Pretty predictable what happens when you deny coverage for a treatment someone needs

terminalshort 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

But do they need it? How do you know? And don't say because the doctor said so, because doctors disagree all the time. When my grandfather was dying in his late 80s, the doctor said there was nothing he could do. So his children took him to another doctor, who said the same. And then another doctor, who agreed with the first two. But then they took him to a 4th doctor, who agreed to do open heart surgery, which didn't work, and if anything hastened his inevitable death due to the massive stress. The surgery cost something like 70 grand and they eventually got the insurance company to pay for it. But the insurance company should not have paid for it because it was a completely unnecessary waste of money. And of course there will be mistakes in the other direction because this just isn't an exact science.

▲

asdff 7 hours ago | parent [-]

At that point, why cover anything at all if the doctor could always be wrong?

▲

terminalshort 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Stupid question. If you have a better way to make decisions on insurance coverage then state it.

▲

asdff 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Why is it on me to come up with a new model for healthcare? I can acknowledge shortcomings of the present system without having to come up with solutions for them.

▲

latency-guy2 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> Pretty predictable what happens when you deny coverage for a treatment someone needs

Other poster demonstrated that you have no idea what "need" is. So you also have no idea what a "shortcoming of the present system" is either, because how the hell would you even know?

	▲	asdff 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		People being denied treatment they need seems like a shortcoming of the present system.

▲

quesera 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It would be a clean and compelling narrative, if Luigi or someone he loved was denied coverage for a necessary treatment!

But that doesn't seem to be true at all. He just had a whole lot of righteous anger, I guess. Gotta be careful with that stuff.

▲

asdff 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Why does it matter if it personally occurred to him or someone related to him? It happens to plenty of people. You can have empathy for people not bound by blood.

▲

quesera 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Of course you can. But where does it stop?

There is a great deal of injustice in the world. Psychologically healthy adults have learned to add a reflection step between anger and action.

By all evidence, Luigi is a smart guy. So one can only speculate on his psychological health, or whether he believed that there was an effective response to the problem which included murdering an abstract impersonal enemy.

I'm stumped, honestly. The simplest explanations are mental illness, or a hero complex (but I repeat myself). Maybe we'll learn someday.

	▲	asdff 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		He could die quietly making no impact on the issue. Or he could sacrifice the rest of his free life to put a spotlight on the issue. That is what he chose to do. Not an easy decision I'm sure.