R
rdean
Guest
Think Progress » Insurance company executive refers to high-cost patients as dogs.
In the state of New York, insurers are legally prohibited from discriminating against individuals who submit large claims. So when Guardian, a major insurance company, was faced with the high-cost claims of 37 year-old muscular dystrophy patient Ian Pearl, it decided to cancel its entire line of coverage in the state of New York rather than pay for Pearls claims. In an e-mail obtained by The Washington Times, it was revealed that one executive at the company refers to patients like Pearl as dogs that the company can simply get rid of:
In an e-mail, one Guardian Life Insurance Co. executive called high-cost patients such as Mr. Pearl dogs that the company could get rid of.
A federal court quickly ruled that the companys actions were legal, so on Dec. 1, barring an order by the federal Department of Health and Human Services, Mr. Pearl will lose his benefits.
The cost of Pearls annual treatment is approximately $1 million a year. The Pearl family is unable to receive the quality health care that Ian needs. One-on-one skilled nursing is essential, Mrs. Pearl said.
...
$1 million a year for treatment would be rationed in a country with socialized medicine. They simply could not afford it for one person.
Which is why they cut off anyone with even a mild case of this illness.
If insurance is only for people NOT sick and who DON'T get sick, then why is it called "insurance"?
How can Republicans defend this? How is it possible?