Advocates say it is discrimination and are arguing for “insurance fairness” on the grounds that people who have joints surgically replaced typically don’t face the same kinds of coverage challenges.
Okay, I can spell out the “medical necessity” for you insurance companies in a way you’ll understand: mental health is important for physical health. You do things to improve mental health and you also improve physical health. So if you improve someone’s mental health now, you won’t be paying out for all of the later physical problems brought on by the stress and the knowledge that their life would be better if only some more miserly than Scrooge insurance company would let them have a fucking leg.
And having a prosthetic limb is important for physical health anyways. Helps you be more active, massively increases productivity (that’s what capitalists want right?), decreases wheelchair/caregiver costs, etc.
Excellent points. The increased physical activity part would also save these idiot insurance companies money, but they would have to think beyond the next quarter.
Okay, I can spell out the “medical necessity” for you insurance companies in a way you’ll understand: mental health is important for physical health. You do things to improve mental health and you also improve physical health. So if you improve someone’s mental health now, you won’t be paying out for all of the later physical problems brought on by the stress and the knowledge that their life would be better if only some more miserly than Scrooge insurance company would let them have a fucking leg.
And having a prosthetic limb is important for physical health anyways. Helps you be more active, massively increases productivity (that’s what capitalists want right?), decreases wheelchair/caregiver costs, etc.
It’s simply an all around win.
Excellent points. The increased physical activity part would also save these idiot insurance companies money, but they would have to think beyond the next quarter.