Suppose you have no money and for some reason insurance won't cover it. Can you be denied treatment? Check this link:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5557221244&ssPageName=ADME:B:EF:US:1

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman

The short answer to your question is Yes, medical care in the United States, particularly through a private medical facility, is subject to one's financial resources. The obvious exception is emergency medical care rendered by a government subsidized facility.

Roughly half of all individual bankruptcy filings in the US are the result of a catestrophic illness and the resulting medical bills, and most of those filings are by people with jobs and have medical insurance. The high cost of services can easily overwhelm a middle class family and bankruptcy is used to save households.

From my days working at a hospital...the answer to your question is yes. (unfortunately).

Interesting use of e-bay though...they should have listed a "buy it now" price...

...rent the video John Q. An excellent example of how someone can go over the edge over a VERY real issue...

__________________
2009 ML350 (106K) - Family vehicle
2001 CLK430 Cabriolet (80K) - Wife's car
2005 BMW 645CI (138K) - My daily driver
2016 Mustang (32K) - Daughter's car

I think it has to be covered under your plan. I don't think that most plans would go for an experimental treatment.

No, it is not an unfortunate thing. Otherwise people would be trying all sorts of experimental treatment and bankurping the system. It has to have a proven track record before it will be even considered by insurance.

In any case, you have a choice between 3 things. Quality, Quanty and Cost containment. Can't have all 3 in this world. In Singapore, they had Cost containement and Quantity. Quality went down the toilet. You have to ask yourself, "What will you be willing to give up" before you do anything.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

I think that most people with "medical insurance" provided by their employer would be shocked to find out all the exclusions in the policy. Medical insurance is like everything else. You get what you pay for. With a cheap policy, the company has all kinds of loopholes to allow them to avoid paying for "questionable" treatments.

If the treatment chosen doesn't show a certain benefit, statistically, to improve or extend the life of the patient, they won't cover it. Sometimes, they avoid paying if the disease is fatal and the treatment will simply extend the inevitable. It's become a miserable business.

It's quite an ethical dilemma, if you think about it. This fellow may have a terminal disease, and his life can be extended by, say, 1 year, with $250K worth of treatment. Is this worth the money? If you are him, obviously it is. But, the $250K has to come out of the pockets of everybody who pays into that insurance company. All of their premiums must go up by an incremental amount to pay that $250K and the end result is no cure.

Quite an ethical dilemma.

Life is itself terminal. End of life issues are extremely difficult emotionally, ethically, and financially. It sounds terribly heartless to deny life-extending medicine. But like you say, who wants to pay a huge premium because some folks can't let it go and just die? Most of my family (sibs, Mother) have living wills and directives. Hopefully that will allow us some control over our endings. But even that is no guarantee.

That is the crux of the problem. When someone has a terminal illness, whereby the 5 year survival rate is something like 10%, if you step back from it, the logic dictates that the $250K to keep this person alive for a couple of years would be better served on people who have the potential for a longer lifespan.

But, when you are up there close and personal with the person who has the disease, how many of us can look at the person point blank and tell them, "Sorry, it's just not worth $250K to try and keep you alive for another few years". Nobody can do this.

Oooops. Made an error there. Only an insurance company can do this. And they are crucified because of it.

Since money is finate, would you one one person dying and nature taking it's course or several people suffering.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

I'm not really sure of the question. One person's death vs. several people suffering?

It's one person's death and several people getting treated, who have a greater potential for a cure

or

Treating the person to the maximum degree possible and also treating the several other people who have a greater potential for a cure.

One costs significantly more than the other. We all must pay for it.