Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Chernobyl vs. Insurance Policies


Throughout these Chernobyl readings, discussion, and blog posts, a prevalent topic has been the need to prove a certain degree of illness in order to receive benefits. I find the case of Chernobyl especially troubling as it encompasses illnesses that are largely out of the control of those who are experiencing them; they are not, say, diabetes or coronary artery disease, which are often exclusively caused by lifestyle choices and bad habits. The irony of this is that these diseases are suffered by those who usually have health care benefits and these diseases are in fact covered by insurance plans. The victims of Chernobyl for the most part, have no control over the origins or prevention of their diseases, nor do they have a clear path to care for these diseases.
            However, it cannot go without saying, that many of the “sufferers” did actually do things to increase their “rem” levels such as going into the Exclusion Zones. Yet this is not too far off what many people on insurance policies do when desperate – finagle test results, or even making their conditions seem slightly worse to receive better coverage or move themselves up higher on transplant lists. (Please forgive the pop culture reference, but does anyone watch Grey’s Anatomy?)
            Overall, I am just impressed with the amount of altercation that has to go into actually getting the help that you need, and in the case of the Chernobyl disaster, I believe is deserved. I don’t want to ignite a fiery debate about healthcare at this point, but I find these discussions particularly interesting within the context of this nation’s healthcare debates right now.

No comments:

Post a Comment