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.
From a purely “medical necessity” viewpoint even, having a properly-functioning prosthetic helps him keep the rest of his body healthy! (Although I suppose they’d figure on denying claims for hospital treatment when his unhealthy heart caved in!)
(Although I suppose they’d figure on denying claims for hospital treatment when his unhealthy heart caved in!)
The long term goal of this type of policy is to not only reduce immediate cost, but to offload the cost of long term care onto a socialized network like social security.
The majority of amputees are already diabetics, if you remove their ability to remain active and mobile, you substantially increase the chance of renal failure. Patients who require dialysis because of renal failure get enrolled for disability through social security.
From a purely “medical necessity” viewpoint even, having a properly-functioning prosthetic helps him keep the rest of his body healthy! (Although I suppose they’d figure on denying claims for hospital treatment when his unhealthy heart caved in!)
The long term goal of this type of policy is to not only reduce immediate cost, but to offload the cost of long term care onto a socialized network like social security.
The majority of amputees are already diabetics, if you remove their ability to remain active and mobile, you substantially increase the chance of renal failure. Patients who require dialysis because of renal failure get enrolled for disability through social security.