To all Canadians - Don't Vacation in U.S. if You're Pregnant

[Joe Guy]

A dream vacation has turned into a financial nightmare for one Saskatchewan couple, after a mom-to-be gave birth while on holiday in Hawaii.

Jennifer Huculak says she was billed nearly $1 million after unexpectedly giving birth to her daughter in Hawaii.

Huculak was six months pregnant when she flew to Hawaii for a holiday with her husband in October 2013. Before her trip, she bought Blue Cross insurance and received approval from her doctor.

But two days into her trip, Huculak's water broke and she spent the next six weeks on bed rest in a Hawaiian hospital. Her daughter was born nine weeks early and spent two months in intensive care.

While she's grateful that her 11-month-old daughter is now healthy, Huculak and her husband were left with a $950,000 medical bill.

"It makes you sick to your stomach," she told CTV Saskatoon. "Who can pay a million-dollar medical bill? Who can afford that?"

Blue Cross is refusing to pay any of the amount, arguing that Huculak had a pre-existing condition.

In a letter to Huculak, the company noted the following: "Ms. Huculak was diagnosed and treated for a high-risk pregnancy in the six months prior to departure. As Ms. Huculak is currently hospitalized and being treated for this high-risk pregnancy, any expenses incurred are not eligible under the terms of your policy."

But Huculak says that she did not have a high-risk pregnancy, she had a bladder infection which led to bleeding.

"The specialist in Hawaii said that these things just happen. There's nothing that causes them," she said.

Her specialist at home in Saskatchewan has written to Blue Cross, saying that the bladder infection did not lead to Huculak's early labour. But her coverage was still denied.

Huculak is angry because she said the Blue Cross pamphlet had no fine print explaining any rules for pre-existing conditions.

She said the family is now trying to decide if they should fight Blue Cross, declare bankruptcy, or wait and see what happens.

Meanwhile, she hopes that other travellers will learn from their ordeal. "It's a very sad situation to be in and people need to be aware that insurance companies will deny you if they have anything they can go on," she said.

source

[MajGenl.Meade]

Yeah, insurance companies are great at wanting to abide by the contracts agreed between them and the clients. Clients aren't so happy about that. "Pamphlet" - dumbass.

Mind, a premature delivery in itself is not a pre-existing condition. She was pregnant but with no expectation (pun not intended) that anything would happen for another 90 days. Some bright lawyers for both sides will get together and make a fortune each.

[Long Run]

I think it is interesting that Blue Cross would issue any policy to a woman who is already pregnant. There are other specialized insurance policies for people who have emergencies when they travel (maybe this is a type of one). The article does not provide enough information to figure out what is going on, but is written to highlight the big, bad, evil insurance company angle.

[Gob]

Thanks for the warning, I'll avoid the place.

[Econoline]

YOU'RE PREGNANT?????

[MajGenl.Meade]

Worse - he's Canadian!

[rubato]

Yeah, insurance companies are great at wanting to abide by the contracts [which are so stupid that no one outside a US health insurance company boardroom would ever imagine anyone would be asshole enough to suggest] agreed between them and the clients. Clients aren't so happy about that. "Pamphlet" - dumbass.

... "

"Health Coverage" means "Health Coverage" dumbass. Hiding bullshit in the fine print is just wrong. Didn't the ACA forbid exclusion of pre-existing conditions?


yrs,
rubato

[wesw]

not a fan of aca or insurance industry, which are now one and the same.

rubato is absolutely correct. the industry is corrupt unethical and is our new master

[wesw]

I am a fan of universal care

[MajGenl.Meade]

Please don't add your words - 24 of them - to what you purport to have been written by me. It is dishonest.

A person who purchases any complex thing involving a contract - be it insurance, a house, a car - based only on a "pamphlet" (which should contain a warning to read the actual contract) is a silly person indeed.

Contracts are drawn up by lawyers working for their client. I never saw any "fine print" hidden in any insurance contract. To the contrary, the terms and conditions are clearly stated, although bothering to read them is a different matter.

You appear to be ignorant of the fact that the ACA went into effect for policies as of Jan 1 2014 2014 whereas this travel policy was purchased in October 2013.

Perhaps you were in no position to notice.

[rubato]

Canadians. Fuck 'em if they don't read the fine print!"

What convenient business ethics you have. Most people would acknowledge that when there is an asymmetry of knowledge which is in fact created by one of the parties it is immoral and ought to be illegal.


yrs,
rubato

[wesw]

medical care would be affordable if the middleman was eliminated. there is already a process for doctors to get money from patients.

wage attachment

make it possible for people to voluntarily have their wages garnished at say...15%? that includes all benefits, welfare and food stamps. then, the doctors would have a guaranteed income stream well into retirement, even unto death.

lotta work for lawyers too. the insurance guys can go bang nails for a few years and rebuild their strength.

why don t one of you movers and shakers take that idea and go change the world? its yours.

wes

[MajGenl.Meade]

What convenient business ethics you have. Most people would acknowledge that when there is an asymmetry of knowledge which is in fact created by one of the parties it is immoral and ought to be illegal.
yrs,
rubato

Rather a neat summation of your having added 28 words to something you pretended as being written by me. It is an asymmetry of honesty and typical of a poison dwarf.

But speculation about personalities aside, are you in favour of discarding all contracts in case one of the parties is either too bone idle to read or functionally illiterate?

Also, should pamphlets used as sales point summaries (for any product whatsoever) consist of several hundred pages which would be er.... a contract and not a pamphlet. You really don't like trees do you?

That is so very scientific and rational. I mustn't be unfair though - you are hard of hearing.

[wesw]

am I the only one who thinks the health insurance companies are not necessary?

[Scooter]

I don't have any sympathy whatsoever. Blue Cross policies for travel outside Canada are not pages and pages of legal gobbledygook. They are a single piece of legal-size paper folded into a pamphlet. It is cheap insurance because it has very broad exclusions for pre-existing conditions. I don't know how they treat pregnancy generally (some travel insurers will not cover ANY expenses related to pregnancy or delivery, regardless of whether the pregnancy is considered high-risk or not). No travel insurer is going to cover the costs of neonatal care for a baby who was obviously not a covered person under the policy when it was sold, and that is the bulk of the $950,000 bill the couple received. As to the woman's own medical needs, she sought medical treatment related to her pregnancy within the time frame that made her condition not "stable" according to the terms of the policy. I buy somewhat more expensive travel insurance that requires my pre-existing conditions to be "stable" for 90 days before travel, rather than six months, but I am still careful, whenever possible, to avoid ANYTHING that could be seen as a change in treatment. For cripes sakes, I don't even let my pharmacy substitute one generic formulation for another if I am planning to travel within 90 days. Yet this twat was fucking BLEEDING during her pregnancy and didn't stop to think that there might be a problem with their insurance if she experienced any sort of emergency overseas?

Saskatchewan Blue Cross has said they gave the couple a letter outlining nine events supporting denial of coverage. One can only wonder why this couple has chosen not to make that letter public. No actually, one need not wonder. They know that anyone with the brain cells of an acorn squash who reads it will recognize that any idiot would have known they weren't covered for those risks.

[MajGenl.Meade]

The voice of sanity and knowledge. (Yes, that's what I said).

[Beer Sponge]

Worse - he's Canadian!

Kiss my ass!

[MajGenl.Meade]