Should rape be considered a pre-existing condition?

ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
Should rape be considered a pre-existing condition?

With Christina Turner being dropped from her insurance after being raped, and it being cited as a pre-existing condition, do you feel the decision is correct? Is it ethical?

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5487
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Link to the story? If

Link to the story?

 

If that's what happened, then no, I don't think it's ethical.

 

 


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:o

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/chris-turners-rape-pre-existing-condition-say-insurers

http://airamerica.com/politics/10-21-2009/sexual-assault-not-preexisting-condition/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/21/insurance-companies-rape-_n_328708.html

 

 

On October 20, Turner spoke at the National Women’s Law Center's launch of "Being a Woman Is Not a Pre-Existing Condition"

 

They have a website and here is a little video from them.

 

 

 

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


Stosis
Posts: 327
Joined: 2008-10-21
User is offlineOffline
The rape itself is not a

The rape itself is not a pre-exiting condition buut I would say any physical or mental trauma caused by it is. Then again, America could just stop being a country of assholes and do away with the whole idea of pre-existing conditions. You know, like a normal country.


Jormungander
atheistScience Freak
Jormungander's picture
Posts: 938
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
Stosis wrote:The rape itself

Stosis wrote:

The rape itself is not a pre-exiting condition buut I would say any physical or mental trauma caused by it is. Then again, America could just stop being a country of assholes and do away with the whole idea of pre-existing conditions. You know, like a normal country.

If you do away with the 'no pre-existing conditions' rule then people would be outright stupid to have health insurance. Without that rule people would be wise to wait until they have a sever medical problem and then get health insurance to cover the problem for them. There would be no point in having the insurance all the time if you could wait until there is a problem and then get it just long enough for the problem to be treated. For the having health insurance to make any sense at all, it needs to exclude pre-existing conditions. Why pay for health insurance all the time if you can buy it after learning that you will need expensive treatments.

Not allowing pre-existing conditions to be covered produces a host of problems. Allowing pre-existing conditions to be covered would result in people getting health insurance only after a serious medical problem has be discovered. So we deal with the problems of the first option rather than have the industry collapse due to the problem caused by the second option.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Well if she was raped before

Well if she was raped before signing on for the insurance then yes it is a pre-Existing Condition. Witch is the case when she made the calls. Well technically rape isn't a condition but anyway. The system may be crap but it exists.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
I'm in favor of having

I'm in favor of having people that believe as CC start a charity to cover people with pre-existing conditions. That way, they could give money to the charity and they could show us how compassionate they are rather than just tell us. I'm in favor of having a society where you don't get to consider yourself compassionate just because you support higher taxes on everyone that is richer than yourself but rather you actually provide the help yourself.

Eliminating pre-existing conditions in this rape case really amounts to compensation for crime victims by society at large. Why not try to extact the money from the criminals instead of sucessful businessmen by punishing them through higher taxes? Why not have the rapists work in a prision factory or force them to work two jobs when they get out to pay off these costs?

One point they don't address is why didn't these women have insurance before they had medical needs. Was it because our schools failed to get them into jobs that could pay for good insurance? The same politicians that run these schools would run our health care system.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Can we have links from

Can we have links from reputable sources please?

 

Something like the New York Times, CNN, MSNBC or the like.  You know what I mean.  News organizations that have the resources and the willigness to do a proper investigation and rip this chick a new one if it turns out that the whole thing is bunk.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 I think we should take the

 I think we should take the obvious "THIS IS ANTI-WOMAN!!" emotion out of this and just call it what it is.  It's not anti-woman.  It's pro-insurance.

The American health insurance industry is in the business of denying coverage.  This is one excuse out of thousands, and it just happens to touch on a very sensitive cultural issue.  We can make a big stink about this as a gender issue, but the fact is, insurance companies have every reason to do exactly what they do, and if there's a big to-do about this, and they change the rule in this instance, it won't matter.  They'll find new things to deny people for.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:If

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

If that's what happened, then no, I don't think it's ethical. 

So if it's unethical for an insurance company shareholder or executive to not take money out of their pocket to provide her coverage, is it not unethical for you as well to not pay for her treatment? Why is not unethical for the doctors and hospitals to charge for her treatment?

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:The

Hambydammit wrote:

The American health insurance industry is in the business of denying coverage.  

Why don't you send her the money for her treatment? I guess your in the busness too of denying raped women treatment.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:Why don't you send

 

Quote:
Why don't you send her the money for her treatment? I guess your in the busness too of denying raped women treatment.

Because I am not an insurance company.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Eliminating

EXC wrote:

Eliminating pre-existing conditions in this rape case really amounts to compensation for crime victims by society at large. Why not try to extact the money from the criminals instead of sucessful businessmen by punishing them through higher taxes? Why not have the rapists work in a prision factory or force them to work two jobs when they get out to pay off these costs?

In the case cited by the OP the rapists were not caught. How do you extract money from criminals that get away with the crimes?

EXC wrote:

One point they don't address is why didn't these women have insurance before they had medical needs. Was it because our schools failed to get them into jobs that could pay for good insurance? The same politicians that run these schools would run our health care system.

In the case of the woman cited in this OP she did have insurance. When her insurance came up for renewal she was dropped. So explain how you address this?

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5852
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Jormungander wrote:Stosis

Jormungander wrote:

Stosis wrote:

The rape itself is not a pre-exiting condition buut I would say any physical or mental trauma caused by it is. Then again, America could just stop being a country of assholes and do away with the whole idea of pre-existing conditions. You know, like a normal country.

If you do away with the 'no pre-existing conditions' rule then people would be outright stupid to have health insurance. Without that rule people would be wise to wait until they have a sever medical problem and then get health insurance to cover the problem for them. There would be no point in having the insurance all the time if you could wait until there is a problem and then get it just long enough for the problem to be treated. For the having health insurance to make any sense at all, it needs to exclude pre-existing conditions. Why pay for health insurance all the time if you can buy it after learning that you will need expensive treatments.

Not allowing pre-existing conditions to be covered produces a host of problems. Allowing pre-existing conditions to be covered would result in people getting health insurance only after a serious medical problem has be discovered. So we deal with the problems of the first option rather than have the industry collapse due to the problem caused by the second option.

Another argument in favour of a national health system, where the issue of whether or not to pay insurance is no longer such an issue, even if there remains an option to pay for private insurance.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5487
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Cpt_pineapple

EXC wrote:

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

If that's what happened, then no, I don't think it's ethical. 

So if it's unethical for an insurance company shareholder or executive to not take money out of their pocket to provide her coverage, is it not unethical for you as well to not pay for her treatment? Why is not unethical for the doctors and hospitals to charge for her treatment?

 

She didn't hire me to provide coverage. She hired the insurance company.

 

 


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic wrote:In

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

In the case cited by the OP the rapists were not caught. How do you extract money from criminals that get away with the crimes?

Good point. Should society at large be required to compensate crime victims? It seems like this should be the debate rather than healthcare. Perhaps the women would rather get a cash payment than get money to see a shrink. Who are we to tell her how to spend such a benefit?

Should the same politicians that can't catch criminals or reform them in prision should run my healthcare? No thanks.

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

In the case of the woman cited in this OP she did have insurance. When her insurance came up for renewal she was dropped. So explain how you address this?

I suppose education. This sounds a bit like people that want to blame McDonalds for making them fat or Philip Morris for giving them lung cancer. Why is she not educated to not buy crappy, cheap products? Another failure of the education system to teach logical, critical thinking. And the same politicians should run my healthcare?

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:She

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

She didn't hire me to provide coverage. She hired the insurance company. 

The insurance company didn't break the terms of the contract. They did exactly what she hire them to do. She didn't hire them to cover everything. I don't see why they are under any more obligation than you to pay for her care.

 

So do we only allow health insurance contracts that cover every thing and can never be canceled? Do you have any idea how much that would raise rates for everyone?

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3716
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
How the hell could any

How the hell could any private company provide coverage for pre-existing conditions even if they wanted to? They'd go bankrupt.

My opinion on this would have to depend on whether the woman was covered before she was raped.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:pauljohntheskeptic

EXC wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

In the case cited by the OP the rapists were not caught. How do you extract money from criminals that get away with the crimes?

Good point. Should society at large be required to compensate crime victims? It seems like this should be the debate rather than healthcare. Perhaps the women would rather get a cash payment than get money to see a shrink. Who are we to tell her how to spend such a benefit?

Should the same politicians that can't catch criminals or reform them in prision should run my healthcare? No thanks.

If your plan is the criminals are required to compensate victims then you need to add like a 300% penalty to whatever losses they have caused as a means to pay for all of those you can't catch. It's basically like triple damages in a lawsuit to punish the negligent party.

Actually it was the Fort Lauderdale Police in this case that didn't catch the criminals. Most police officers as far as I know are not elected to be a cop but are hired. Perhaps you live somewhere where all the cops are elected politicians?

EXC wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

In the case of the woman cited in this OP she did have insurance. When her insurance came up for renewal she was dropped. So explain how you address this?

I suppose education. This sounds a bit like people that want to blame McDonalds for making them fat or Philip Morris for giving them lung cancer. Why is she not educated to not buy crappy, cheap products? Another failure of the education system to teach logical, critical thinking. And the same politicians should run my healthcare?

You must have missed that Miss Turner was an insurance underwriter and knew all the ins and outs of the insurance industry. What the problem here is once you have an issue that continues insurance companies can leave you in the middle of a river to drown so to speak. What should happen is that they can't cancel you while you are being treated and for a reasonable period after you recover from the illness. Otherwise they will just dump everyone as soon as they file a claim for a hang nail. Some auto companies are famous for canceling people after a car accident even if it was the fault of the other driver.

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Actually it was the Fort Lauderdale Police in this case that didn't catch the criminals. Most police officers as far as I know are not elected to be a cop but are hired. Perhaps you live somewhere where all the cops are elected politicians?

The sherriff is elected but the police departments all are supposed to be accountable to elected officials(Mayor, city council, etc...). But it seems like the biggest problem with sexual predators is the lack of reform in prision and supervion when they are released from prision. Mainly because we are behelden to the judicial and prision system which is not rewarded for sucess but is set up to provide job security to judges, lawers, police and prision guards.

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

You must have missed that Miss Turner was an insurance underwriter and knew all the ins and outs of the insurance industry. What the problem here is once you have an issue that continues insurance companies can leave you in the middle of a river to drown so to speak.

 

Because people don't want to pay the extra money for cadillac health care plans. I'm sure this doesn't happen to the powerful and wealth. Did we see any stories of this happening to politicians or CEOs? So if we want everyone to have expensive health care plans, we need to attack poverty and not a system that just raises the costs for everyone.

 

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

What should happen is that they can't cancel you while you are being treated and for a reasonable period after you recover from the illness. Otherwise they will just dump everyone as soon as they file a claim for a hang nail.

  

Why can't people be educated that these are crappy plans that may lead to problems? Then they decide if they want to spend more for a better plan?

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Some auto companies are famous for canceling people after a car accident even if it was the fault of the other driver. 

Why did the insurance company even know she was a rape victim? Shouldn't this be private information? Seems like a lot of  these problems would go away if medical records were kept private.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:pauljohntheskeptic

EXC wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

You must have missed that Miss Turner was an insurance underwriter and knew all the ins and outs of the insurance industry. What the problem here is once you have an issue that continues insurance companies can leave you in the middle of a river to drown so to speak.

 

Because people don't want to pay the extra money for cadillac health care plans. I'm sure this doesn't happen to the powerful and wealth. Did we see any stories of this happening to politicians or CEOs? So if we want everyone to have expensive health care plans, we need to attack poverty and not a system that just raises the costs for everyone.

This is just something to consider in your suggested reform of the US Healthcare system.

In this case, it's clear she didn't have a clause that prevented cancellation or non-renewal of her plan. In most cases, health insurance plans are all like this except when you have a group plan from your employer. Group plans force the insurance companies to insure and keep all of the company's employees unless they cancel the entire plan. This is part of what has been discussed as an option by Congress. Setting up a group plan that people could get insurance and not be cancelled. It is no different than a large group plan at a big corporation.

 

EXC wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

What should happen is that they can't cancel you while you are being treated and for a reasonable period after you recover from the illness. Otherwise they will just dump everyone as soon as they file a claim for a hang nail.

  

Why can't people be educated that these are crappy plans that may lead to problems? Then they decide if they want to spend more for a better plan?

As someone who is self-employed even with "good plans" this clause exists in mine as well. As I too live in Floirda like Miss Turner, perhaps it's a State of Florida regulation in the insurance statutes.

EXC wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Some auto companies are famous for canceling people after a car accident even if it was the fault of the other driver. 

Why did the insurance company even know she was a rape victim? Shouldn't this be private information? Seems like a lot of  these problems would go away if medical records were kept private.

Your health record is not private to the health insurance companies just like your driving record is not private to your auto insurance company. It is how the insurance company determines risk. If your health record or preexisting conditions were private, then the insurance companies would statiscally determine risk based on claims for your sex and age, something that has been discussed in Congress as well. This would mean prexisting conditions aren't considered in rate determination, something I thought you were against.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Why did the

EXC wrote:
Why did the insurance company even know she was a rape victim? Shouldn't this be private information? Seems like a lot of these problems would go away if medical records were kept private.

 

That is a very good question. In the United States, there is a law called HIPPA that protects privacy of medical records. It was passed in part to assure that things like this case never happen.

 

Hell but if I were to change dentists, I would have to fill out HIPPA forms because the fact that I am missing a few teeth is protected information. Yet this woman could not get insurance without disclosing the fact that she took anti viral drugs?

 

You see, that is part of the reason why I asked above for links to news sources such as CNN & other regular sources. All of the links that were provided, along with all of the results that come up for me on google point to blogs. And for the most part, those blogs are all citing a single blog (the Huffington Post article) as the sole source for this story.

 

Now google did finally find me the original press release from a few days ago and that is only slightly more detailed the the Huffington article. However, none of the other articles that I found had any of the scant additional information that the Huffington piece had in it.

 

Really, it looks like this woman drew up her “press release” and sent it only to one rather popular blog. Then other blogs decided to jump on this without attempting to determine if there was any meat to the story.

 

If regular journalists want to have anything to do with it, they will unleash the army of fact checkers to see if there was a police report and/or court records on file. Then they would telephone the woman in question, go to her house and ask to see the pages of letters that she has from the several insurance companies that all said the same thing.

 

On finding that this really is a live story meriting serious coverage, why would the New York Times not be all over the story like white on rice? They tend to be one of the most liberal organizations out there and if this story is good enough for them to run with, it will sell a lot of papers for them once the word gets out that people need to read the story.

 

Don't get me wrong, this could be a valid story but as it stands, it has about as much backing as the Tawana Brawley kidnapping from the 80's that almost certainly never happened.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Your health record is not private to the health insurance companies just like your driving record is not private to your auto insurance company. It is how the insurance company determines risk. If your health record or preexisting conditions were private, then the insurance companies would statiscally determine risk based on claims for your sex and age, something that has been discussed in Congress as well. This would mean prexisting conditions aren't considered in rate determination, something I thought you were against.

Another reason why I would try to go to a foreign country for treatment rather than have my medical history be made public record. This is another reason why the individual needs choice in his health care. If the doctor is going to make the information public, find another doctor. Seems like with gov. run health care, we would loose our privacy Then employers and life insurance companies would discriminate as well.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca