Should genetic information be available to insurers?

[Whoha]

Originally posted by LordShiva
And if the insurer doesn't want to insure a person, it shouldn't have to.

No argument here.

[Dauphin]

Of course, the flip side is taking out an annuity with your pension savings.

Get stung by health insurance, no worries, you'll get a bonza deal on your annuity.

And vice versa.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
No it wouldn't, since there would be tremendous self-selection of the most expensive customers.

but the masses who dont want people prying into their life need insurance

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
The real problem is the insistence that all medical bills should be paid by through some sort of insurance. This made sense when such costs were unpredictable; as medical science improves and the amount of risk decreases, insurance companies should just stop paying for things that aren't risky.

If you think medical care is a basic right than the government should take over (to whatever degree is appropriate) at that point.

This is spot on. The problem I see often times at least with regards to health/workers comp is that

a. people are straight up whiny babies with claims
b. insurance companies are paying for things that are frankly unneccesary. Theres often times where companies will not only pay for an operation, but for everything post operation such as rehabilitation etc.

in the case of a car accident a company might shell out 500,000k when all is said and done. 100,000k of that might just be emergency care. 400,000k might be pain managment, rehab, lost wages, etc etc. now none of these things are risks on their own, they are implied risks associated with a car accident. basically an insurance company will get taken for a ride when really their responsibility (at least in my mind) would be to save your life first, not provide the rest of your life for you.

I look at claims daily and when I see 200,000k for some asshat tripping over a cow and hurting his back, i throw my hands up!

[MRT144]

insurance companies also need to restructure their prescription and mental health benefit policies. Theres good prescriptions (such as ones for mental health than ensure employment and premiums coming every month) and bad ones like viagra which provides no future income from premiums except on the basis of being the provider that costs the least (based on the assumption that this person is older, retired, and pays some premium out of pocket)

Now Im not completely cold hearted but honestly, if you need prescriptions to LIVE, rather than prolonging your potential income, the insurance company should reserve teh right to drop you.

and also litigation against insurance companies is another cost that sucks out money for no other reason than people being whiny babies

[Japher]

malpractice has always been looked at as a good place to improve the process

same with prescription medicine, being paid by prescription myself I am biased. however, suprisingly, I think medicine, in general should be cheaper

the system sucks

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Japher
malpractice has always been looked at as a good place to improve the process

same with prescription medicine, being paid by prescription myself I am biased. however, suprisingly, I think medicine, in general should be cheaper

the system sucks

i'd say only life saving medicine should be cheaper. or medicine that helps generate future returns by keeping the person alive or employed.

[DinoDoc]

Now Im not completely cold hearted but honestly, if you need prescriptions to LIVE ... the insurance company should reserve teh right to drop you.

What's the point of insurance from the individual perspective then?

[Arrian]

mrt,

The insuring agreement in insurance policies is typically about "indemnification" - that is, to make one whole.

Thus, paying for non-emergency care like rehabbing after a surgery is most certainly what the insurance is for.

Frankly, I'm not sure what you're on about here, other than ripping on people who get hurt.

-Arrian

[Zkribbler]

This thread misses the key point. [b]Insurers should not be involved in providing health care.]/b]

Insureres are the key reason that, in the industrialized world, the U.S. has the highest cost of health care, the shortest lifespans, the highest rate of infant mortality, and the highest percentage of people with no health coverage.

The purpose of health care should be to get sick and injured people healthy. The purpose of insurance is to make a profit by insuring healthy people and refusing coverage to sick people.

We in the U.S. have a sick and perverted system of providing health care, which does not work, and which is getting worse with each tick of the clock.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Arrian
mrt,

The insuring agreement in insurance policies is typically about "indemnification" - that is, to make one whole.

Thus, paying for non-emergency care like rehabbing after a surgery is most certainly what the insurance is for.

Frankly, I'm not sure what you're on about here, other than ripping on people who get hurt.

-Arrian

I'm on a tirade about slapdicks that cost insurance companies hundreds of thousands of dollars because they suck. The people that get injured, or fake being hurt more than they really are, get addicted ot pain meds, etc etc. I have no tolerance for them. and old people. and old hurt people that think insurance/doctors/your money is their right to have.

I want to see low cost catastrophic even health insurance, with options for additional services such as mental health care.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

Now Im not completely cold hearted but honestly, if you need prescriptions to LIVE ... the insurance company should reserve teh right to drop you.

What's the point of insurance from the individual perspective then?

ensure that they have the ability to continue to work. old people don't work.

[DinoDoc]

Why should the insurance company care about that as long as they get paid? Keep in mind I'm not talking about pre-existing conditions here.

[Japher]

wouldn't all genetic malays be considered a pre-existing condition?

[DinoDoc]

According to MRT's theory, age would be considered a genetic malays.