Just go die you big baby....

Mick Jagger

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
678
Reaction score
0
Location
Dallas
Four-month-old Alex Lange is described as a "happy, adorable, big baby." Yet he can't get health insurance.

Rocky Mountain Health Plans refuses to cover little Alex because he's too large. Denver's NBC11News.com reports:

Because of his size, Baby Alex was turned down for health insurance, his height and weight put him in the 99th percentile according to CDC guidelines.


Kelli [his mother] says it's ridiculous, "It's frustrating, it's very frustrating."

Dr. Speedie at Rocky Mountain Health Plans says all babies are evaluated for insurance the same way. "In children it's based on a combination of height and weight."

The health insurance reform legislation moving through Congress would end this practice of denying coverage based on "pre-existing conditions" -- in Alex's case, "obesity."


Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/12/alex-lange-denied-health_n_317337.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Was he denied medical treatment somewhere?
Is the baby sick...No?.... it says he's perfectly healthy.
So no one is tell him to "go die."

No one is arguing that the system isn't flawed.
No one is arguing that the way we address health insurance and medical expenses is perfect.
However, you don't need to adopt Obamacare inorder to address those issues. It's not an either/or proposition.
 
never would have happened here in the first place.
 
being denied medical insurance based on risk. especially of a newborn who's outcome wouldn't have been known for a few month's. or because you have run out of insurance. i just laugh when i hear these stories and keep being told by some it's the best there is.
the few times it goes right, yes. but mostly not.

Neither would a revolution against the King of England... but what's your point?

bastille day wasn't british.
 
Was he denied medical treatment somewhere?
Is the baby sick...No?.... it says he's perfectly healthy.
So no one is tell him to "go die."

No one is arguing that the system isn't flawed.
No one is arguing that the way we address health insurance and medical expenses is perfect.
However, you don't need to adopt Obamacare inorder to address those issues. It's not an either/or proposition.

How would you address the issue of pre-existing conditions, bro?
 
How would you address the issue of pre-existing conditions, bro?

Define the specific problem. What's wrong with pre-existing conditions?
Should you be to go without coverage until you need a procedure, then quickly buy a policy only to pay for that procedure, then be able to drop the coverage immediately afterward?
 
Define the specific problem. What's wrong with pre-existing conditions?
Should you be to go without coverage until you need a procedure, then quickly buy a policy only to pay for that procedure, then be able to drop the coverage immediately afterward?
I'll take that to mean you have no solution to the problem.
 
And in recent news:
DENVER — A Colorado insurance company is changing its attitude about fat babies.

Rocky Mountain Health Plans said Monday it will no longer consider obesity a "pre-existing condition" barring coverage for hefty infants.

The change comes after the insurer turned down a Grand Junction 4-month-old who weighs about 17 pounds. The insurer deemed Alex Lange – called by his parents a "happy little chunky monkey" – obese and said the infant didn't qualify for coverage.

Read more at:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/12/rocky-mountain-health-pla_n_317954.html
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top