Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

bigthink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 314 posts

Re: 42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

#11

Post by toomuchtodo »

Pharmakon wrote: post #4

Sometimes I’m just amazed that people haven’t risen up in bloody revolt yet. Recently my mother had a flare-up up radiation-induced pneumonitis and the PPO insurance she pays $14,000 annually wouldn’t approve a single unit of Advair. It took a week of talking to doctors and insurance drones to figure out that they were pushing her to an alternative that cost them $100 less. If I woke up tomorrow and people were burni…

What would healthcare-centric revolt look like? You would need to apply pressure to specific congressional representatives, who support a specific ideology and don't believe in universal healthcare (A Crowdpac campaign has funded close to $4 million dollars to challenge Susan Collins when she's up for reelection due to her supreme court vote; that most likely won't scale). I could of course see rouge elements of such a movement using violence (not condoned!), but there has to be something legal that puts fear into Congress to act.

Re: 42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

#12

Post by gred »

A big factor here seems to be lifetime limits to benefits:

> Financial toxicity led Fumiko Chino to co-write a research letter in JAMA Oncology last November. After her husband surpassed his insurance policy's $500,000 lifetime limit, Chino drained her savings to pay for his treatment. When he died, she was left hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt.

However, these limits were outlawed by the Affordable Care Act, even for grandfathered plans:

https://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/about-the-aca/benefit-limits/...

Re: 42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

#13

Post by sdegutis »

Pharmakon wrote: post #4

Sometimes I’m just amazed that people haven’t risen up in bloody revolt yet. Recently my mother had a flare-up up radiation-induced pneumonitis and the PPO insurance she pays $14,000 annually wouldn’t approve a single unit of Advair. It took a week of talking to doctors and insurance drones to figure out that they were pushing her to an alternative that cost them $100 less. If I woke up tomorrow and people were burni…

Insurance is a legalized scam and it’s a shame it’s been made mandatory for everyone. Literally just a middleman now that does nothing except steal money from both sides.

Edit: wow yall are incredibly divided on this comment. I'd love to see the internal statistics on the upvote/downvotes this got, but it seems like it's something like -12 and +12

Re: 42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

#14

Post by zrail »

gred wrote: post #12

A big factor here seems to be lifetime limits to benefits: > Financial toxicity led Fumiko Chino to co-write a research letter in JAMA Oncology last November. After her husband surpassed his insurance policy's $500,000 lifetime limit, Chino drained her savings to pay for his treatment. When he died, she was left hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. However, these limits were outlawed by the Affordable Care Act,…

Yeah, the study appears to be looking at 2000–2012. The lifetime limit ban started on March 23rd 2010, according to this Vox article:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/15/14563182/o...

Thanks Obama.

Re: 42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

#15

Post by colordrops »

mikeyouse wrote: post #9

Feels like the headline should include "In America". This certainly doesn't happen in the rest of the civilized world.

Is China civilized? Cuz it definitely happens there. I've heard a doctor ask a family how much money they've got in the bank, and took it all to keep a dying uncle on life support for another month. A crime.

Re: 42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

#16

Post by thrower123 »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #11
Pharmakon wrote: post #4

Sometimes I’m just amazed that people haven’t risen up in bloody revolt yet. Recently my mother had a flare-up up radiation-induced pneumonitis and the PPO insurance she pays $14,000 annually wouldn’t approve a single unit of Advair. It took a week of talking to doctors and insurance drones to figure out that they were pushing her to an alternative that cost them $100 less. If I woke up tomorrow and people were burni…

What would healthcare-centric revolt look like? You would need to apply pressure to specific congressional representatives, who support a specific ideology and don't believe in universal healthcare (A Crowdpac campaign has funded close to $4 million dollars to challenge Susan Collins when she's up for reelection due to her supreme court vote; that most likely won't scale). I could of course see rouge elements of such…

> (A Crowdpac campaign has funded close to $4 million dollars to challenge Susan Collins when she's up for reelection due to her supreme court vote; that most likely won't scale)

This sort of thing should be illegal, particularly when it is out-of-state interests injecting money. If you live in another state, vote out your own reps you don't like.

The harassment the poor woman has been put through lately is obscene.

Re: 42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

#17

Post by coolboy93290 »

If I find out I have cancer:

0) Take all my money from all the accounts, turn it into cash.

1) Give cash to a blood relative in a backpack.

2) If married divorce, uncontested. [You will need 3 months].

3) Apply for 10 credit cards. [Maybe 3 weeks]

4) Use credit cards for all medical expenses.

5) With last card, get a lawyer to help file bankruptcy.

6) Slowly die in blood relative's backyard.

7) Die.

(This is the best solution I have worked out in USA for me.)

Re: 42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

#18

Post by toomuchtodo »

thrower123 wrote: post #16
toomuchtodo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would healthcare-centric revolt look like? You would need to apply pressure to specific congressional representatives, who support a specific ideology and don't believe in universal healthcare (A Crowdpac campaign has funded close to $4 million dollars to challenge Susan Collins when she's up for reelection due to her supreme court vote; that most likely won't scale). I could of course see rouge elements of such…

> (A Crowdpac campaign has funded close to $4 million dollars to challenge Susan Collins when she's up for reelection due to her supreme court vote; that most likely won't scale) This sort of thing should be illegal, particularly when it is out-of-state interests injecting money. If you live in another state, vote out your own reps you don't like. The harassment the poor woman has been put through lately is obscene.

Money is considered speech. The legislative and judicial branches condone such actions, and the example you take issue with is the result of representatives having national impact (in this case, voting for the appointment of a supreme court judge).

Re: 42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

#19

Post by mikeyouse »

zrail wrote: post #14
gred wrote: post #12

A big factor here seems to be lifetime limits to benefits: > Financial toxicity led Fumiko Chino to co-write a research letter in JAMA Oncology last November. After her husband surpassed his insurance policy's $500,000 lifetime limit, Chino drained her savings to pay for his treatment. When he died, she was left hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. However, these limits were outlawed by the Affordable Care Act,…

Yeah, the study appears to be looking at 2000–2012. The lifetime limit ban started on March 23rd 2010, according to this Vox article: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/15/14563182/o... Thanks Obama.

And before people get too comfortable -- Every single "Obamacare replacement" plan does away with the ban on lifetime caps either directly or indirectly. These are enormously beneficial to insurance companies (they essentially have unlimited liability without them) and there is a ton of money to have the caps reinstated.

Re: 42 percent of new cancer patients lose their life savings

#20

Post by dragonwriter »

mikeyouse wrote: post #19
zrail wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the study appears to be looking at 2000–2012. The lifetime limit ban started on March 23rd 2010, according to this Vox article: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/15/14563182/o... Thanks Obama.

And before people get too comfortable -- Every single "Obamacare replacement" plan does away with the ban on lifetime caps either directly or indirectly. These are enormously beneficial to insurance companies (they essentially have unlimited liability without them) and there is a ton of money to have the caps reinstated.

> Every single "Obamacare replacement" plan does away with lifetime caps either directly or indirectly.

You mean, does away with the ban on such caps, right?

Post reply on HN