That has to be the worst kept dirty secret in the history of dirty secrets.
Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
31–40 of 301 posts
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#32"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.)
You would need to prove that murdering a health care CEO will save many innocents, first.
K. So step 1. murder health insurance CEO (no healthcare involved there), check. Step 2. watch UnitedHealth's refusal rates closely, ongoing.
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
It's a little different when a jury of your peers convicts you of a crime which was democratically passed by a legislature, versus a lone gunman who feels he is the judge, jury, and executioner.
The point here is that "democratically passed legislature" is not at people's service.
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#34"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.)
"Murdering a murderer to save many innocents could be considered ethical by some?" This is a heavy statement. More I read, heavy it gets. Kill people it never the answer. The ideia that "I" have the power is weak. People, together, have power, however they don't know what to do. In his case the easiest way to win is pressuring the government, with the people, for clear changes.
Well, in 1789 France, we killed people
It worked beautifully
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#35"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.
I understand what you're saying.
But a murder carried out by a random citizen is still worse than a death sentence after a fair trial and convicted by a jury of your peers.
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
It's a little different when a jury of your peers convicts you of a crime which was democratically passed by a legislature, versus a lone gunman who feels he is the judge, jury, and executioner.
Why? Apparently something excused murder in the death row case?
So expressing the sentiment that nothiong excuses murder and still having a death row is just I congruent and wrong.
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#37"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.)
Even if you accept that, it still doesn't excuse it being done by companies or individuals.
The point is also orthogonal to what the insurance industry does.
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
I am not a lawyer, but I would assume that death due to omission of expected care fits pretty neatly under "negligent homicide".
Duty of care?
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#39"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.)
You can't just shoot people and kill them in the street! That's barbaric! You need to do it from behind a desk through a corporate bureaucracy like a civilized person.
Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
It's a little different when a jury of your peers convicts you of a crime which was democratically passed by a legislature, versus a lone gunman who feels he is the judge, jury, and executioner.
America is the land of stand your ground laws in which a citizen may legally take a life if they feel endangered. Let's not forget the 1000 or so police kill every year.