[Newsbot]

Title: Australian couple stuck with $1M bill for B.C.-born baby | CTV News
Category: Health
Posted By: Robair
Date: 2012-03-28 07:33:14
Canadian

[martin14]

$1:

John Kan and Rachel Evans had taken out travel insurance and extra coverage for Evans' pregnancy without realizing the policy would not cover birth or the baby

$1:

Piper Kan stayed in the neo-natal ward of the B.C. Women's Hospital and Health Centre for three months

And in all those 3 months, no one thought of calling the company.

Head up your asses much ?
Talk about willfully blind....

[Bruce_E_T]

$1:

John Kan and Rachel Evans had taken out travel insurance and extra coverage for Evans' pregnancy without realizing the policy would not cover birth or the baby

Sounds like an honest mistake, I think. You would naturally assume extra coverage for the pregnancy would include a possibility of an early birth. Good luck to them I suppose.

[martin14]

Bruce_E_T Bruce_E_T:

$1:

John Kan and Rachel Evans had taken out travel insurance and extra coverage for Evans' pregnancy without realizing the policy would not cover birth or the baby

Sounds like an honest mistake, I think. You would naturally assume extra coverage for the pregnancy would include a possibility of an early birth. Good luck to them I suppose.

Yeah, ok, a mistake, for the first week..... but 3 months ?

[Bruce_E_T]

martin14 martin14:

Yeah, ok, a mistake, for the first week..... but 3 months ?

Right. I don't get that part. Quite a weird little story really.

[cougar]

Let's get some math out on this thread. The couple will be paying $300/month for 278 years. Let's assume that the $300 represents 5% on a combined income of $6,000. (let's also keep in mind that to get a salary of $3,000/month per person they both need to be quite qualified in something)

So 5% of 278 years is roughly 14 years. In other words the couple would have to be working full time for 14 straight years just to repay the medical bill (zero other expenses).

Let's finally compare the 14 years with the 90 days of service they received.....

If we suppose that there were 2 medical staff personnel constantly tending the pregnant woman during that time, the ratio between what the Australians are making as qualified people and what the hospital is making is 1:56. (14 years x 12 months x 30 days/month divided by 90 days). You can also get the same ratio by dividing the $333,333 the hospital charges a month by the $6,000 monthly salary of the Australians.

This is a total rip off!

One can still argue that at the hospital the care is 24 hours/day compared to 8 hours of work for the Australians, and equipment costs, facility costs and that, but, my personal conclusion would be - the service is extremely overpriced.

[Dragon-Dancer]

I don't see why they should think about calling the company when they were under the impression that the coverage for the pregnancy would include the birth. I would say the mistake was in not checking if that was the case when purchasing the policy in the first place but if the insurance company was selling them a policy related to covering pregnancy it seems an easy assumption to make that a birth is a potential related outcome.

[PluggyRug]

Insurance companies have a neat way of hiding policy details...it's in the fine print.

[cougar]

Pregnancy Insurance for a pregnant woman in her 9th month who also puts herself on a 12 or so hour flight? I wish to see the company that would offer a policy and the premium at which it will come.

[desertdude]

Jeez a million ! What did she deliver a heard of elephants, even if she was in the hospital for three months I don't see how that would cost a million bucks !!!

A friend of mine just delivered here, had complications and weeks later had to have surgery aswell in one of the best and one of the most expensive private hospitals here, didn't have any insurance and did pay a fraction of that, maybe stayed in the hospital for three month might come up to fraction still doubt it though !

I would love to see a break down at how it totaled up to million !!!!!!!!

[martin14]

PluggyRug PluggyRug:

Insurance companies have a neat way of hiding policy details...it's in the fine print.

I'm sure even the Aussies do teach their people how to read....

[andyt]

Well, I give them credit that at least they were trying to get home to give birth. Unlike visitors from other countries who purposely try to give birth here.

[cougar]

desertdude desertdude:

What did she deliver a heard of elephants.....

Thanks for making me laugh.

[BartSimpson]

Memo to Self: Don't buy BC born babies.

[bootlegga]

When I sold travel insurance at AMA (Alberta's CAA branch), it was always made clear that pregnancy (or any other pre-existing condition) was covered under the policy. I don't know if the Australian company that insured them ever properly made them aware when they were buying it.

Travel medical insurance is for 'unexpected' medical needs - and I don't buy the argument that a premature baby is unexpected - it happens all the time. I also know that we NEVER recommended any travel in the last trimester.