There's a writer, Cory Doctorow, who writes SF and tech journalism. He wrote a story maybe five years ago about a group of mostly white middle-aged men who communicated on a message board (looks around suspiciously) for survivors of people who lost loved ones to cancer. Some of them became militant against the insurance companies who wouldn't pay for the expensive care which might have saved their spouse or child's life, and some of them became suicide bombers at the headquarters of such companies. The story is called "Radicalized" and it is in a collection published in 2019, also called "Radicalized". The other three stories in the collection are: 1) in a future world where appliances all require licenses in order to keep working (for example, your toaster won't toast unless you have an up-to-date software license which you have to renew every year), some poor people start hacking / jailbreaking the appliances and shenanigans ensue; 2) a Superman-like superhero decides to get involved in a police brutality case and finds that his acceptance by white people is conditional, and shenanigans ensue; and 3) a rich asshole builds a doomsday bunker for a small group of his close friends and underlings, and shenanigans ensue when world events make the doomsday bunker necessary. There's a lot of shenanigans, and further discussion may belong in Knave's Doom thread.
Not to make light of the situation, but your comment reminded me of my favorite actor, Andrew Scott, playing James Moriarty in Sherlock:
There's not really such a thing as a "burner" phone any more. Every phone can be tracked back. At least to someone. This may have been meant as a red herring - a stolen phone with no connection to the shooter. Anyone thinking for a second would not carry a personal phone to a premeditated crime, even if they were careful not to drop it.
I have read unconfirmed reports that the bit you see underneath the hood and above the scarf is actually a mask.
Ah, great in Fleabag. Loved him in Sherlock and his five minute bit part in that 1917 movie is awesome---great actor.
Ha... remember how Obamacare was "death panels"? That monicker should accurately be applied to insurance companies, especially United Healthcare. And especially their Medicare Advantage plans. My bet is that the assassin - or more likely the person who hired him - had an elderly relative who was denied approval for care by United Healthcare.
If Medicare covers it, Medicare Advantage plans cover it. There is no carrier approval in either case, what is covered is set by Congress.
Just one example: "Senate report scrutinizes Medicare Advantage prior authorization denials for post-acute care services." https://www.aha.org/news/headline/2...uthorization-denials-post-acute-care-services And another... More Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries Are Filing Appeals for Denied Services or Treatments https://www.commonwealthfund.org/bl...-filing-appeals-denied-services-or-treatments
As some of you may know, I have two disabled children that use wheelchairs. When they needed new chairs, they had outgrown their previous ones, we submitted to insurance which was UHC at the time. They denied. We resubmitted. They denied again. I threatened legal action. They approved. That was pre-ACA. I get the frustration and the anger directed at a for-profit company administering healthcare from a personal perspective. However, Medicare is one of the most regulated programs in the US. There is zero carrier involvement in approvals or declining care. Zero. I have never once had one of my clients bring me a legitimate claim that UHC was denying care that Medicare provides for. It just doesn't happen. Employer Group Health Plans are a different animal, but the ACA built a floor for coverage that all carriers have to abide by or they will get their ability to offer plans revoked, so it doesn't happen as much as it used to. What people get upset by is not having a treatment that their doctor says would show promise not be approved. That is usually because Medicare doesn't approve it based on it being experimental or unproven. And yes, I have seen the viral post about a carrier not approving anesthesia to be administered throughout a surgery. Those situations are usually due to whoever it is that is coding the procedures has done it incorrectly or the carrier employee isn't entering it into their payment systems correctly.
And if those plans are found to be at fault, they will lose star ratings and the government stipend that correlate, and eventually die off, like Humana is in Ohio. It's not a perfect system, as we have discussed previously.
I always thought health insurance companies were terrible. Then I started working in healthcare and realized they’re even worse than I thought.
I'm sure, like all industries, there are some good experiences that people have had with health insurance companies. Let's post those stories here. I don't have any, so I can't go first, but someone here surely has had a good experience with a health insurance company. Don't be shy, post away, so we can all be reminded that there is good in every industry. Anyone?
And now Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield has reversed their decision on caps for surgery anesthesia. I'm sure that's just a coincidence ...
Of course any company of any size is self-insured with the medical insurance company being the administrator of the plan. Companies and corporations are accomplices in insurance company failures.