Man responsible for the death of thousands is shot and killed

[edhopper]

Am I still supposed to grieve for his family?

[Drum]

1. Feel better now?

[edhopper]

7. Yes

Thank you

[Drum]

11. That's terrific.

Me, I live in NYC, as does my wife, our friends, and their families. I don’t want shoot-outs on our streets. No matter who gets shot and lies there bleeding, I find no joy or relief in it.

And what of the individual doing the shooting this morning? Are they some sort of justice deliverance hero? Is that the sort of person you might support, even vote for perhaps?

Ugh, I just can’t even with this. Great succinct post, though. Enjoy your feeling.

[Groundhawg]

2. Yes, we do not condone murder.

[edhopper]

8. Condoning murder

And not being bothered by some scum dying are two different things

[Groundhawg]

12. no, silence is guilty.

[kelly1mm]

3. Couldn't the same be said of ANY US President over the last 40 years if they were shot? Democrats and

Republicans alike?

[soandso]

5. Yes

and it's politicians who created this system where medicare pays these insurance companies to provide (or not) Medicare Advantage. Nobody would be dying in wars without the politicians who stir shit and then fund the wars (proxy or direct US troop involvement).

[Maru Kitteh]

4. I feel sorry for any little kids. Anywhere. Everywhere. His are no different.

Him, on the other hand, that doesn’t upset me. Not popping a bottle of bubbly or anything, but I gotta say, I’m really not bothered at all.

[Silent Type]

6. Lots of lawyers out there would love to take a few of those cases, especially if someone's death or

bad outcome is directly tied to an insurance decision (even as an internal policy), delay of care, pain, etc.

Insurers can be sued just like docs, hospitals, etc., who screw up. Although in the insurers case, one wouldn't file a malpractice, they'd sue the insurer for liability or errors and omissions for a denial which caused permanent injury, death, etc. In fact, in some cases that might get the patient or family a whole lot more money than the restrictive malpractice laws in many states.

[edhopper]

9. That would be of great solice

To the dead person's family.
And if it were so easy to sue. Why do the insurance companies still do it.

[Silent Type]

15. Solice, No. indication of how seldom that happens, yes. Even under original Medicare, hospitals

and doctors boot patients out once DRG days are met and they can’t justify additional days or treatments, refuse to provide further care because they know Medicare auditors will catch them, etc.

It’s not just private insurers screwing up the healthcare system.

[Meowmee]

10. It's actually almost impossible to sue a hospital or doctor for malpractice, especially a hospital

Very few medical malpractice cases are taken on/brought each year on contingency. If you have money to do it though, money talks as usual. The whole system is set up to protect them.

[Silent Type]

17. You are not suing the hospital unless they did something wrong too, you are suing an insurer.

And, at a minimum they’ll settle to avoid nuisance and publicity.

Obviously bad things happen, but I don’t think anywhere near thousands of deaths due to insurance denials. I do think there are thousands of patients who have say a knee replacement before trying conservative therapy, physical therapy, etc. Medicare has the same requirements in there coverage policies, BTW.

There are lots of initial denials often because doc submitted a few codes wrong, and the vast majority are overturned after doc provides additional information. Medicare will reject claims too for same reasoning.

Now as far as health system, I have supported Medicare/caid for all since 1980. But until Congress wises up, and takes on trump supporters who want nothing to do with “gubment insurance,” this is what we have. Harris totally avoided healthcare reform this election, probably because it wouldn’t sell to trumpsters who hate the government.

[Meowmee]

20. I am talking about medical malpractice cases against hospitals/hospitals etc., not suing an insurance company

who denied a claim, and caused death or permanent harm.

They won't settle if they think they can win or get the case dismissed etc. Most cases settle if they agree to it because people do not want it to drag out for years and go to a trial, and because a trial is likely to favor the defendants. But many drag on for years before they settle. It is very costly and time consuming, lawyers will not take on a case on contingency that can't recoup and surpass that even when they know there was negligence. If it goes to trial, it almost always goes in favor of doctors/hospitals because juries favor them in high percentages even with strong evidence of negligence.

Every law is set up to protect doctors and hospitals against this, not patients who have been harmed. Including time limits for declaring and bringing a suit and who can sue. Hospitals in particular have armies of lawyers and agencies to defend them. And nearly everyone involved, even others in the community, not directly involved, circle the wagons at the hint of a possible suit.

One interesting case is the fosamax suits against Merck, a pharmaceutical company, it took 13 years to settle 1200 or so onj cases, about 500 femur fracture cases were thrown out, but have now been revived. Those are just the cases that were brought and accepted by lawyers.

Most medical malpractice cases against hospitals and doctors never see the light of day. The number is somewhere around 20,000 or less that go forward per year to even being declared.

[Silent Type]

21. Agree. Although malpractice is not what thread is about.

[Meowmee]

22. I suspect that it is equally hard to bring the type of suit you suggested

Last edited Thu Dec 5, 2024, 08:57 AM - Edit history (1)

which is why I mentioned mms as an example because I know what it is like. I doubt there are tons of lawyers wanting to take these cases on.

Edited to add: in one case of malpractice against myself. Where the insurance company denied a huge hospital stay adjacent to an ICU stay all of which was due to serious negligence on the part of my doctors and the hospital. I told the hospital that I was going to sue them if they tried to bill me. they then told me they were going to absorb the cost after they appealed it and it was denied. Actually what I should’ve done was sue them all anyway because I had permanent damage from all of the negligence and I could easily have died.

[Silent Type]

23. Probably because there aren't a lot of cases where one can show the insurance company was at fault.

I don’t deny insurance companies are a hassle, but it’s what Congress has allowed us. If you have some stats that show otherwise, I’ll listen/read.

[Meowmee]

24. I'm pretty sure there are numerous cases

I will let you do the research as I don't have time now but I will look later. I suspect it still would not be a case with many lawyers wanting to take it on. The thing is most cases are never brought or even attempted to be etc. People are harmed and die, give up etc., they often do not have the strength to take it on as did the op.

[LeftInTX]

13. Yeah, let's celebrate 🍾

[Groundhawg]

14. any evidence he is responsible for a death?

[Arazi]

16. As the CEO, the buck stops with him

Literally.

And as United Healthcare is number one in claims denial, yes I’d say it’s a certainty he’s responsible for many many dead Americans

[edhopper]

18. UNC has a

30 % denial of claims.
What do you think happens when people don't get medical care?

[LeftInTX]

19. We have UHC medicare through hubby's retirement

He was hospitalized twice earlier this year and we had no problems with coverage.

Second time was repeat of angiogram at a different facility. I took him to the closest hospital for the first one and it wasn't the best decision. Doc was not the best and couldn't get the cath through the blockage
A week later, we went to a large university. They admitted him that day and performed a successful procedure the next day.

It's a medicare advantage program, however it works more as a PPO since his work supplements it.

We've been on it six years. I haven't had any real issues, except the annoying deductible.