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.
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.
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).
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!
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.
Some people are not as able to cope with depression as you claim to be. I have a few friends who suffer, and if they were not receiving medication and therapy, they would never have the will to see daylight, let alone accomplish anything. For them, it is not a matter of biting the bullet, they need help, and thankfully they receive it.
Palm trees and 8
I have a few friends who suffer, and if they were not receiving medication and therapy, they would never have the will to see daylight, let alone accomplish anything
I'm not biting the bullet by myself. Wellbutrin is the greatest thing ever invented and I've got no problem writing out the 2 cents per paycheck to the FEds or my insurance so that people that need psych meds can get them. Without meds, its just aweful.
This is my sig.
from my post on TFA:
Here's the thing, it doesn't really matter if she is plain old lazy, or truly depressed.
The issue here is that the insurance company is making the call, and it is not their job to make that decision.
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".
It is my assumption that this woman has regular meetings with a doctor at which time she is assessed to see - "is she still depressed?", "Has there been any improvement?", etc.
THAT is the ONLY information the insurance company needs to make their decision.
Anything else, such as info from FACEBOOK, does not tell the whole story, hell, it might not tell ANY part of the story. It may be irrelevant, and it may just be misinterpreted completely by someone who lacks the professional designation to be making decisions and pointing fingers in the first place.
The insurance company no doubt will argue that the have to "protect their assets" and that "people scam insurance co. all the time". While that is no doubt true, we must not forget that the insurance companies make plenty of cash by ripping people off on a daily basis. It's a two way street.
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.
If they want to save money so bad, they can start by firing the person that is paid to browse facebook.
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
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 I were the insurer, I might do the same, but only because it would be in my selfish interest. It would still be either ignorant or dishonest and shouldn't be allowed.
As many others have already pointed out in various ways, a majorly depressed person can easily have a good moment. The thing is, even if she has a good moment of 15 minutes, the rest of the 23 h 45 mins of the day she might still be disfunctional. She might even have decently good full days if her friends take her for a trip and get her involved in a lot of fun stuff, making her forget about her problems for a moment. That doesn't make it last or mean that she'd be fine or able to function normally in normal everyday life. That makes a major difference. Depression may not make you unable to laugh at a joke, but that doesn't make it any less of a problem -- you can't live laughing at a joke all the time.
Of course major depression tends to come with major drop in motivation to do anything, so you might think something requiring arrangements such as a vacation might be out of reach for a majorly depressed person. After all, she'd have to find the motivation to get through the arrangements, choosing a place and activities etc. to actually get out for a vacation, right? Well, maybe she just has good caring friends who arranged it for her.
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.
The parent wasn't complaining about the insurance companies being robbed. It is your co-workers who pay for your insurance when you cannot. If enough people are so "depressed" that they can't work the insurance company will adjust its rates if it continues long enough. That is exactly why your insurance goes up, because your company is costing the insurance company more to cover you.
While I agree an insurance company has no business using Facebook for determining a case they do have the right to investigate fraud. Keep in mind insurance companies have a whole slew of their own "trusted" professionals that are on their pay role and look after their best interest, not the insured's.
IMAGE VERIFICATION IS EVIL!
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.
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.
It's the insurance company's job to pay out claims. Period. End of story.
That is what they exist for.
If they don't pay claims then they might as well be all arrested for fraud.
They do their best to avoid paying claims even when there aren't people around willing to make excuses for them.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
As stated in a dozen comments in this topic, the article is about disability insurance to replace wages, not about access to health care.
If this person ends up a destitute bag lady, she'll still be covered by the Canadian universal health care system.
This particular story is out of Canada, different health-care system, different incentives.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
The problem is that doctors are rather incented to declare people sick, so insurers will pay them.
This. This is what is wrong with US health care. The only incentive doctors should have to declare people sick is that the people are sick. If your system is designed to encourage anything else then it's broken by definition.
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.
Tjstork shouldn't be modded "troll". Our constitution guarantees us "life liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness". Happiness is not a given.
Next thing to consider is, all of the medical practices are considered "arts". Psychiatry is not a science, with quantifiable, qualitative states. It's all guesswork. You can't plug someone into a freaking machine, and say, "I can measure x units of schizophrenia, x units of depression, and x units of whatever else".
At least with physical health, much of what might be wrong with a patient is measurable. Blood pressure, pulse, respiration, blood chemistry, urine and stool specimens. You have nothing like that with psychiatry.
Parent has a valid point, in that people with physical problems often have to work, unless that physical problem measurably impairs their ability to work. Psych problems? Fat chance. All we have is the doctor's word. How can we know this is NOT yet another scam to take the insurance companies for a ride?
Part of the reason I'm skeptical of shrinks is, I've read and heard plenty of stories about people who had grave psych problems, who were admitted into various programs to "cure" them. Amazingly, many are "cured" just about the time that all available funding expires. What a coincidence, huh? IMHO, they were scams from start to finish.
As for those who say the insurance companies are ripping us off, so they deserve to be ripped off - I ask, "Why not fix the real problem?" Here in the states, at least, we have healthcare reform on the table right now. Part of the goal is to limit the insurance company's ability to rip us off, and another part is to limit the ability of "customers" to rip off the insurance. Why the hell should 95% of honest, working people have to foot the bill for those 5% dishonest insurers, care providers, as well as customers? FFS, if we could eliminate the graft and corruption, ALL OF OUR BILLS could be cut by 20% or more!!
Send all the thieves to jail, and stop trying to justify your favorite thief.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
I have a few friends who suffer, and if they were not receiving medication and therapy, they would never have the will to see daylight, let alone accomplish anything
I'm not biting the bullet by myself. Wellbutrin is the greatest thing ever invented and I've got no problem writing out the 2 cents per paycheck to the FEds or my insurance so that people that need psych meds can get them. Without meds, its just aweful.
If you really are on Wellbutrin as you claim then maybe you understand how complex and time-consuming it is to find the correct medicine and dosage for illnesses like depression. Based on your comments, I'm not inclined to believe that you are - and if you are, perhaps it isn't the correct medication for you. Lack of empathy doesn't really fall into the depression spectrum, it's more like borderline or even paranoid personality disorders.
If you had a deeper understanding of mental illness, you would probably have some compassion for people who struggle for years after seeking treatment to have some positive results, and many others that find testing med after med leads to disaster as often as improvement.
If you are satisfied with taking your pill and feel that is all that your illness requires, I strongly suggest you consider a more complete treatment program that includes weekly therapy sessions with someone that isn't a psychiatrist. Perhaps you will gain some coping mechanisms to deal with the issues that a pill will never solve.
Good day, sir.
"All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
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.
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...
(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.
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
Me: Doc, Do I have rectal Cancer?
Doc: Email me a pic so I can tell.
----------
To: Doc
Subject: Rectal diagnosis photo
Attachment: hello.jpg (25 KB)
Here you go.
----------
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.
This particular story is out of Canada, different health-care system, different incentives.
But... but... I've been reading Slashdot for years - so I know this sort of thing only happens in America! The rest of the world is run by virtuous, thoughtful, caring, intelligent individuals who act only in their population's best interests!
#DeleteChrome
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.
This particular story is out of Canada, different health-care system, different incentives.
Yes, but this sort of insurance is PRIVATE INSURANCE. Were it covered under the Universal health care, it would not be an issue. A private company has a profit motive, and therefore usually tries to come up with ways to DENY CLAIMS. Now, perhaps this is a wrong instance, perhaps it is a right instance... I'm not informed enough to know.
But certainly, a fraud claim under the public system would require much more evidence than just "we saw some pictures of her smiling." This is more like the guy claiming he couldn't work cuz he has a bad back, and then people seeing him building a house (god I've seen this at last 3 times, fucking scammers). Those people need to be OUTED big time, because we are paying for those pricks to collect $$$ for nothing; and worse, they then work under the table on side jobs and pay no taxes BACK into the system!!!
Manulife is acting EXACTLY like the US health care system. EXACTLY.
I thought for a moment you said warfarin.
On second thoughts take that back. It was more like I hoped it.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Any sort of work would require her showing up regularly to her workplace. Anyone with a history of depression will tell you this is hard. Can you summon the energy to go out and pretend to have a good time when a friend asks you out? Sure, especially if you know it means a lot to them. But to do that *every single day*? There will be days when you can't really get out of bed, because the world just feels too heavy, and it may ruin you company's presentation, or deadline, or whatever.
So yes, your mental illness may be such that you can function at a party, but not cope with the responsibilities of a job. The point is, this is not up to the insurer: there are doctors to verify the diagnosis.
As for the woman herself, if she lives in a system where she can get paid while she battles with depression, should she refuse it? Sure, she may be scamming them, but the photos don't prove anything.
Except that the doctor shortage is not a function of universal health care, it's a function of the self-regulated medical profession maintaining control over how many doctors are certified every year. They keep the numbers down, so everyone has to scramble for a doctor, and the doctors can pick and choose patients. If the gov stepped in and mandated more seats in medical schools, there would be more doctors and less of a shortage.
The Canadian system isn't perfect, hell it isn't even very good, but it covers everybody, and it's more than twice as efficient as the current US system. But hey, if you enjoy the taste of the shit that the insurance companies feed you, by all means, keep right on eating it.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Yeah, Canada, where you can't even just switch doctors if the one you've got keeps failing to do his job. I'm not particularly against a semi-state funded healthcare system, but looking at the Canadian healthcare system I can completely understand why US citizens are so afraid of socialized healthcare.
You've obviously never actually "looked" at the Canadian health care system, or you couldn't post such crap. You're just repeating right wing propaganda.
The Canadian system isn't perfect, and there are real improvements which could be made to it. But apparently it's good enough that right wingers have to make up bullshit in order to sufficiently discredit it.
Now excuse me, I have to attend a euthanasia board meeting to determine whether its time to terminate grandma.
Loose lips lose spit.
And a lower average quality of physician. The government can’t mandate skill or talent among its citizens.
How can you use my intestines as a gift? -Actual Hong Kong subtitle.
You're hilarious. Are you the kind of libertarian who wants just enough government to protect the rich from everyone else? Good luck with that.
Private health care works great in the US, don't it? Where you have the least efficient health care system in the developed world. By a factor of two. No really. Basically you have the private sector insurance companies who spend 40-60 percent of their revenues on denying claims. How is that a good thing? Insurance companies can get away with this because when it comes to their health, people get desperate. So basically, left without regulation, the insurance companies can deny you services that you've already paid for. How is even less regulation going to fix this?
The only part of your health care system that works reasonably well is Medicare. You know about Medicare, right? That government-funded insurance that pays for people who can't get insurance elsewhere?
The fact is, the numbers just don't bear out the libertarian position when it comes to health care. The US spends $6000/person/year on health care, and 45 Million people go uncovered by insurance. The next best developed nation spends $3000/person/year, and has coverage for everyone. And for this horrible value, the US has one of the sickest populations in the developed world. Not exactly getting your money's worth, are you?
Basically, your libertarian argument comes down to this: you want to live in a well-functioning, healthy society, but you don't want to pay for it. Well guess what, that doesn't work. When the poorest people get healthier, everyone benefits. That's why things like healthcare, education, public works, etc are worth paying taxes for, to make life better for everyone. But you guys are too selfish to see that.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Blame it on Canada, the theme never gets old here.
The issue is much more nuanced than most arguments would indicate.
Unlike most, I live near Canada, worked in Canada and even been to the hospital in Canada. Canadian Hospitals are not as comfy as the ones I go to in the US. They seem more institutional and less customer focused. That being said, they seem just as competent. (life expectancy and infant mortality are much better in Canada than here in the US)
Anyone with real money (and suckers like myself who pay 10 Grand a year) will likely have a better experience in the US system than the government system in Canada.
The other 60% would do much better in Canada. No more worries about loosing insurance when they loose a job, or worries about scrounging up insurance money, no more co-pays driving people to the brink.
BTW, us IT workers need to learn from the Canadian Doctors. Imagine if we controlled who could enter the IT field? We also could create artificial shortages and boost our salaries as well.
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.
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.