I’m not sure I’d pick either efficiency or humanism to describe what’s going on here. Personally, I’m not as optimistic as you seem to be about the nature of th

I’m not sure I’d pick either efficiency or humanism to describe what’s going on here. Personally, I’m not as optimistic as you seem to be about the nature of the service that insurance companies provide but I can still see why the case isn’t clear cut. In my mind, the insurance company neglected a particular outcome of their service, and she enacted the loophole. It’s their mistake for not catching it and they’ve now made sure it can’t happen again. I agree with you that insurance, as a concept, isn’t a means of making money as this woman has treated it. I also think the notion of insurance isn’t as sacred: the company is providing a service not some fundamental right, so this woman isn’t necessarily in the wrong for taking advantage of a “bug”