Should insurance be denied to domestic violence victims?
21 Star it
View Point , Shimla:
Sep 19 2009
Made Popular Sep 19 2009

Victims of domestic violence have no relief in seven of US states and the District of Columbia because of unwillingness on the part of insurance companies to cover such individuals. Getting beaten up by a spouse is considered a pre-existing condition in Idaho, Mississippi, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming. Under the cold logic of the insurance industry, if you are in a marriage with someone who has beaten you in the past, you’re more likely to get beaten again than the average person and are therefore more expensive to insure. While the very thought of domestic violence victims being denied health coverage is unbearable; it leaves one to think whether it is justified?
Add Images and Videos
Close X
Recommended Tags or Keywords
Search by Tags or Keywords
Selected Media ( You can Upload only Six media )
Sorry no picture found for this combination of tags. Try to search minimum number of tags at once
1 Stars
Disagree
Roberto
Sep 19 2009
Burlington,
United States
Denying insurance means double pain for the victim. One by getting beaten up, two, by not able to claim money for the treatment.
Comment Link
1 Stars
Disagree
If a person is being beaten up several time s before, that's a separate issue. But for newly wedded, it should be allowed.
1 Stars
Agree
Insurance companies doesn't cover such uncertain scenarios and that's quite logical too. People would come up with anything calling it domestic violence.
1 Stars
Agree
Heartless as it seems, but technically yes. Domestic violence is symptomatic, cyclical, and predictable. It is not really accidental. The solution to DV victims does not lie in insurance coverages but in QUITTING THE GODDAMN VIOLENT RELATIONSHIP ALTOGETHER PRONTO, and NEVER GO BACK TO IT.
1 Stars
Disagree
Domestic Violence victims do not need insurance but separation from the man/woman they live with. That is the only permanent solution.
1 Stars
Agree
But it is unfair to somebody who 1st gets beaten up by the spouse and then denied the treatment expense as well.
Local Opinions (6)
1 Stars
Disagree
Denying insurance means double pain for the victim. One by getting beaten up, two, by not able to claim money for the treatment.
1 Stars
Disagree
If a person is being beaten up several time s before, that's a separate issue. But for newly wedded, it should be allowed.
1 Stars
Agree
Insurance companies doesn't cover such uncertain scenarios and that's quite logical too. People would come up with anything calling it domestic violence.
1 Stars
Agree
Heartless as it seems, but technically yes. Domestic violence is symptomatic, cyclical, and predictable. It is not really accidental. The solution to DV victims does not lie in insurance coverages but in QUITTING THE GODDAMN VIOLENT RELATIONSHIP ALTOGETHER PRONTO, and NEVER GO BACK TO IT.
1 Stars
Disagree
Domestic Violence victims do not need insurance but separation from the man/woman they live with. That is the only permanent solution.
1 Stars
Agree
But it is unfair to somebody who 1st gets beaten up by the spouse and then denied the treatment expense as well.
Global Opinions (6)
1 Stars
Disagree
Denying insurance means double pain for the victim. One by getting beaten up, two, by not able to claim money for the treatment.
1 Stars
Disagree
If a person is being beaten up several time s before, that's a separate issue. But for newly wedded, it should be allowed.
1 Stars
Agree
Insurance companies doesn't cover such uncertain scenarios and that's quite logical too. People would come up with anything calling it domestic violence.
1 Stars
Agree
Heartless as it seems, but technically yes. Domestic violence is symptomatic, cyclical, and predictable. It is not really accidental. The solution to DV victims does not lie in insurance coverages but in QUITTING THE GODDAMN VIOLENT RELATIONSHIP ALTOGETHER PRONTO, and NEVER GO BACK TO IT.
1 Stars
Disagree
Domestic Violence victims do not need insurance but separation from the man/woman they live with. That is the only permanent solution.
1 Stars
Agree
But it is unfair to somebody who 1st gets beaten up by the spouse and then denied the treatment expense as well.
Agree (3)
1 Stars
Insurance companies doesn't cover such uncertain scenarios and that's quite logical too. People would come up with anything calling it domestic violence.
1 Stars
Heartless as it seems, but technically yes. Domestic violence is symptomatic, cyclical, and predictable. It is not really accidental. The solution to DV victims does not lie in insurance coverages but in QUITTING THE GODDAMN VIOLENT RELATIONSHIP ALTOGETHER PRONTO, and NEVER GO BACK TO IT.
1 Stars
But it is unfair to somebody who 1st gets beaten up by the spouse and then denied the treatment expense as well.
Disagree (3)
1 Stars
Denying insurance means double pain for the victim. One by getting beaten up, two, by not able to claim money for the treatment.
1 Stars
If a person is being beaten up several time s before, that's a separate issue. But for newly wedded, it should be allowed.
1 Stars
Domestic Violence victims do not need insurance but separation from the man/woman they live with. That is the only permanent solution.
Add your Comment
Home

Delicious
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Stumble Upon
Technorati
Mixx
Sphinn
Twitter
SphereIt
Propeller
Gmarks
Newsvine
Yahoo! My Web
Live Journal
Blinklist
E-mail
RSS 








