In an online article about health insurers refusing NICU charges - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-05-2011, 09:12 AM - Thread Starter
 
vachi73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 181
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

From: http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Features/Insuring-Your-Health/michelle-andrews-on-neonatal-ICU-health-costs.aspx

 

"Nathan and Sonji Wilkes thought they had covered all the insurance bases before the birth of their son, Thomas, seven years ago. Their obstetrician and the hospital near their Englewood, Colo., home were all in network. They checked with the health insurer that provided their coverage to estimate their out-of-pocket costs. The expected total: $400.

 

Thomas's birth was uneventful. But when hospital personnel circumcised him, he wouldn't stop bleeding. He was given a diagnosis of hemophilia, treated and placed in the hospital's NICU, where he received treatment to stop the bleeding and remained under observation for a day. A few weeks later, the Wilkeses got a $50,000 bill for Thomas's NICU stay. They learned that the unit, located on the same floor as the regular nursery and delivery rooms, was staffed by a company under contract to the hospital, and the company didn't accept the family's insurance plan."

 

 

Too bad the article didn't mention that, had they just left their son alone, this would not have been a $50K hospital bill!!!

 

And, another potentially REALLY HORRIBLE risk of circumcision (the bleeding, that is ... not the cost!).

 

And, how expensive is circumcision, really? In this day and age of crazy-high health costs, why does this persist??

 

Sigh.

vachi73 is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off