Virginia mom who lost arm in shark attack learns insurance won't cover $73K prosthetic hand
nypost.com

Another person who has to turn to GoFundMe to get proper prosthetic care. Truly the sign of a functioning society when people have to resort to the generosity of others through a private for-profit crowdfunding platform to lead a normal life.

  • frunch@lemmy.world
    26·
    12 days ago

    In a statement, a Cigna Healthcare spokesperson said, “While many of our health plans cover a number of prosthetic options, we are evaluating benefit updates to help expand coverage of advanced prosthetics for more people.”

    I love the detached language they always address these matters with. Reading between the lines, I’d chalk this more up to: “this client isn’t on the $1500/mo plan so they don’t get coverage for stuff like that. Better luck next time. Oh yeah, and we’ll reconsider our policy sometime lol”

    Fucking monsters

    • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.orgOPM
      131·
      12 days ago

      This is why mutualized public healthcare systems work better than for-profit ones.

      in a mutualized system, 1000 people pitch in $10 per year so that one person in need might get the $10,000 surgery or prosthetic they need that year.

      In a for-profit system, 1000 people pitch in $10 and the healthcare provider tries its hardest to make sure nobody costs more than they individually put in, or proposes coverage with out-of-pocket expenses so high they know nobody will take them up on the offer, so they can keep as much of the $10,000 for themselves.

      You know why?

      Because that’s what for-profits do. They are LEGALLY compelled to put the interests of their shareholders before everything else.

      And that’s why no healthcare system should be incentivized to turn a profit.

      • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
        8·
        12 days ago

        They are LEGALLY compelled to put the interests of their shareholders before everything else.

        This is not true and people need to stop perpetuating it. They have a fiduciary duty to the shareholders. If they don’t increase profits, the board of directors might replace the CEO. But there’s NO LAW forcing this. If there was, there wouldn’t be the popular (among Apple nerds) Tim Cook quote to “get out of the stock” over how environmentalism affects ROI.

        Cook, clearly trying to remain calm, shot back: “When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind, I don’t consider the bloody ROI [return on investment]. When I think about doing the right thing, I don’t think about an ROI.”

        Cook then offered his own bottom line to Danhof, or any other critic, one which perfectly sums up his belief that social and political and moral leadership are not antithetical to running a business. “If that’s a hard line for you,” Cook continued, “then you should get out of the stock.”

        https://alearningaday.blog/2016/03/12/tim-cook-on-roi

        Please stop mixing untruths with facts about the shittiness of our healthcare system.

        • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.orgOPM
          6·
          12 days ago

          This is not true and people need to stop perpetuating it

          I read up on this and you are correct. I thought shareholder primacy was enshrined in corporate law but it isn’t.

          I stand corrected. Thanks!

        • shalafi@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          12 days ago

          CEO at my last company told the board he intended to go in the red in order to build up our staff and products. They applauded him.

          Why isn’t he in JAIL?!

          What was funny was that COVID boosted demand for our new remote product that customers weren’t signing up for. LOL, we made a profit trying to lose money.