4 ms·

The title is somewhat misleading, since it implies the family paid that much. From near the bottom of the article: >Brigland’s family paid $7,200, their plan’

The title is somewhat misleading, since it implies the family paid that much. From near the bottom of the article: >Brigland’s family paid $7,200, their plan’s out-of-pocket maximum.

vundercind 2y ago
Plus have been billed another $11,000 for an ambulance that insurance decided not to cover.
- burnt-resistor 2y ago
  Surprise! Gotcha capitalism and unexpected risk of bankruptcy, homelessness, and poverty is America's defining feature that's not a bug.
  - vundercind 2y ago
    Judging from the photos I’m guessing these folks can take the hit and at least be OK, if not somewhat scuffed-up, financially speaking, but almost $20k in medical bills because your kid had one could-happen-to-anyone mishap would ruin a lot of families’ entire decade. It remains baffling to me that almost any other topic gets attention in this country when we have this problem.
    - burnt-resistor 2y ago
      Of course, because us poor people don't have access to journalists or large social media presences. The burden for most families falls on them and nonexistent, power-law distribution ad-hoc charity drives like GoFundMe that are more like the lottery rather than receiving a consistent amount of help comparable to their condition. The whole point of society is to share risks and costs that would be difficult or impossible to share alone. When a society doesn't do that, it becomes a degree of a failed state by definition. Anything shared today in America is privatized, eliminated, or disparaged as "communism" by the ignorati and by the greedy rich.
    - kcplate 2y ago
      What photos did you see that I didn’t?
      - vundercind 2y ago
        Maybe it’s different in San Diego, but mismatched sunken slab walkways and large poured concrete landscaping features would only occur on new or recently heavily-made-over well-above-median-cost houses in trendy areas, place I’ve lived. The photos read “money” to me, at least enough that they might not be ruined by an unexpected $20k outlay in a year (though I’m sure it stings, at least).
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
moribvndvs 2y ago
It’s not really misleading, doesn’t say the parents paid that. The actual costs outside OOP maximum is spread across the insured, so high bills affect many.
TaurenHunter 2y ago
> Insurance did not pay all the claims, including one ambulance bill. And Lindsay said the family received a letter this summer suggesting they owe an additional $11,300 for Brigland’s care. While the landmark No Surprises Act protects patients from many out-of-network bills in emergencies, the law controversially exempted bills for ground ambulances.
- RestlessMind 2y ago
  And still the headline is silly. 18,500 total is far less than what "totaled more than a quarter-million dollars" implies.
  - beej71 2y ago
    Since a lot of people don't have insurance, I think the number is useful. Also what the actual fuck with that markup?
    - RestlessMind 2y ago
      If you don't have that much, you can always negotiate down. So ultimately, you are really looking for an intersection of: those who do not have insurance, those who get snake bites, those who cannot negotiate for whatever reasons and thus face death/medical bankruptcies. My gut feeling tells me that it is a very small number, but happy to learn from actual data if it is readily available.
RestlessMind 2y ago
Not sure why you are downvoted. The title is indeed misleading. It literally says "totaled more than a quarter-million dollars". Sorry, but the "total" should include discounts induced by out-of-pocket maximum, which was 7,200 in this case[1]. "total" should also include discounts negotiated by the insurer with the hospitals, which will be a lower cost than the title implies. Sensationalist headline indeed, to pray on "murican healthcare silly... hahaha" biases. [1] afterwards, the article says they got an additional bill of 11,200 but not sure if they paid it or negotiated something else.

The title is somewhat misleading, since it implies the family paid that much. From near the bottom of the article: >Brigland’s family paid $7,200, their plan’s out-of-pocket maximum.

vundercind 2y ago

Plus have been billed another $11,000 for an ambulance that insurance decided not to cover.

burnt-resistor 2y ago
Surprise! Gotcha capitalism and unexpected risk of bankruptcy, homelessness, and poverty is America's defining feature that's not a bug.
- vundercind 2y ago
  Judging from the photos I’m guessing these folks can take the hit and at least be OK, if not somewhat scuffed-up, financially speaking, but almost $20k in medical bills because your kid had one could-happen-to-anyone mishap would ruin a lot of families’ entire decade. It remains baffling to me that almost any other topic gets attention in this country when we have this problem.
  - burnt-resistor 2y ago
    Of course, because us poor people don't have access to journalists or large social media presences. The burden for most families falls on them and nonexistent, power-law distribution ad-hoc charity drives like GoFundMe that are more like the lottery rather than receiving a consistent amount of help comparable to their condition. The whole point of society is to share risks and costs that would be difficult or impossible to share alone. When a society doesn't do that, it becomes a degree of a failed state by definition. Anything shared today in America is privatized, eliminated, or disparaged as "communism" by the ignorati and by the greedy rich.
  - kcplate 2y ago
    What photos did you see that I didn’t?
    - vundercind 2y ago
      Maybe it’s different in San Diego, but mismatched sunken slab walkways and large poured concrete landscaping features would only occur on new or recently heavily-made-over well-above-median-cost houses in trendy areas, place I’ve lived. The photos read “money” to me, at least enough that they might not be ruined by an unexpected $20k outlay in a year (though I’m sure it stings, at least).

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

moribvndvs 2y ago

It’s not really misleading, doesn’t say the parents paid that. The actual costs outside OOP maximum is spread across the insured, so high bills affect many.

TaurenHunter 2y ago

> Insurance did not pay all the claims, including one ambulance bill. And Lindsay said the family received a letter this summer suggesting they owe an additional $11,300 for Brigland’s care. While the landmark No Surprises Act protects patients from many out-of-network bills in emergencies, the law controversially exempted bills for ground ambulances.

RestlessMind 2y ago
And still the headline is silly. 18,500 total is far less than what "totaled more than a quarter-million dollars" implies.
- beej71 2y ago
  Since a lot of people don't have insurance, I think the number is useful. Also what the actual fuck with that markup?
  - RestlessMind 2y ago
    If you don't have that much, you can always negotiate down. So ultimately, you are really looking for an intersection of: those who do not have insurance, those who get snake bites, those who cannot negotiate for whatever reasons and thus face death/medical bankruptcies. My gut feeling tells me that it is a very small number, but happy to learn from actual data if it is readily available.

RestlessMind 2y ago

Not sure why you are downvoted. The title is indeed misleading. It literally says "totaled more than a quarter-million dollars". Sorry, but the "total" should include discounts induced by out-of-pocket maximum, which was 7,200 in this case[1]. "total" should also include discounts negotiated by the insurer with the hospitals, which will be a lower cost than the title implies. Sensationalist headline indeed, to pray on "murican healthcare silly... hahaha" biases. [1] afterwards, the article says they got an additional bill of 11,200 but not sure if they paid it or negotiated something else.