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

Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 301 posts

Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

#41

Post by TimTheTinker »

tossandthrow wrote: post #5
andrelaszlo wrote: post #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.)

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.

In the 20th century, I think the death sentence was only ever applied for first-degree murder and for treason.

A claim denial that results in denial of life-saving treatment could never be counted as either of those charges.

Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

#42

Post by tossandthrow »

jimbokun wrote: post #35
tossandthrow wrote: post #5

Earlier 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.

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.

It was not the justification of murder I was talking about. Simply the fact that murder as a solution is absolutely accepted in the US.

Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

#43

Post by JohnFen »

mrbluecoat wrote: post #6
andrelaszlo wrote: post #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.)

If a cancer patient is denied a claim for life-saving medication because they're 'not sick enough' then dies, is it murder?

Yes, in my opinion. It's homicide at the very least.

Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

#44

Post by dgfitz »

tboyd47 wrote: post #23
weberer wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody knows how bad it is. Everyone wants to change it. But I don't see how it can change as long as both parties are on the payroll https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/unitedhealth-group/recipien...

It can change once Americans break their addiction to "health care."

Huh?

I don't know a single person who ENJOYS going to the doctor, or needing medical treatment.

What are you on about?

Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

#45

Post by joejohnson »

tossandthrow wrote: post #5
andrelaszlo wrote: post #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.)

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.

And which is currently fighting multiple wars around the world, or justifying support of many proxy wars which are killing thousands daily.

Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

#46

Post by forgetfreeman »

lopalimpa wrote: post #12
andrelaszlo wrote: post #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.)

"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.

I find absolutist stances based on ideology distasteful. History has pretty vividly shown that sometimes killing people is in fact the answer. Something something Nuremburg trials.

Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

#47

Post by garciasn »

I was just denied a colonoscopy as not medically necessary by UHC, coincidentally three days before their CEO was killed, because they don't want me to have anesthesia to do it; they argue I should be awake.

When I called to refute the denial, which was denied, I asked them to find the person, if it was a person, who denied it and shove a tube up their ass without anesthesia and then reassess whether it's medically necessary to have a colonoscopy without it.

I'm 45. Colonoscopies are a thing. I had a friend die at 52 two years ago after he was diagnosed with stage IV during his first colonoscopy. I spent many of his last days watching him struggle to survive; I don't want that to happen to me just because UHC charges me $2000/month in premiums and denies basic service because they need to pay their executives too much money.

Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

#48

Post by xyzzy4747 »

mrbungie wrote: post #33
xyzzy4747 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's the least bad system.

Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

#49

Post by psbp »

carlgreene wrote: post #7
andrelaszlo wrote: post #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.)

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?

There is legal precedent establishing healthcare providers' obligations in life-threatening situations. The same moral responsibility should exist when insurers deny lifesaving care, it's just hidden behind bureaucracy.

Re: Feds help health insurers hide their dirty secret: denials on the rise

#50

Post by jimbokun »

weberer wrote: post #15
edwinjm wrote: post #8

It's time the US realizes how bad its medical system is.

Everybody knows how bad it is. Everyone wants to change it. But I don't see how it can change as long as both parties are on the payroll https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/unitedhealth-group/recipien...

Everyone wants to change it...until you propose a concrete new system including payment mechanism.

"Give me universal health care...but don't increase my taxes!...and don't take away my current insurance plan!"

Post reply on HN