Kidney donors may face huge medical bills because having one kidney may constitute a pre-existing condition under which coverage is denied, officials confirm.
A Texas hospital official said organ donors are told, but only orally, that having one kidney may be a pre-existing condition affecting insurance.
Philip Knisely, 53, of Austin, Texas, who donated a kidney to a co-worker a year ago, has received more than $18,000 in related medical bills, and said he was not informed that if he ever lost his employment-related insurance, insurers might consider his having a single kidney an uninsurable pre-existing condition, the American-Stateman reported Sunday.
Best health care in the world!
I am sure all the anti gov people think this is just fine. After all corporations should be able to F*** over people as much as they want to as long as it is in the name of profits.
It’s kind of like they’re covering the cost of the guy getting the kidney by screwing over the guy who gave it.
Or, Alfred, we could legislate the concept of pre-existing conditions out of existence. Without spending the money you think I’m in favor of.
#4–Alfie==HEY ALFFIIEEEE!!!! You are setting up a valid choice between a health care financing system that the USA can afford versus one that costs trillions of dollars more.
Only mistake you make is confusing which is which. The trillions of dollars spent that will bankrupt this country is THE ONE WE HAVE NOW!!!!
Why don’t you pull your head out of your ass, clean your glasses, and smell the coffee and look at the facts?
I know, two things at once. I shoudda picked one or the other.
@#5 There lies catch-22. You do that and no one gets insured until sick, collapsing the system for certain. Now, you could also legislate mandatory purchase of health insurance by all, opening whole another can of worms.
Present system does have its checks and balances, you can’t remove them without dismantling everything. Improvement needed is intelligent safety net. It could be trivial. Ex. simply deduce from doctor’s taxes any amount of treatment they give to uninsured. No new agencies and bureaucracies – just ‘ye olde IRS doing its usual job and one new line in their code. No middleman costs. Doctors decision on who and how deserves the “free” treatment. Also applicable to ER/Hospitals.
#7, simply deduce from doctor’s taxes any amount of treatment they give to uninsured. No new agencies and bureaucracies – just ‘ye olde IRS doing its usual job and one new line in their code. No middleman costs. Doctors decision on who and how deserves the “free” treatment. Also applicable to ER/Hospitals.
That . . . is actually a very interesting idea. I’ll to think on that one some more.
Dismal and Alfie. What a couple of dopes. Pretending anyone wants the “freedom” to suffer from illness or that personal freedom extends to allowing your fellow citizens to suffer from illness ALL FOR THE PURPOSE of allowing a medical industrial complex to rip profit out of a social need.
You’d almost think the rest of the world hasn’t been living the solution for decades that these masterminds still can’t even imagine.
Dopes. Only dope is illegal, but they both should be.
#10–Loser==haven’t seen your drooling here for a while, course I’ve been busy too. Yes, quite a “system” you want to design. For profit ripping off the masses with the short falls to be made up by charitable minding doctors.
Dope just doesn’t cover how stupid you three are.
10 LibertyLover,
Wouldn’t the smart doctor just line item everyone as uninsured?
7 dusanmal,
A private insurance with no pre-existing conditions exists in Switzerland. All insurance is private, all people must have insurance and no insurance company can deny a client or claim. They have various tiers of service, starting with health care and then moving up to private rooms and shit like that. They don’t make money on health care: they make money on selling insurance to a person; health, life, home, auto. Get a package, they make more, you save more.
It IS possible. THere is just no real will in the US for it to happen. Basically, because morans like AlfredENewman believe that the Government = Satan. And that’s why he only drives on roads he makes with his own God given hands!
Alfie==HEY ALFIEEEEEEE!!!! says: “soft tyranny of do gooders.” Corrupting and paraphrasing several civil rights leaders.
Kinda reminds me of the Spanish Inquistion with their use of Comfy Chairs as torture devices.
Religious yet Hates the Poor. The double combo.
14 AlfredENewman,
Only a true AMERICAN Christians revels in the suffering of others. And only a true AMERICAN Christian fantasizes about the day when their fellow citizens are ill. There is a special place for you in Hell… particularly amongst the sodomites and hate filled.
Hurry it up please!
#13, If he got caught, he could be brought up on charges of fraud. If you charge the insurance company, it is in a DB somewhere. If an insurance claim and a line item claim ever match up, slap him hard.
Deductions work now. I am sure it would work in this instance, too.
17 AlfredENewman,
OOOooooh! Your homosexual fantasies about dickheads are “coming out”. So should you… Leave Jesus and God for the heterosexuals.
19, AlfredENewman,
LOL. You really live in a delusional world… OH yeah! You’re library starts with B and ends with IBLE.
And naught in between. Like your ears.
Here’s a European warning America not to tread down the same path Europe has.
http://tinyurl.com/yb4esfb
23 AlfredENewman,
“I want to see you reap what you have sown…that will make me very happy…”
You care far too much about me. Probably because you’re a homosexual and you know I’m a man. I couldn’t give one tiny shit about you though, because you are worth less than even that.
I’m going to go an enjoy life for a bit while you praise the Lord trying to fend off your homosexual tendencies… And by tendencies, I mean your fantasies of being gangbanged by a room full of priests and holy icons.
@Alfred
Obama did run saying he was against the idea of a mandate.
I have to say I am irritated about this change.
Having freedom to opt out is critical because it denies a monopoly if it is a failure.
I find it irritating that government likes to have monopolies of power — which never work — which is why we don’t allow corporations to have monopolies.
Free market economics principles applies to government as well.
I was thrilled with Obama last year because he was against insurance mandates versus Hillary that was all for them.
However, nothing has passed yet and I really am not liking this bill.
If this were some force of nature, there would be a charitable organization to combat it (we have “Beat Cancer” orgs, why not have a “Take Care of Kidney Donors” org?). Just saying. If US-style conservatives want to fix the broken health care system, whining because the US is trying to avail itself of the experience of other countries, is not enough. You actually have to come up with an alternative method to fix it. And why did you not act 5, 10, 15 years earlier?
Living in Canada, where the governing national party is called The Conservative Party, but nobody wants to dismantle socialized health care, I have an entirely different perspective!
There’s never, ever been a better time to emigrate. Any under-educated american with a little courage ought to be able to take their english speaking skills to a country where there is a big demand for english teachers. Even if you didn’t go to college you don’t need it to get started, if you did the TOEFL certification should be a snap. So go ahead, improve yourself and secure a better future for your descendants. You too can live in a society with high taxes and social medicine. The perception that the USA is a model for a society with a high standard of living is finally showing itself for what it truly is. A con game where a very few can live high on the hog while the masses are struggling just to stay alive.
#23 Alfred1
In the Uk system you are able to opt out, and use private only health care I believe. You can get your NHS contribution (or most of it at least back).
#17 Alfred1
The reason bringing up Switzerland is important is because it shows that a well functioning health care system does not have to be a government system. BUT it does have to be highly regulated, by government.
So there are your choices
1) Have (at minimum) government insurance system, to create a competitive landscape such that basic health care is low cost, universal and can be relied on by all.
2) Or highly regulate the industry, such that you get the above.
Either works.
The route the US is currently taking is some kind of perverse middle way, with all the cost and waste and idiocy that we see today. The result is it costs much more for less.
So anybody arguing for the status quo, or the status quo plus a tweak, isn’t really paying attention.
Personally I’ve experienced 1 in a few countries, and it works well. Both in the cost, and the service delivered.
And since I feel the need to repeat this point over and over again…
Universal health care as supplied in other industrialized nations, provides good health care for _everybody_, at a _much lower cost_. Typically less than half the price of US.
Why can’t the US have a system like that? Swiss or otherwise?
#27 “but nobody wants to dismantle socialized health care”
Do you really think once it is established it can ever be dismantled even if you want to? Have you ever seen a bureaucracy dismantled anywhere? The main purpose of a bureaucracy is to perpetuate itself. Hell, we can’t even reform the tax code. Yes I know, don’t tell me, Canada’s is great.
#29
“Universal health care as supplied in other industrialized nations, provides good health care for _everybody_, at a _much lower cost_. Typically less than half the price of US.
Why can’t the US have a system like that? Swiss or otherwise?”
Why do people from other countries feel this insatiable need to correct everything they see “wrong” in the US? I notice quite a few problems in the world go screw with someone else.
#31 Loupe Garou
I live in the US. So it effects me and my family. This year my health insurance went up by 40% for example.
If I didn’t live here, then it would not bother me.
I’ve been fortunate to live and work in other countries. So I can relate that experience. You’d think that’d be helpful. Apparently not.
But lets not worry about ‘screwing’ right now.
Why do you want to pay much more, for worse health care? Riddle me that.
Re: #9, Alfred1… “I prefer freedom, to servitude…I prefer Government OUT of my life, not in it.
Alfred… you want government out of your life?
Imagine the USA without any government. Sure, you would be totally free… like any other animal. Who would you dare pick up in your Taxi? Hmmm?
Pretty simple to imagine… even for you.
As someone who actually lived under both a euro system (Germany) and here, I can say our system is so inefficient and broken it isn’t even funny. I had one daughter born here and one there, guess which cost me a couple thousand bucks for just a few days care and which system provided a week of care with no bill presented to me.
Alfie:
Read the original post again. Then read what I say below (and I’ll use fairly small words so you can understand).
Now, suppose you have badly damaged kidneys, and your MD says you need a transplant. However, if any person donates a kidney to you, they are now in the class of having a “pre-existing condition,” and can’t get health insurance at all. If the donor falls ill to any medical problem, they can’t get medical coverage in the future, unless they don’t donate a kidney to you.
You won’t get your kidney, and will either be on dialysis for the rest of your life (but the insurance company may weasel out of paying for the dialysis), or you’ll die.
Think about it…
isn’t this going against every single “organ donor” campaign ever done by the DMV and the doctors who say we need more donors to save more lives?
i would guess in texas and other states that are less lax in regulations a lot of people will opt out of organ donation the next couple of years because they will see being a good and compassionate person no longer pays.
#32, So, because your insurance went up 40%, it’s ok to take from others to give you some relief?
Would you feel that way if your insurance would go up under FedCare but down under private?
I don’t think it went up 40%. Sounds like BS to me.
#30 Loupe Garou (man-wolf)
Bureaucracies indeed are insidious, but sometimes they do get pared down, after a struggle. From Margaret Thatcher in the UK, down to Bill Bennett here in BC.
But you misrepresented what I wrote. Rephrased, it’s that none of the five major political parties wants to dismantle socialized medicine. Even the ruling Conservative Party doesn’t go beyond wanting it to run more efficiently. As do we all.
The bugbear of socialized medicine being the devil’s spawn seems not to be an issue in countries that actually have socialized medicine.
#33, The US didn’t have a strong central government all through the 1900’s and it grew to be a super-power in spite of that.
It would work if people were forced to be more self-reliant.
Why is your opinion of your next door neighbor so low that you think he needs a nanny to watch after him?