next day. People passed the picket sign calling me names. Even with the news report in the local paper the doctor still had his loyal following of people. Go figure! I think people these days are brainwashed to follow the money trail and understand that as the only requirement to living. What ever happened to "bill me later"?
2007-12-21 09:12:06 · answer #4 · answered by skycat 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
So you are saying....
Hospitals and doctors needs to provide an expensive treatment for free? Of course, you focused on just one incident, but there are vast number of similar cases we never hear about. How can hospitals treat those people for free and still stay in business to help others?
This is an unfortunate side of the reality in the world we live in.
If we kept suing doctors, the price of medical care will rise even higher and eventually, no one could afford it. Think beyond the immediate emotion before think about blaming someone or entities.
2007-12-21 08:59:43 · answer #5 · answered by tkquestion 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because the money is being paid to the insurance company, they take the money so they are responsible- I would be mad at all of them and even myself for not being productive enough to have the cash to cover it
2007-12-21 08:59:20 · answer #6 · answered by glbs2 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree, there is enough blame to go around.
In Canada, if the organ was available, that girl would have had the operation, and it would have been paid for by the National Health care system.
2007-12-21 09:12:32 · answer #7 · answered by bgee2001ca 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
You are obviously not in the UK.
We do not have an automatic right to life. In the Uk it is balanced to what the NHS can give without crippling the system for others.
Link : http://www.guardian.co.uk/medicine/story/0,,1487305,00.html
2007-12-21 08:55:02 · answer #8 · answered by Angel 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Don't worry , they are angry, however their attorneys have advised to keep a low profile for now.
2007-12-21 08:58:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋