Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Photos Lead To Cancellation of Quebec Woman's Insurance
No. 24601 writes "A Quebec woman on long-term sick leave, due to a diagnosis of depression, lost her health benefits after her insurance provider found photos of her on Facebook smiling and looking cheerful at parties and out on the beach. Besides all the obvious questions, how did the insurance company access her locked Facebook profile?"
First question, is she sure it was actually locked down? Some of those settings sound like nonsense to the non-technical.
Second, is she the one that posted the photos? If someone else posted photos of her on a public page, anyone can see them.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
*sigh* Well, speaking as a depressive I can say that a good part of the treatment that a psychiatrist suggests to their patients, besides their antidepressants, is to engage in social activities outside the home. They also say that staying cooped up at home and failing to get out can lead to a relapse and readmission to hospital. The Insurance company is not licensed to practice medicine, only to read a doctor's diagnosis and pay what's due.
... because people with depression must wear black on the outside, as black as they feel on the inside.
Yet another reason why private healthcare must be stopped. Curing people doesn't come into it - it's about keeping them sick enough to stay profitable.
Suppose she has friended coworkers who know that she is collecting disability pay for depression but is posting party pics. Or suppose that the pics were posted by others who have not limited access to them. If she is tagged and the photos aren't actively blocked to outside viewers, they are fair game.
"Besides all the obvious questions, how did the insurance company access her locked Facebook profile?"
She blindly accepted a friend request from her insurance company's friendly insurance claims adjuster.
I guess she's feeling pretty depressed right now. Does that mean she can have the insurance back?
Python coder | PyQt Applications | Writer
Facebook has so many little loopholes and you can be sharing information without realising it. I know a few people who think their accounts are locked down andyou can't view anything from their profile page. However their photo albums show up in other areas even if you can access it from their profile page. I assume they've not set the right settings for that particular album.
This is why I don't use my real name on Facebook or use my exact location. It may mean friends, relatives, etc find it harder to find me but if I want to speak to them then I'll look for them.
Evil insurance company, plain and simple. I am not saying that they all are, but this is beyond grasping at straws. This is healing someone because they are sick, and them kicking them to the curb and throwing them out because they show signs of recovery. She should sue them for making the depression worse. We should get together and figure out how to draw enough attention to put a stop to this, and make an example for other insurance companies.
This is a prime example why I don't think capitalism alone has all of the answers. If A needs B and C to prosper, and C needs A & B, A will rape B dry until C is so bad off that it is also hurting A. How does this make sense?
Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
She also doesn’t understand how Manulife accessed her photos because her Facebook profile is locked and only people she approves can look at what she posts.
Oh, please, you're talking to a generation that grew up watching Dateline and 20/20 where insurance companies hired private investigators to stalk people who would do the following:
So then you'd see the companies hiring PIs to track the people (who allegedly could barely move) tearing it up at Disney World. Yeah, scam artists and fraudsters.
You shouldn't be surprised to see insurance companies being very proactive in their searches to follow up on people. I cannot say whether or not she is legitimately getting the short end of the stick or if she's defrauding the company. Sounds like the former. If she had made claims that she never smiled and couldn't go out in public due to depression then she might have problems. Why doesn't she just get her doctor to send a note to her insurance company explaining that people suffering from this magnitude of depression (and those recovering from it) can force themselves to smile for a picture? I mean, it's likely that the insurance company got tired of paying sick leave for depression unless it could be shown to be a chemical imbalance they probably were just looking for any reason to have to stop forking over pay.
Personally, I was offered $250 by my company's health insurance plan if I signed something that said I had not used tobacco products in the past 6 months. I hadn't but a few years ago I had (what I was told) were Cuban cigars in Mexico. Those friends put pictures of me on Facebook smoking them. So what? Well, if they found contrary evidence to my claim, I faced having my insurance terminated. Not worth the $250. Be aware of what Facebook puts on display for the world--even if you think it's private it's usually not. I mean, it could be as inane as some coworker who doesn't like her sees her other friend at work tagged in a photo with 'depressed' coworker on leave and decided to copy what photos they could see and forward them on to the insurance company?
My work here is dung.
after her insurance provider found photos of her on Facebook smiling and looking cheerful at parties and out on the beach....
Well, she was on benefits because she was diagnosed as depressed, and it's already been said that any psychiatrist worth their salt will tell you to get yourself out there and at least *try* to have a good time.
But seriously, this is a bit out of hand, hasn't anyone at her insurance carrier ever had a picture taken? What does the photographer usually scream at you?
SMILE!!!
"When I am king, you will be first against the wall..."
I think this could rebound terribly (and rightfully) on the insurer.
The worst thing for a clinical depression is to stay closeted away. In the UK, there is no "social prescribing", where a GP may decide that the root of your troubles are a social disconnection. This disconnect raises stress, and is a sizable aspect in depression.
Rather than pump people full of antidepressants, they prescribe you a visit to a local social group that is ratified as being suitable for this (can be activity groups, plain social groups, heading to a gym, or whatever would best fit the person that's available).
This has had marked benefits to many that use the service.
Depression is always a fight, and when you fight it best, there's always a time that you smile. It may not last for long, but every point you can laugh and be brought out is an absolute gem. And there's no surprise that mates will take a pic of you when you're smiling and paste it on Facebook, rather than ones of you looking glum and disconnected.
One of those gems, for me, was years ago, just after my brother had had a massive car smash that left him on life support. One of my friends had first been blunt (there's nothing you can do, so get on with life while this goes on and things work themselves out), then actually managed to get me out and make me laugh. For just a minute; epic effort on his part, but it gave me a moment's respite, for which I'm eternally grateful.
Now, if anyone had dared to say to me in that minute or two of respite that I wasn't upset, torn up and terrified, I'd have torn them several new ones, and stomped on the pieces until the men in white coats dragged me off.
Smiling pictures of a depressive are not evidence they're not depressed. They're evidence that they have a good support network of people who are prepared to do the heavy emotional lifting to keep them going..
Cutting the insurance is going to make anyone depressive (or recovering depressive) fall far back down the treatment path..
Wouldn't be surprised to find this one in litigation sometime soon.
This is a HUGE part of the current problem in the States with health insurance. Health insurance companies are not doctors. You can't make a diagnosis by looking at pictures on someone's facebook account. They teach you that in medical school, I think. I'm all for the public option myself, and I hope it puts the health insurance companies out of business. Frankly, I think anyone who works for an organization as corrupt as an American health insurance company, has it coming, because nobody who works for one can possibly claim ignorance to the crap that goes on with them.
This sounds like some kind of farce... and yet I can't help wonder how long it will take until I read about similar cases in Finland.
We have a great health care system, in theory. In practice everyone who can afford it has private health insurance too, so that you have the option of using private services when the public ones don't deliver.
.: Max Romantschuk
Have you not read any of the previous posts or are you just trolling? Go back to your Mommy's basement and hush...
You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
One thing's for sure. This won't help her depression.
No portion of this post may be rebroadcast without the express, written consent of Major League Baseball.
I thought canadian health care was so great that we needed to xerox it and never need health insurance again. WTF, eh?
Where exactly is the false claim? Should people who suffer from depression be depressed every single moment of their lives and not try to make it better?
Yeah.
A cancer patient might be rather sick, but make an extra effort for special events.
What next? They're going to cancel insurance for cancer patients if they look like they're better?
An insurance agent is unlikely to be an authoritative expert on medical matters (or in the rarefied field of "psychiatric diagnosis via facebook photos") - they may know some stuff (just like I do), but when it comes to a court case or other legal stuff it should not be their call to make. If the insurance company has doubts they should insist that the policy holder be examined by a certified expert in the relevant field. After all, it's not unusual that you have to go for a medical examination when you sign up for certain sorts of insurance. They don't just leave it to an insurance agent to say "hmm she looks ok to me".
Too bad if her case is genuine she'll likely be too depressed to sue them (unless she can afford her meds and is still taking them).
First of all, she lost disability payments not health care coverage (the story says nothing of healthcare benefits). Secondly, all information in the story including the claim that the disability was ended was provided by the Quebec woman. Thirdly, people do abuse disability leave.
This is not about health care benefits. Her disability payments were stopped. And if I were the insurer, I would question that if someone is functioning well enough to go on vacation, to go out to a bar with friends, etc... is ready to go back to work.
If Facebook photos are the standard by which we're judging whether or not people should be paid insurance claims for being depressed, I wonder if I can use that?
No, I'm not depressed. I mean, I have ups and downs like everyone else, but I don't think it's so severe to be classified as a medical condition. Still, I could certainly churn out a few photos when I'm feeling down one day and post them. Then maybe I could call my insurance company and tell them, "See? I'm depressed! It's right there on Facebook!"
people with depression, even deep depression, can smile, laugh, and be outgoing right up until the moment they commit suicide.
It's part of the syndrome that they want to act like a natural, happy person, even if they're on a brink - no matter what. Many won't admit they're ill until fatal results happen.
Insurance companies shouldn't have anything to do with diagnosis, they aren't qualified (not being doctors), and they have a conflict of interest, making money by denying illness. Frankly I think making money by denying health care to people is nearly as unethical as just shooting them up front.
Think of the Irony!
My best friend and my brother have both had severe depression problems. It is quite possible to be out and functioning at moderate levels of depression - talking, smiling, looking like you're enjoying yourself. I think one described it something like this:
If you can be out and functioning, then you can function at your goddamned desk and stop trying to rob those people who do show up to work despite their depression.
This is my sig.
Oh man, you do NOT want to go there. If you get into a battle of anecdotes on the issue of public versus private health care, you will be killed on that debate every time.
Seriously.
Don't make me go digging through all of the stories of people who have been screwed over and scammed by private insurance companies, because it will take at least a couple of weeks to write the book about it.
What a stupid question! How many people do you know, who will properly firewall friendship requests through means of investigation? Most of my female friends see Facebook or Twitter as a popularity contest. Sometimes I wonder where their extra 300 friends came from when mine stagnates at 200.
That isn't even close to the first question. In fact it is what is known as entirely moot. Pictures of someone on the beach smiling, regardless of their origin, aren't even remotely close to proof that they don't experience severe depression. You would have to be some kind of incompetent evil moron to be in a position to make such decisions at an insurance company and still make such a decision. They know damn well what they hold in their hand is not proof of anything. What they hold is an excuse they offer up for their outlandish behaviour . Who cares from whence the excuse is derived?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Truly I'm confused. I thought Canadians had national health care? So is it the national system canceling her or some kind of supplemental plan?
It all starts at 0
Unless of course you argue that depression doesn't work that way.
It doesn't. Everyone has periods of highs and lows. A person with major depressive disorder has highs, as seen on Facebook in this case, but the highs are so short and the lows so long and deep that they interfere with the patient's ability to function for a significant period of time.
Maybe you can get disability for depression if you only show pictures of yourself on facebook depicting deep frowns and somber scenes! That's a diagnosis if I ever saw one!
Blanchard said that on her doctor's advice, she tried to have fun, including nights out at her local bar with friends and short getaways to sun destinations, as a way to forget her problems.
The bar sounds like silly advice, alcohol and anti-depression medication NEVER mix.
Some people are only alive because it's against the law for me to hunt them down and kill them.
One of the major issues in private health insurance today is Recission, the nullification of your insurance contract:
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2009/06/healthcare-ceos-shoot-themselves-foot
http://digg.com/health/Understanding_the_rare_practice_of_recission
With group insurance policies, you have a certain amount of protection. But for individual contracts, it really works against the whole point of having insurance in the first place.
My best friend and my brother have both had severe depression problems. It is quite possible to be out and functioning at moderate levels of depression - talking, smiling, looking like you're enjoying yourself. I think one described it something like this:
Dude, you know what. I have depression. There's not an hour where I wake up where I'm NOT thinking about killing myself or everyone else and I just bit my damned upper lip, say life sucks, and move on. I enjoy the fleeting moments of happiness like a fine glass of whiskey and move on, and frankly, getting out and doing something, and having a job, and working, even if you screw it up, is the best thing you can do.
When you go through hell, keep going.
This is my sig.
are you guys even reading the article?? she's not losing health insurance, but rather "long-term sick leave pay" the insurance companies pays her while staying at home. nowhere in the article does it say insurance company doesn't want to treat her condition. they want her to go back to work. isn't healthcare free in canada anyway?
I don't know if this lady is committing fraud or not, but people with depression usually just sleep all day. Everyone tells them something is wrong but they laugh. Then they realize they never go out any longer, not even just sit in the yard. This is a first step towards getting help. It is a good sign the lady is getting out of the house and meeting freinds. So since the insurer didn't know this, I guess we can diagnose them with some kind of mental retardation, or gross incompetency.
are PONZI schemes. Insurance is just one of many. Look at the US Federal Reserve system. The
first people to get in on the 'action' reap the biggest profit, while at the same time giving people the hope that if they participate in the system, they will indeed profit from the scheme.
Typical of all pyramid scams.
Imagine a private 'institution' printing money for a government, then selling the printed and minted 'money' back the the government that comissioned the 'money', for a profit. It boggles
the mind, yet many people buy into this scheme.
Something has to change and drastically, to all the major 'institutions' of the world.
As someone who has known several people with depression and bipolar disorder I'd like call bullshit on your kneejerk "FRAUD!" conclusion.
Most people with depression can be just fine for an hour or two and then spend a long time not even leaving their bed, those who are bipolar can be even worse, they'll be at a party having a blast and in just a few minutes they'll switch over to seriously contemplating suicide right then and there.
And even discounting this and trying to look happy for everyone else's sake there's also the fact that a lot depressed people do seem to really value those times when they can shake their depression for a few minutes or hours, and guess which image of themselves they'd rather show friends and family...
/Mikael
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Photographer: Smile.
Victim: What?
Photographer: Say Cheese.
Victim: Oh Oh CheeeeeeeeeeSeeeeee.
Photographer: (Click, Click, Click)
Insurance Co: Your toasted.
But the issue is that to determine if someone with depression is able to work, becomes very difficult. One also needs to know what kind of job she had, although IBM suggests a desk job, likley pushing paper as part of some project (coding included in pushing paper). Recall that it appears that Abe Lincoln was clinically depressed when in the white house (it was called melancholy at the time) but clearly he was functional to put it mildly! Of course Lincoln had a lot of reason to be depress when in the white house both from the death of a son and what he had to do as president.
I'm wondering, for a second here, why Canadians need to have private health insurance? I thought under Canadian law insurance companies were barred from insuring anything the government does. So does this mean that Canadian health insurance does not include mental health?
How barbaric!
This is my sig.
Could you code if you were so depressed that all you could think about was how you hated yourself and wanted to die?
The insurance company knows full well they'd be in serious trouble if they used a claim of "you look happy so can't be depressed". They know depression is a medical condition.
Here's what I think happened; a co-worker got annoyed with her being on sick leave for such a long time. She grabbed some photos from facebook and sent them to the insurance company with an email saying "See! She's not depressed". The insurance company thought there was probably justification for some sort of investigation. They investigated. They pulled the medical records and their doctor decided that based on the objective evidence there was no reason she was still entitled to sick pay.
You know when the most dangerous time is for someone who has suicidal tendencies. It's when they cheer up - it might mean that they've made the final decision to end it all. They'll be happy, smiling, giving away their stuff, party-party-party - and then they kill themselves.
Not only can you not diagnose whether someone's suffering from depression (it's NOT "gee, I'm depressed") by just looking at pictures - it's actually against the shrinks' professional code here in Quebec to proffer a diagnosis or ANY opinion without actually having examined the patient.
The proper course for the insurance company would have been to get a second opinion.
I am not defending the money-grubbing insurance company(ies) or the way health insurance works in North America, but what about the responsibilities of this woman and/or her doctor(s)?
According to the article, she's been on long term disability for a year and a half. This isn't a case of a person working, while the insurance company refuses to pay medical bills. No, this woman has been on long term disability (by it's very definition meaning you are not able to perform your job) - and while she takes off work for 18 months from IBM (a large enough company that should have plenty of options for limited functionality), she's going to parties, going on vacation, etc, etc, and continuing to collect a (pay)check.
I am not a lawyer, I am not a doctor, I don't know this person, I don't work for IBM, I don't have any affiliation with any health insurance company (other than being a "customer" myself), but the woman has already talked to a lawyer, and the amount of press she's already getting worries me that there will be a large settlement and lengthy legal proceedings, and guess where that money comes from... other insurance payers and taxpayers.
And this woman's defense is that she doesn't know how the insurance company accessed her photos that she posted on the Internet... come on.
Isn't capitalism just great!
dam me! forgot how its not the system that suck its the people in the system.... hmmhmm, and that there are only two system in the world, communism and capitalism, no gray area or alternative, silly me! /s
note: you don't get color from a monochrome system, just saying...
Cancer is a "simple" disease, not a mental condition. Why do you link the two?
Insurance agents ARE often experts in the field they insure. How else would they do their job? Car insurers know a LOT about cars, that is what they do. They collect as much data as they can and then determine what premium to charge so they can still make a profit by insuring against risks. And one part of it is knowing when a claim is bogus. Don't try to claim seagulls ruined the paint job on your car, in the mountains. Do not claim damage from hail unless you are certain hail did indeed fell in your parking spot, because they DO know. It is their job.
Depression is a very difficult mental diagnosis and people have been known to lie. This woman did NOT just go to ONE special event, but several, in a short time frame. When does depression end and just feeling blue start? When do YOU pay more for your insurance to cover someone else? Oh, that is right. YOU are paying for this woman and the moment YOUR premium goes up, you are crying the company check more carefully.
I could easily create an insurance company that is very nice and kind and considerate, you would also pay through the nose to be insured by it. Want to bet that you don't, that you go for the cheapest possible? Well, then this is how they do it, by investigating claims.
No doubt this will go to court. Sometimes insurance companies get it very wrong, but then, they have calculated the risks of that too and they seem to think that they have the edge here. Nothing I have seen so far convinces me they are wrong. All we got is two stories, why do you automatically presume this woman isn't running a scam?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
How about the evil people who use evil insurance companies? They want to the lowest cost, and how do they think that is achieved? By the company just taking peoples word for it?
This example is a woman who went for a cheap insurer, then found out that they are cheap because they hate to pay out.
Oh and why does everyone assume this woman is telling the truth? Where is the medical re-diagnosis to prove she is still suffering from depression? last time I checked, that would have been the first thing to do. She didn't. Doesn't that tell you a lot?
Newsflash! People have been known to scam insurance companies.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Friend of mine had some raunchy photos posted of him drunk at a bar with some rather young looking women. There were photos of him "feeding" them alcohol and "undressing' with them in the rather dark club. When he went for his interview a few weeks ago the chief hauled out photos of himself printed directly from a private facebook page. He said they made no effort to hide where the photos came from. It was a direct print off of Facebbook. He couldn't explain him very well and was asked to not apply to the force again and they would be adding these documents for future interviews in other jurisdictions. He has been on a campaign since that interview to find more people like him. He told me that he has found another person that lost his job because of something someone wrote on his wall about an incidental that occurred when he was underage and he threw a guy off a high school stage and caused him brain damage. Scary shit this social networking crap. Young kids just post whatever crap they want on Facebook. Having seeing my younger cousins profile I was shocked that he had posted some of the things he had and I warned him about posting about his mischief online. "Its just kids stuff" sure but does he want it following him around when hes in the job market in 15 years? No!
Although it is entirely possible that the story played out exactly as this woman and her lawyer claim, this may not be the entire story. The news article contains quotes almost entirely from the woman and her lawyer. The insurance company declined to comment (which is smart during a lawsuit) besides a written statement that "We would not deny or terminate a valid claim solely based on information published on websites such as Facebook."
Maybe they are lying and some overzealous office jockey wanted to get himself a bonus by revoking her disability pay. But maybe there is more information about her case that she is not disclosing. Maybe she is trying to sensationalize her case in the media to try to embarrass the insurance company into not canceling her disability pay. It is unfortunate if she really is getting hosed, and I'm confident that if that is the case then the courts will right it, but I have a nagging feeling that we're being taken for a ride on this one. It's difficult to tell when we get reporting from only one side of an adversarial (insurer, insuree) relationship.
Someone recently posted a picture of me that gives evidence that I recently shrunk to the size of a 3rd grader...along with all my old 3rd grade classmates. Do you think I could get insurance payments to cover treatments? Maybe we could use this for a class action lawsuit.
I've been going to Depression/Bipolar Support Alliance (DBSA) meetings for over a year now, in Los Angeles and Maine. (Think of a support group, then subtract the woo, jargon, god and other b.s.) I have my own experience with depression, and I know people who've had it far worse.
According to the article, Blanchard is diagnosed with major depression. A running joke in DBSA groups is that you can tell the new people with depression from those with bipolar because they crack the most jokes. Without the high and low cycles of bipolar, we tend to grasp at any moment of levity we can attain or create. There's a common misconception that depression is a flat, constant low mood. This is rare. Typically one varies between extreme lows and more functional periods, with stops everywhere in between. One also gets very good at faking it for short periods of time.
Meds aren't a magic bullet either, more a set of blunt tools whose effect on any given person will be highly variable. Beginning treatment often means a period of medication roulette, where the prescriber and patient work to balance efficacy, side-effects and (in the U.S. at least) costs. In the long term, lifestyle adjustments, especially increased social involvement, are essential.
The bottom line is, if Blanchard wants to return to the working world, she's been doing exactly what she should be.
Manulife, on the other hand, took a very small risk, which makes perfect market sense. The chances of Blanchard fighting back the way she has were slim, and the financial savings for the company miniscule but real. Faced with the loss of their emergency income, many people with major depression would have retreated further into their shells. Some might have attempted suicide.
Disability insurance companies employ doctors and nurses to review claims periodically. If they have reason to suspect fraud they will hire an investigator to look into the activities of a "disabled" person. In this case we have a "depressed" person on leave for a year and a half. My guess is that length of leave is outside the accepted normal period for depression. They would probably expect a depressed person to receive appropriate medication and counseling and be involved in a return to work program after that length of leave. So they began investigating and terminated the leave to force the issue. Depression is a common trigger for disability these days and often relates to the claimants work environment. I'm not familiar with Canadian insurance funding arrangements but in the US a disability plan for IBM would most likely be self funded meaning the premiums paid by employees coupled with IBM's dollars would be used to fund the claims. Often the insurer has a fiduciary liability to plan participants to protect the plan's assets. Although it is rare the insurer could actually be sued if they didn't investigate and question this claim. Ultimately it should be up to a uniform set of medical guidelines the insurer uses to review such claims. Depression has a well documented set of procedures that should be used to review the case. This evidence by itself seems sketchy but if combined with other factors such as claim duration and other evidence it may be justified. She may have a good lawyer that's doing a snow job on the "big bad insurer". The insurer is also limited by privacy laws as to what they can publicly discuss about the case and her attorney can exploit those rules
There is only so much Congress can do to effect change in Canada...
My amazing wife - Artist, Author, Philosopher - Laurie M
To put it midly the symptoms of depression are depression, if your insurance is paying for some kind of treatment and you not depressed, then it works, doesn't it? I think that this was a really, really stupid idea on their part, now the client can take them to court and claim that she is depressed again because she isn't on the treatment that the company was paying for. I would hope that even a law student could win this one, and now the insurance company will probably pay out more in settlement money than her origional treatment would have cost.
Just how long should we the other insured people be paying for someone to sit at home feeling bad about themselves?
I know about depression. My wife's family has some serious depression issues and she has struggled with it in the past. She has never missed more than a day of work at a time, calling in only when she feels her mood is so bad that it would be a problem at work. She uses 3-4 sick days a year doing that. She doesn't take medication for it, she just deals with it, some times for months at a time. It helps that I can tell when she's getting worse and can do things to make it easier on her...after seven years, I can usually get her through it without it getting particularly bad.
That said, the insurance company shouldn't be able to arbitrarily suspend her benefits without a serious discussion with the medical professional(s) treating her. After 18 months there *should* be some questions asked: what has been done to treat her, why isn't it working, what else can be done, et cetera. That's a long time to be depressed for any reason, and the insurance company shouldn't be expected to pay out indefinitely for such a vague ailment.
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
Chronic pain syndromes exist where there is no evident neurological or musculoskeletal reason for the pain. A Chronic Pain Disorder is a mental illness, generally secondary to depression.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
I do. Poorly by my own standards but well enough by those of my employer. But everyone is different.
Do not negate depression. They ever think for a moment it might have been temporary, or even faked to 'fit in' with her friends?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Me: Doc, Do I have rectal Cancer?
Doc: Email me a pic so I can tell.
I have been depressed. There are certain brands of soap my wife knows she cannot buy, as the smell brings back memories of the severe depression. During those periods I searched for ways to be happy, and was quite cheerful in public. It was the hours and days laying in bed that nobody knows about that still scare the hell out of me to this day. There are very few medical diagnoses possible from a picture.
If she can function at a bar, she can function at a desk.
Clearly, you have never suffered from depression. Even though she's at the bar appearing functional, keep in mind that that may have been the first time she was able to leave the house in weeks.
What they want is to collect their premiums. They are willing to pay out for some minor sniffles and even the occasional broken bone since if they didn't the premiums would dry up. But starting the very instant you end up with an expensive medical condition, they want nothing more than for you to die of it as quickly (and cheaply) as possible. Their ideal customer is the guy who never has a sick day in his life right up until he is killed instantly in a traffic accident, preferably while on his way to see a cardiologist about his recent chest pains.
SEE!! I Told you everything you see on the internet is true!! Just ask Manulife!!
And what is this other supposed evidence, exactly? It sure doesn't appear in TFA.
They CLAIM they have "other evidence". If it exists, why didn't they offer it to the media when asked? They had the chance when they admitted they used facebook in the first place.
Depressed people smile. It's about what they're feeling on the inside, not what they look like on the outside. There's no way to just look at someone and immediately know if they are depressed are not. Just think of all the ways even functioning, non-depressed people pretend to be happier than they really are. This is not a fair medical assumption and I hope the courts get a hold of this case and laugh it away.
I honestly don't see why we can't have the best of both worlds.
For example, we have a thriving public education system which guarantees almost universal education. We also have a thriving private education system for those who, for whatever reason, don't want to take advantage of public eduction. Sure, right-wingers gripe about our public eduction system, and I know that there are people out there would like to see it systematically dismantled, but the truth is that it works pretty well. Especially when you get to the university level, such as state colleges and universities.
Speaking of education, we have a fantastic student loan system as well. As a student, you can borrow money from the federal government to attend college. You can also borrow money from private lenders. You have a choice.
I guess I don't understand why health care can't work the same way. We have a public system to take care of everyone's basic medical necessities. We have a private system to take care of what people want above and beyond that. (Private rooms, name-generic prescriptions, specialists who charge above the normal rates, elective procedures, etc.) No one has to go bankrupt because they get sick. No one has to decide between having a broken bone set or buying dinner that night. If for whatever reason you don't like the public health system, you're free to go spend money out-of-pocket on either a private plan, or if you have enough, pay the health care providers directly.
It seems to me that those who are fighting against the public option are the ones who want to limit our choice, not the other way around.
I agree with most o the comments here, that the insurance company was not right to make the call based on photos they found on the internet, it's the doctor's decision.
However, if you're well enough to go on holiday (be it depression or anything), then surely you're well enough to go to work.
I know if I took sick leave from work and bunked off on holiday during that time, I'd get fired on the spot.
This is fucked and exemplifies one of the major problems with beaurocrats and businessmen making crucial health coverage decisions - they uyse whatever excuse they can tonot have to pay for what they are supposed to have to pay for, and will weasel out of any claim they can.
A person can have acute/major depression and be on the verge of suicide, that doesn't mean that they will never smile or laugh.
I have (as we all have) heard many of these stories - but usually it's involving teens drinking or getting high or something and someone finding that on facebook - this situation, if were getting the full story, should never have happened, regardless of how she "looks in her photos."
With that said, unfortunately in this day and age you have to be careful what sort of info you put on social networks.
If you want to post pictures of yourself flashing at mardi gras, yet you aren't independently wealthy and still may need to get hired or do anything that someone night take as an invitation to look into your past/social life, you may wish to not post such photos, or post them under a pseudonym account.
So..., you're saying that some kind of evil bureaucracy is being allowed to get between a patient and his or her doctor? And meddle in the healthcare decisions that are made by patient and doctor? Why, that's scandalous! We should protest such bureaucratic meddling and demand that our rights as patients be protected from same.
Oh, wait...
Please pardon my ignorance on this topic. Manulife is a private insurer, yes? Does Quebec not have the same access to the Canadian national healthcare system as the rest of the country? If they do, is clinical depression (or other mental illnesses) not covered under that system? Basically, why did this woman have to go through a private, commercial insurer?
Makes one curious what kind of things won't be covered under the USA's future government healthcare system(s).
zo, doktor Freud sayz ze cure for depression maybe to go out wiz your friendx und enjoy life and stop uzing facebook all day.
www.boznz.com Simple solutions to complex problems.
(there are a lot of stickywickets here and not enough details.. but reading between the lines and going with my gut based on my dealings.. this is my take)
Everyone want to rant about the evils of health care and I agree with damn near all of it. But as someone who has dealt with depression for a couple of decades and with (actually pretty good) healthcare assistance, I'm inclined to think she's taking advantage of the system and deserves to be dropped.
As I understand it, sick leave in Canada is paid sick leave (like maternity leave here in the US) which over insurance premiums. Sick leave is designed for medical recovery that would inhibit your ability to perform you job.
Now believe me.. coping with depression can definitely include going to the beach and smiling for pictures, but by doing those things in the capacity mentioned in the article, she's demonstrating that she is in fact capable of doing tasks where she had previously claimed her depression would inhibit her job performance. As she's being paid, she's now defrauding the system.
I'll give her the benefit of the doubt that she is depressed. In her case, her sick leave is designed to allow her time to visit therapists, psychologists for medications, or even prolonged hospital visitation if required. She should be using the paid sick leave to take real advantage of her medical coverage.
I suffer from depression and I also have supplemental health insurance with Manulife. Obviously I am calling them tomorrow to cancel.
A few years ago they funded 6 weeks off work for my depression. Now I am hoping there aren't any photos of me floating around the net from that time, otherwise they might come around demanding that money back!
On this picture you see two members of the German national football (soccer) team. One of them killed himself on November 10th by leaping in front of a train, suffering from severe chronic depression. Guess which one.
(You'll find the solution here. If you picked the right answer, you may want to consider a career in insurance. I'd suggest this one for starters.)
most of what follows is true
I'm not surprised a desk jockey at an insurance company decided to make a medical decision on this. Insurance desk monkeys don't usually have any medical training, and become a hindrance.
I once had a patient come into the office. He was in near tears. I took him to the exam room, and found out that his insurance company (Molina in the US) had canceled his coverage for dialysis. He was a critically ill patient, and was panicking. I called the insurance to find out what was going on. I was told by the desk monkey that they did not cover 'elective' procedures. At this point I was incredulous. I tried a couple times to tell him dialysis was not a choice, and certainly not elective. No dice.
I had to argue for close to an hour to get a supervisor. This flunky was going to cut all coverage to this man's dialysis. No if's, and's, or but's. The supervisor reversed the decision on the spot, but damn. Most nurses don't have the kind of day they can devote an hour of arguing with an insurance company. The patient isn't medically trained, and certainly wasn't in a state to do it, what with being critically ill, and coming to grips that he was not going to ever get off of dialysis.
That's the worst of my experiences, but I can't say it was isolated. After ten years of nursing the episodes of crackpot crazy insurance company behavior just keeps happening more and more. It's not that uncommon.
But what the pictures show her out and active several times a week - over many weeks?
That would seem to at least warrant a review of her claim.
TO: All Employees
SUBJECT: New Sick Leave Policy
SICKNESS:
No excuse...We will no longer accept your doctor's statement as proof. We believe that if you are able to go to the doctor, you are able to come to work.
AN OPERATION:
We are no longer allowing this practice. We wish to discourage any thoughts that you may need an operation. We believe that as long as you are an employee here, you will need all of whatever you have and should not consider having anything removed. We hired you as you are, and to have anything removed would certainly make you less than we bargained for.
DEATH:
Other than your own: This is no excuse for missing work. There is nothing you can do for them, and we are sure that someone else can attend to the arrangements. However, if the funeral can be held in the late afternoon, we will be glad to allow you to work through your lunch hour and subsequently let you leave 1 hour early, provided your share of the work is ahead enough to keep the job going in your absence.
Your own death: This will be accepted as an excuse. However, we require at least two weeks notice as we feel it is your duty to train your replacement.
ALSO:
Entirely too much time is being spent in the restroom. In the future, we will follow the practice of going in alphabetical order. For instance, those whose names begin with "A" will go from 8:00-8:15, and so on. If you're unable to go at your time, it will be necessary to wait until the next day when your time comes again.
We appreciate your cooperation,
THE MANAGEMENT
This is an old joke (and way older from what I know, than the linked newspaper article). But anyway tistork, you might still agree with it agree with it even if it is a joke. If so, then you definitely have real management potential.
On another note, well before the public internet and email, I took this and ummm copied my high school's official letterhead and signature section (with the school principal's signature) onto it. Then I made around 500 copies and left them lying around all over the place (2000 student population). It was excellent to see how many people freaked out before they figured out it was a joke. Amazing how people look for the worst some times... and amazing how much fun you can have with that too, sometimes. :) In the end the principal actually told me he thought it was one of the better jokes pulled at the school. :D
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Amen.
Anyone who attempts to issue definitive, action-taking diagnoses based on snapshots alone should put it in software under a public license and let us all use the WebShrink online doctor.
Yes, I am sarcastic and don't for a second believe this is possible or accurate.
I wholeheartedly and immediately believe that there are bone-headed actions such as this that insurance companies take every day in order to avoid paying for care or claims. And this is why for-profit healthcare is an oxymoron.
After some thought, I think we as tax payers have decide not to bail out AIG.
Wow, reading these posts I had no idea SlashDot was a haven for big government European style socialism. It's hilarious.
Unfortunately, many of you are also retarded for having poor reading comprehension. First, she's getting disability money and not working because she has depression? WTF. That alone is retarded. Second, she was seen "having a good time". If you can have a good time somewhere else, you can have one at work. Who doesn't hate their job? Now we're going to pay people not to work because they're depressed?
They didn't cancel her "insurance", they stopped paying her free money so she could go hang out at the beach and have a good time.
Cool story bro. Now why the fuck should someone who is depressed be paid not to work? There is no rational though plan that allows for paying people disability payments for working based on "depression". How many poor ass people are poor because they're depressed and _never_ worked, are we going to pay them a significant portion of a normal salary because they're depressed? My rule, being sane, is that you never pay disability for something which someone can very, very easily fake - even if they're not faking it.
The sense of entitlement around here is horrible. I go to work and slog through long depressing days, paying into an insurance pool that's paying out to any and every person who convinces a psychiatrist they're depressed. Meanwhile, they're out enjoying themselves at a party, and thats the cure? I think the cure was suckering the system into paying benefits for a bad mood, I know I'd be thrilled enough to cure the darkest funk if I could get a few months of paid time off. Ive been very depressed at times in my life and I've never once considered it anyone else's problem.
Once again, those facebook/myspace/twitter posts bite another one in the butt. Anyone who posts ANYTHING on the internet, no matter how hard you try to lock it down, is just naive to think that someone can't find a way to access it. The ones I love are idiots who paste videos of them doing something illegal, then are shocked when the police show up.
I have so many friends from that game, I have no clue who they are though.
Depressed people are usually very good at hiding it. I have a severly depressed friend who is medicated to all hell but yet manages to come have a good night out on the town, including laughter.
The insurance company shouldn't actually have a case, depression does not automaticly make one incapable of smiling for a camera, and it doesn't then follow smiling = not depressed.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
Not all depressive conditions are continuous. There can be intervals of light and happiness between prolonged pits of despair.
I know this since a former lover was bipolar (manic-depressive). She could be exuberant, playful, spirited, horny, full of life, and fun to be with in every possible way. But as it reached its crescendo, it would transform into helpless depression, and accompanied by a deep malevolence aimed with fearful precision at all those close to her - those she could hurt. Family and friends would suffer or flee until she could be checked into an institution for a month or so. Her medications probably helped a bit, but could not prevent the cycles or make much difference to the amplitude of her emotional oscillation.
An insurance company could easily have arranged for photos to be taken during the good phases, when she was better than merely good, even better than ecstatic as she approached the brink. It would not have altered her progression into the abyss, or the depths she plumbed therein. It was more than 20 years ago, and I am still scarred by the memories.
[posting as AC for personal reasons]
When this causes her to become even more depressed and she commits suicide, how much is the insurance company going to be paying to her estate?
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
I know for a fact that the insurance companies have non-medically qualified people denying claims on the basis of JPEGS of radiograms.
There's a lot to be said for the idea that they should be sued for practising medicine without a license.
Reality is the ultimate Rorschach.
I agree with that, provided:
1) the medical fraud tribunal is impartial
2) if found guilty, the doctor is punished with enough severity to effectively disencourage other doctors from doing the same.
Those are the two items that are missing in most countries medical systems today. Medical fraud is investigated by commissions formed by doctors alone, who have no incentive to punish other doctors. Even in the cases where doctors are found guilty, all they get is a wrist slap.
The inevitable outcome? Medical malpractice suits, where layperson juries award millions in compensation to victims. Side effects are either enormously expensive private insurance (USA) or a heavy burden to taxpayers (other countries).
Unfortunately, I see no way out. I can't think of any incentive system that would preserve the best interest of patients while, at the same time, preventing patient-doctor complicity in defrauding insurance companies. This is especially true in psychiatric cases where the assessment whether a patient is depressed or not depends mostly on the opinion of the doctor that's treating the patient.
While depression has many causes, vitamin D deficiency may help explain why there is more depression in the winter months:
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/depression.shtml
"However, it is not to early to heed the following advice: If you suffer from depression, get your 25(OH)D level checked and, if it is lower than 35 ng/mL (87 nM/L), you are vitamin D deficient and should begin treatment. If you are not depressed, get your 25(OH)D level checked anyway. If it is lower than 35 ng/mL (87 nM/L), you are vitamin D deficient and should begin treatment."
More treatment details here:
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/treatment.shtml
"If you refuse to see a physician, or can't find a knowledgeable one, purchase the 1000 IU/day vitamin D3 cholecalciferol pills that are available over-the-counter in North America or a 5,000 IU capsule. Take an average of 5,000 IU a day, year-round, if you have some sun exposure. If you have little, or no, sun exposure you will need to take at least 5,000 IU per day. How much more depends on your latitude of residence, skin pigmentation, and body weight. Generally speaking, the further you live away from the equator, the darker your skin, and/or the more you weigh, the more you will have to take to maintain healthy blood levels."
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
Where do you see a lack of empathy, exactly? He's talking about a way of fighting depression. You really do have to keep moving and trying to be happier. Maybe that won't work for everyone, but for those of us it does work for, it's just about the only way to live.
Happiness can't be found, it must be created.
And I wish you all the luck in the world in terms of being able to create your own happiness. No matter how you feel, it is still possible.
Psychiatry is not simply guesswork despite the standard on /. of marginalizing anything non tech related. Anybody who has met a handful of shrinks will tell you there is certainly skill involved.
Sadly I would far less surprised to see this end in suicide than litigation.
The Public Option has been so watered down that it only will pick up the slack for a tiny percentage of the people without insurance. The rest are going to be REQUIRED to BUY insurance. So this will NOT put the health insurance companies out of business. It will make them rich. We have the best political system money can buy . . . Not that it matters, since she's in Canada.
I'd love to change the world but I can't find the source code.
This is about the same as saying that 'there really isn't such a thing as a stupid slashdot poster'.
Seriously. Get a grip. I can name two doctors I have seen in the last 12 months who could easily qualify under the heading of 'stupid'.
That is: ... ... (I want my money back :( )
1. They make stupid mistakes
2. They fail to properly diagnose (or don't know / have forgotten how / don't care)
3. They fail to communicate (asking a patient questions you would normally ask someone of the opposite sex only?!?)
4. Stating to have an 'interest' or 'specialty' in a subject area they clearly only have passing knowledge in (I am SO glad someone knows that medicine X can *really* help with condition *Y*. I didn't know that. Really. Haven't known it for more than half my life. No, the medicine does not work for me. Really. Just believe me. No, don't write a prescription, I'm not going to have it filled. Why waste my money, and the government's, on something that I know won't work [yes, used it before; yes, I am in that 10% of people for which have no response. Here is my list of what I've done in the last decade and a half with this ailment. Why don't you recognise that half of what's on this list comes from the Authorities on this disease? Oh. Right. Because you only have a PASSING interest. *sigh*)
5. Inability to diagnose (what should be) straightforward standard complaints / issues
(having to diagnose myself, research the symptoms, validate the information, write it all up then present that to the doctor [to whom I am paying FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS AN HOUR (FRAUD! MORON! IDIOT! ASS!)] and to a second doctor to read it and say 'yes, well, that appears to be very accurate')
I'm going to stop here. Look, it's entirely possible that you just happen to be one of the wonderful people on this planet who inadvertently make open and broad reaching statements. Please stop doing so. People may come to believe that you are trolling.
Now, back to our original story topic.
Shame this isn't America; couldn't the person with her insurance cut could possibly sue the insurance company for acting on unproven evidence, possibly with a side of 'will the company now prove that the evidence used is not fake' ?
You have a sick, twisted mind. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.
who are severely depressed. there are people who outwardly seem morose and never smile but are emotionally well-balanced. the external mask you choose to wear or think you need to wear due to social convention or social pressure has no relation to internal chemistry. a depressed person very well could be a morose shut-in, but there are plenty of people who are very depressed who do not fit this description at all
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I'd LOVE to see proof that they limit how many people can enter med school / graduate from med school every year.
You should read more. Start with Wikipedia (be sure to read the references). Also read about any particular state's medical board.
her insurance provider found photos of her on Facebook smiling and looking cheerful
This may well be an unfair action on the part of the insurance provider. Depression does not necessarily mean that you are gloomy 24/7; it is a lot more complicated than that, and this general misperception causes many to overlook or misinterpret what is actually a genuine depression. As an example of just one of the possible explanations for the woman's behaviour, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atypical_depression (Atypical Depression).
I hope she brings them to court and wins this one, I hate Facebook for this.
It is not because the picture on facebook shows a woman smiling that her doctor has deemed her cured, *ssholes.
I hate insurance companies even more. I seriously hope that some lawyer takes her case, and pushes it way
far enough to put a cringe into any insurance company's head whenever they think of this type of strategy again.
I originally read this story on CBC last week and wrote up a comment explaining how A) this was the wrong thing to do, both ethically, and legally as they are not qualified to make that determination based on the information they found, and B) how they were likely going to get sued for their actions anyway (and lose), and C) How anyone that puts this stuff online should not expect that if will be kept private. I also detailed how security is a personal responsibility, and all the technological wizbangs in the would will not keep your information secure if you are an idiot, or at least not careful about what you do. I also illustrated how easy it would be to get at her information on facebook and outlined a step by step procedure should one want to do something unethical. It mostly involved just googling her old high school chums, finding one without a facebook account, creating an account posing as the friend, and then sending a friend request, and bingo bango you have full access to all her photos, as likely they will accept the request. While this is unethical I don't think this is particularly illegal (though you might break the facebook EULA, if you can call such a flimsy agreement legally binding), and really just outlines how lax security in on facebook, and also how blithely unaware most people are about how secure their information is. Anyway after writing that all up and posting that, also indicating that while I am posting that while there is a degree of protection also on the CBC commenting forum, not to treat it like you are anonymous or something, because you are not (just look at the teacher that resigned due to posting inappropriate things on a news paper comments section down in the US). In any event, after writing that all up.... it seems CBC took some exception to something I said thinking I must have violated their submission guidelines (though I am not sure how, perhaps they thought by laying out step by step instructions about how to circumvent facebook security I was somehow encouraging people to do so, if that is even illegal in the first place. Key is my whole point was that it wasn't an ethical action for which they were likely being sued. The other point being to be careful about what you post online as it isn't as safe as you might think.), and decided to censor my comments entirely. Its their site, I suppose they have the right to if they so choose. However I just thought if was funny given the topic.
My girlfriend and I previously have worked for a private investigation company concerned entirely with insurance fraud. There are many similar companies, but ours was a nationwide company with clients like Walmart, AIG, the Hartford, Prudential, GEICO and many others you can think of. Insurance co's will use any information they can get to deny your coverage, and they will take very extreme steps. Once an investigator followed a target to firefighter training and participated in a daylong course with a hidden camera showing the target hauling heavy gear and "injured" people.
While there are many frauds out there, and the vast majority of cases in our company were almost certainly fraudulent, it's important to know that the VERY first thing they do is a regular Google/Facebook/Myspace search. It's amazing how many people don't keep their profiles privately viewable. (One pattern I noticed was a common tendency to use Myspace as proof of one's "coolness" and you don't want that private when there's a whole world who needs to know.)
If you ever are on disability or making insurance claims that might LOOK shady, you should know that there will almost certainly be someone watching you from the street in a car with curtains on the windows. They will follow you across state lines, they will follow you to Walmart, they will follow you to the strip club and they will sit outside your house and photograph you when you come out to check the mail. The photos and videos will be presented to you in court, if not beforehand.
The insurance company's job is to collect premiums and pay out when the doctor says "this person has a bad back" or "this person has a broken leg" or "this person is clinically depressed".
Bottom line, insurance companies HAVE to take the advice of "trusted" professionals, trusted or not, really. That is why we have doctors and lawyers etc - we must have someone who has the proper knowledge to make the ultimate decision.
The above statements could only be completely true in a world where fraud did not exist. Medical billing fraud is a multi-billion dollar problem and it hurts EVERYONE. Your costs and mine are higher because of medical billing fraud. Insurance companies, whether they be private insurers or the government, absolutely have a right to take steps to ensure that they are paying for reasonable services properly rendered. This doesn't excuse insurance companies from taking arbitrary and capricious actions that could deny payment for genuinely needed services. Nevertheless there are lots of corrupt patients and more than a few corrupt doctors out there. It is a real problem.
Please note, I'm not making any judgments one way or the other about this particular Facebook case. I'm merely asserting that insurance providers (private or public) do have a right to protect themselves from fraud and it is in all of our interest that they do just that.
I have severe depression but I smile and laugh sometimes. I guess I should just go kill myself so I don't have to burden my insurance company. This is the problem with all health insurance companies; they take your money when you are healthy but they drop you like a hot potato when you are sick.
many people have commented many different things. Some that understand depression and others that CLEARLY do not. I am not bringing up facebook privacy or insurance company methods. What I want to know is how this bit(h was able to get 1.5yrs of paid leave when I, myself suffer from major depression and I have to trudge my ass into work every day? We both work for fortune 500 companies, both are at the peak of technical advancements and mine(and I am quite sure her) insurance are the best a large technology company can afford. Different insurance companies and I am in the US, but regardless. I have am the same age as this woman and I have been trying multiple different medications over the last 7yrs that make me groggy, spun out or a whole slew of other side effects that interfere with my job and above all DON'T WORK, yet she gets to sit at home...paid, or in this case, take a nice vacation. I'd like a fu(king vacation after 7yrs...maybe I WILL pull the trigger this time, THAT would be the ultimate vacation...I never have to come back.
"That's right...I said it."
We have solved the health care, diagnosis via Facebook and Twitter.
I cannot help thinking that someone is practising medicine via some images on Facebook.
Practising medicine without a license is illegal and if someone had a license I expect it would be at risk because of this.
Worse this is apparently a mental health issue involving depression. We could all review the video of the Army Psychiatrist accused of killing 13 people at Fort Hood. Does he look crazy? The evidence is growing that he was.
There was no external facebook clues for the High School kids some miles down the tracks from here at Gunn HS in Palo Alto, CA
http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/High-school-mourns-second-student-death-on-tracks-in-a-month-46861617.html
Mental health problems can have serious consequences.
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
One thing no one has asked is, when were the photo's taken? They could have been taken before she was depressed. Mental illnesses I'm familiar with tend to have good days and bad days. The problem is you have little to no control over when you'll have a good day or a bad day.
> Society seems to pressure people into hiding these types of problems, or at least people with these types of problems tend to keep them to themselves.
Where 'society' in this case is defined as 'the insurance company'. :P I would hope that this person sue the insurance company for forcing them into deeper depression by pulling this sort of trick. Not only does the company not care if she gets better, they're doing everything they can to ruin her for good. Like someone else said, they don't care if you live or die so long as they don't have to pay out.
I'm being treated for depression and Seasonal Affective Disorder in particular, and there are definitely times when I'm afraid to mention that because of what might happen. A company might not hire me, insurance companies may want to turn me loose -- both of which seem utterly *stupid* to me because I'm better off with treatment than my cubicle-neighbor who might just be hiding their depression rather than treating it!