This is why private insurance companies should die--or, at the very least, no American should be forced to give these parasites his or her money:
Christina Turner feared that she might have been sexually assaulted after two men slipped her a knockout drug. She thought she was taking proper precautions when her doctor prescribed a month's worth of anti-AIDS medicine.
Only later did she learn that she had made herself all but uninsurable.
Turner had let the men buy her drinks at a bar in Fort Lauderdale. The next thing she knew, she said, she was lying on a roadside with cuts and bruises that indicated she had been raped. She never developed an HIV infection. But months later, when she lost her health insurance and sought new coverage, she ran into a problem.Turner, 45, who used to be a health insurance underwriter herself, said the insurance companies examined her health records. Even after she explained the assault, the insurers would not sell her a policy because the HIV medication raised too many health questions. They told her they might reconsider in three or more years if she could prove that she was still AIDS-free....
Turner's story about HIV drugs is not unusual, said Cindy Holtzman, an insurance agent and expert in medical billing at Medical Refund Service, Inc. of Marietta, Ga. Insurers generally categorize HIV-positive people as having a pre-existing condition and deny them coverage. Holtzman said that health insurance companies also consistently decline coverage for anyone who has taken anti-HIV drugs, even if they test negative for the virus. "It's basically an automatic no," she said.
Pisano, of the insurance trade group, said: "If you put down on a form that you are or were taking anti-HIV drugs at any time, they [the insurance companies] are going to understand that you are or were in treatment for HIV, period," she said. "That could be a factor in determining whether you get coverage."
Of course, if a woman didn't file charges, there's no way to prove that she was raped, so she gets to be degraded again by trying to convince some insurance claims person that she was, in fact, raped.
I wonder if the rapists lost their coverage.
This is fucking evil.
- Log in to post comments
I've seen the 'have you ever taken HIV drugs?' bit before. I had assumed that they were forbidden from asking about HIV to prevent discrimination against those who are HIV positive. If true that would make this extremely ironic.
Frankly, as a Canadian I'm not sure how any of you can tolerate your system for another fucking second.
In Canada it's actually a terrible idea to go to your doctor to get tested because it then shows up on your medical records. Anonymous testing clinics are basically the better option for this reason - even getting an HIV test that comes pack negative is a red flag.
What's wrong with that?
Why didn't she at least file a report or charges?
Stuff like this is why the use of "pre-existing conditions" in every way shape and form need to be outlawed for all purposes, including underwriting, rate setting, and coverage.
Ironically short-sighted, how many women won't get the HIV drugs after a rape, and be fully insured if/when they develop AIDS? It the number is greater than one, they lost money.
Quee, if you've ever been raped, you understand why. They make the person (it's not always a woman) feel like it's their fault, and there's something wrong with them for having been raped. They have to go through HELL to prove what someone did to them, and then, if they take drugs as a precaution against HIV or the morning after pill, they lose their health insurance, and have people calling them a baby killer... i totally understand why she didn't report it. I'm just glad she got treatment, and I hope someday our medical system will be based on PATIENT needs not the insurance companies and big pharmaceuticals.