Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
1–10 of 301 posts
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#2"No industry malfeasance could ever excuse murder.
Period."
Murdering a murderer to save many innocents could be considered ethical by some?
(Not saying that's the case here, but nypost made an interesting categorical statement.)
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#3"No industry malfeasance could ever excuse murder."
AND YET
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#4"No industry malfeasance could ever excuse murder. Period." Murdering a murderer to save many innocents could be considered ethical by some? (Not saying that's the case here, but nypost made an interesting categorical statement.)
Given the NY Posts leanings I’m not surprised they walked that line by putting it in there.
Media seems to be on an agenda setting tear to disavow the murder, but I think it’s a frankly boot licking response to what is going on here.
I think this spooked a lot of executives (re: “elites” if you will) and there is pressure to ignore the nuance of what the murder means to people and why it isn’t the same as say, stabbing a tech CEO in SF like what happened last year
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#5"No industry malfeasance could ever excuse murder. Period." Murdering a murderer to save many innocents could be considered ethical by some? (Not saying that's the case here, but nypost made an interesting categorical statement.)
It is funny that the sentiment that nothing excuses a murder is being circulated in the US - a country that still carried out death sentences.
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#6"No industry malfeasance could ever excuse murder. Period." Murdering a murderer to save many innocents could be considered ethical by some? (Not saying that's the case here, but nypost made an interesting categorical statement.)
If a cancer patient is denied a claim for life-saving medication because they're 'not sick enough' then dies, is it murder?
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#7"No industry malfeasance could ever excuse murder. Period." Murdering a murderer to save many innocents could be considered ethical by some? (Not saying that's the case here, but nypost made an interesting categorical statement.)
I'm trying to figure out if these deaths caused by insurance denials could actually be considered murder. I think they would definitely qualify as being premeditated, but can you consider them "killing"? They are causing death due to omission of expected care, but can the omission of something like medical care be considered the cause of death?
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#8It's time the US realizes how bad its medical system is.
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#9"No industry malfeasance could ever excuse murder. Period." Murdering a murderer to save many innocents could be considered ethical by some? (Not saying that's the case here, but nypost made an interesting categorical statement.)
Well, if a killing is ethically justified, it isn't murder. So yes, they're at least begging the question with that statement for sure.
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#10"No industry malfeasance could ever excuse murder. Period." Murdering a murderer to save many innocents could be considered ethical by some? (Not saying that's the case here, but nypost made an interesting categorical statement.)
But now you have another ceo. I'm not suggesting that to fix the issue you would need to - inaudible - again and again