Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
21. That is good news, I am happy to hear your daughter can get a break.
Thu Sep 26, 2013, 01:56 AM
Sep 2013

I hope and pray she never has to use an insurance company to treat a serious life threatening health issue.

I know from experience they will not allow every procedure, even some that are critical and I also know that by the end of a couple years of fighting it (hopefully successfully) your family will loose all of your savings, all of your credit and wind up in debt as well.

That is how the insurance company (blue cross-top of the line) left me and my wife at the end when she died.

As a special bonus, they delayed a surgery for nine months during which time an operable tumor was able to metastasize and kill her, making the surgery unsuccessful, so you will have to excuse my lack of total exuberance in the face of the fact that these deadly vampires still get to run the show and make damn good money off our collective misery.


Still for some that would have died from not being allowed any care whatsoever that may now survive - the loss of all one's assets is of little importance in the end. I never regretted losing everything to get a chance to try to save her. I would do the same again but this rime would not have the resources to pay the weekly barrage of co-pays they require to allow you the attempt at survival, I honestly don't know how we would have been able to get very far at all without having the door vig in hand from the savings account or the credit cards.

Edited to add, I may have been mistaken about the co-pays and such taking all your families assets, considering your daughter was able to pay $60,000 a year for medical expenses and my entire yearly income was $20,000 less than that, I suppose the "better healed" among us will be just fine under insurance care. It is only your average working person's income bracket that will be so destroyed, that explains why politicians making $170,000? a year and cul de sac liberals are perfectly happy with the vampires arrangement, such people can afford to feed them half my salary along the journey and are understandably quite exuberance about how this will effect them.

The larger majority of us will just have to suck it up and take the bankruptcies stoically.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I'm sure they'll find something else. RC Sep 2013 #1
Why? None of that would matter because preexisting conditions can't be excluded anymore.n/t pnwmom Sep 2013 #2
What about existing conditions? RC Sep 2013 #3
Because of the ACA customers who get screwed can switch to a competetor who covers it. tridim Sep 2013 #5
No health conditions can be excluded, whether current or preexisting. pnwmom Sep 2013 #6
Doesn't make any difference what they find - Ms. Toad Sep 2013 #10
The pre-existing changes alone are a big deal in many ways. Hoyt Sep 2013 #4
They don't care as much as you think because they get to way overcharge for covering such people. Dragonfli Sep 2013 #8
No, you're wrong. They do NOT get to charge more for preexisting conditions. pnwmom Sep 2013 #11
I apologize, for some reason I thought we all went into a special risk pool, I guess I was mistaken. Dragonfli Sep 2013 #15
We old farts (pre Medicare, that is) actually benefit the most pnwmom Sep 2013 #25
The unnecessary and vampirific nature of the very existence of insurance middle men Dragonfli Sep 2013 #18
Sorry to have offended you. But it was hard for me to believe a smart person pnwmom Sep 2013 #26
There will be increased premiums for pre-existing, there has to be, Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #47
There will not be increased premiums for people with preexisting conditions. pnwmom Sep 2013 #49
I didn't say higher costs would be confined to patients with pre-existing condition Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #53
Everyone else will NOT be paying a higher premium. pnwmom Sep 2013 #55
"By pulling more people into the system through the individual mandate" Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #56
You said all premiums are going to be higher, and that's false. pnwmom Sep 2013 #59
No they don't. Ms. Toad Sep 2013 #12
That is good news, I am happy to hear your daughter can get a break. Dragonfli Sep 2013 #21
I am very sorry about what happened to your wife. The ACA was written to try to prevent pnwmom Sep 2013 #32
You appear to be missing the point, we were well insured, Insurance care is very expensive to USE, Dragonfli Sep 2013 #43
I think you missed my point. An insurer won't be able to string a patient along for 9 months pnwmom Sep 2013 #45
You know I am too angry to continue here, stop pretending the evil was vanquished, Dragonfli Sep 2013 #50
I didn't say "evil was vanquished," I said that the ACA is trying to fix the problem. pnwmom Sep 2013 #52
She has been relying on insurance companies to treat two serious, life threatening illnesses Ms. Toad Sep 2013 #40
My income was 40,000, and I don't have any income now. Dragonfli Sep 2013 #46
There is a difference between denying the vampire in the room Ms. Toad Sep 2013 #63
I am sick to death that no one cares to end the suffering Dragonfli Sep 2013 #64
I am not willing to allow everyone to continue to drown Ms. Toad Sep 2013 #65
I'm SO glad for you. pnwmom Sep 2013 #28
It is a relief - Ms. Toad Sep 2013 #41
Thank you, ErikJ! Cha Sep 2013 #7
YW Cha! ErikJ Sep 2013 #19
You do know area51 Sep 2013 #9
Cite, please. Ms. Toad Sep 2013 #13
I do know that investigating providers for fraud is a definite cost-saving measure... Hekate Sep 2013 #36
LOL! OnyxCollie Sep 2013 #14
From what I understand your rate is based on only 3 things ErikJ Sep 2013 #17
Exactly. And women can't be charged more. SunSeeker Sep 2013 #20
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2013 #16
Actually, the NYCLU didn't say that. SunSeeker Sep 2013 #22
+1 uponit7771 Sep 2013 #23
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2013 #24
Obamacare is not a Bush policy. SunSeeker Sep 2013 #27
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2013 #30
i see you joined DU tonight to push a bullshit right wing blog. nt SunSeeker Sep 2013 #31
Libertarians are anarchists for the rich/corporatists as they say. ErikJ Sep 2013 #34
Sadly, Libertarians prove you can smoke pot and still be an asshole. nt SunSeeker Sep 2013 #58
It's a Heritage Foundation plan solarhydrocan Sep 2013 #35
Heritage claims the mandate part. But not the other key parts (expansion of Medicaid, etc.). SunSeeker Sep 2013 #44
Alerted on our newbie friend and got a reply faster than light: 3/3 to leave it. Hekate Sep 2013 #37
Ha! Apparently an alerter with more clout or a different jury took another look... Hekate Sep 2013 #39
Me too. Whoever alerted first got a crap jury, but MIR noticed the repeated alerts. SunSeeker Sep 2013 #62
We are too fixated on health insurance and not health care... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2013 #29
Hopefully a public option/single payer will be added somehow in the future. ErikJ Sep 2013 #33
The goal is free health care as a benefit for being a citizen of the richest cou,...wait a sec.... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2013 #38
BINGO! nt adirondacker Sep 2013 #54
Who could not click on a thread title like that one? LWolf Sep 2013 #42
That's not entirely accurate OhioChick Sep 2013 #48
thanks for that. We need answers as to where the work is being done and what our antigop Sep 2013 #51
So, in other words... ChromeFoundry Sep 2013 #57
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2013 #60
Wondering if the internet connection is secure since most public ones are not. uppityperson Sep 2013 #61
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obamacare ends corporate ...»Reply #21