Carlin & Evan 11: Scary Health Situation

[JermajestyDuggar]

Of course Kelly had to go. It’s surprising to think she has what? 6 underage kids at home. I don’t know anyone with that many kids at home that travels as much as her. It’s like she’s decided she’s done parenting now and she’s going to pretend she’s the mother of only grown children. 

[SassyPants]

I have lots of questions regarding large, ever growing families, plus women with various health and reproductive issues and health care insurance. I’d imagine Kelton, John and Bobby have coverage, and Zach did at one time, but what kind of ongoing coverage do the rest have? Who is covering the Stewarts? Scary if all they have is the Christian ministry coverage.

[JDuggs]

13 hours ago, marmalade said:

No, Kelly did not take Erin's share of the boutique. She confirmed this on a SM post several months ago. She said she is part of it because she enjoys it. 

You’re right. It doesn’t say that she’s a partner. This is what they said about Kelly when Erin left the boutique.

Spoiler

 

[CanadianMamam]

Yeah, this is another case of deliberate language and in one of the Q& stories they stated that Kelly was not a partner but they didn't deny that she had a financial stake, they just kind of skirted the question. I know the BSB filing changed after Erin left and I think keeping it in just Whitney and Carlin's name was smart.

[just_ordinary]

On 8/8/2022 at 5:28 PM, Mama Mia said:

If I was Carlin , and my income was enough to comfortably support my family, and I was having health issues that required help with childcare and transportation and monitoring — I’d be very glad that my husband was willing and able to take on the role of helping me, and caring for our children. Even if he was putting his own career on hold for awhile. Like millions of women do to help their families out. All the time. There are many, many SAHM, by choice. Even those with career training. Most who don’t have significant health concerns of their partner in the mix.  Why is it so weird when it’s the father? 

It’s not weird and if she was healthy and they chose him to be a SAHD great. But right now they are financially dependent completely on her, while she has severe health problems. That’s a lot of pressure on her and let’s face it- she also needs to look presentable and upbeat most of the time. The audience tolerates more real/negative content only for so long. 

[SassyPants]

23 hours ago, SassyPants said:

I have lots of questions regarding large, ever growing families, plus women with various health and reproductive issues and health care insurance. I’d imagine Kelton, John and Bobby have coverage, and Zach did at one time, but what kind of ongoing coverage do the rest have? Who is covering the Stewarts? Scary if all they have is the Christian ministry coverage.

Quoting myself here. Today, Jessa confirmed that they use a Christian ministry health fund. Josie B. Commented that she loves Christian ministry health plans.

[FiveAcres]

4 minutes ago, SassyPants said:

Quoting myself here. Today, Jessa confirmed that they use a Christian ministry health fund. Josie B. Commented that she loves Christian ministry health plans.

I wonder how the Christian ministry plans treat Covid claims, especially since so many of their adherents probably believe Covid is a hoax. 

[MaryOrMartha]

Why are fundies against traditional health insurance? Is it because it's too expensive?

[Audrey2]

4 minutes ago, MaryOrMartha said:

Why are fundies against traditional health insurance? Is it because it's too expensive?

I have a feeling several reasons play into fundies being against traditional health insurance. First, it's usually tied into having a job which means working for someone else who pays your insurance which they are against, feeling it's more important to be self-employed generally speaking. Second, health insurance covers people they don't agree with and they have no say in how the money that is either paid in by them or paid in for them is being used to help people they disagree with, possibly even (gasp) homosexuals and minorities! Third, they like to pick and choose about what medical condition should and should not be covered by insurance. They wouldn't want to be in a traditional plan because it would cover birth control/iud. By taking part in a Christian plan they can decide who is worthy of getting what treatment.

[0 kids n not countin]

7 minutes ago, Audrey2 said:

I have a feeling several reasons play into fundies being against traditional health insurance. First, it's usually tied into having a job which means working for someone else who pays your insurance which they are against, feeling it's more important to be self-employed generally speaking. Second, health insurance covers people they don't agree with and they have no say in how the money that is either paid in by them or paid in for them is being used to help people they disagree with, possibly even (gasp) homosexuals and minorities! Third, they like to pick and choose about what medical condition should and should not be covered by insurance. They wouldn't want to be in a traditional plan because it would cover birth control/iud. By taking part in a Christian plan they can decide who is worthy of getting what treatment.

Would they cover the eyelid procedure some here feel Josie B got? 🤔🙄👁

[Dandruff]

3 hours ago, MaryOrMartha said:

Why are fundies against traditional health insurance? Is it because it's too expensive?

I think part of the reason is that they don't want to even inadvertently help fund an abortion.

[Jasmar]

Speaking as a former fundie-light, they also knee-jerk despise anything that smacks of Obamacare. I don’t remember health insurance being a negative thing until after that.

[Tdoc72]

6 hours ago, MaryOrMartha said:

Why are fundies against traditional health insurance? Is it because it's too expensive?

I’m wondering how it’s actually different. It sounds like people paying into one fund and then getting some things covered. 

[Smoochie]

I went to Jessa's instagram and it has just as many naysayers as those in favor and I don't think it's all trolls. Many talk about things that weren't covered and how catastrophic injuries or aftercare coverage is inadequate.

[JDuggs]

1 hour ago, Tdoc72 said:

I’m wondering how it’s actually different. It sounds like people paying into one fund and then getting some things covered. 

It’s different, I think, in that it’s not officially insurance. When you show up at the hospital, you are Private Pay because the hospital won’t bill Christian Ministries Healthcare directly. So first, the patient tries to negotiate the bill down with the hospital. Some providers will, some won’t. Then Christian Healthcare pays the patient directly who then pays the provider. I learned this from some other person shilling it. It doesn’t seem to cover well visits either.

[GuineaPigCourtship]

Sounds like a huge headache of their own choosing.  I don't feel sorry for them.

[Mama Mia]

18 hours ago, Smoochie said:

I went to Jessa's instagram and it has just as many naysayers as those in favor and I don't think it's all trolls. Many talk about things that weren't covered and how catastrophic injuries or aftercare coverage is inadequate.

Most of the comments seem to be people arguing over US vs anywhere else healthcare systems. With some die hard conservatives arguing how their $1,000 a month insurance with a $20,000 deductible that left them disabled and $100k in debt is better than paying 1% more in taxes- somehow. Cause communism? 
 

I could see the Christian Share programs working ok if you had pretty significant money, or access to money as loans from family, but I don’t think most average income people could afford to pay the big ticket medical expenses up-front and then get reimbursed. Interestingly in the comments someone asked about similar secular cost-share programs- and the Christian Share program said there are companies that do that. Can’t recall the name. 

[Heidijoey]

Most of the comments seem to be people arguing over US vs anywhere else healthcare systems. With some die hard conservatives arguing how their $1,000 a month insurance with a $20,000 deductible that left them disabled and $100k in debt is better than paying 1% more in taxes- somehow. Cause communism? 
 
I could see the Christian Share programs working ok if you had pretty significant money, or access to money as loans from family, but I don’t think most average income people could afford to pay the big ticket medical expenses up-front and then get reimbursed. Interestingly in the comments someone asked about similar secular cost-share programs- and the Christian Share program said there are companies that do that. Can’t recall the name. 

Can the Christian ministry decide what to pay for and what not to pay for? What if they are set to pay for something do something social media snooping and find the patient did something they don’t agree with ? Can they cancel the payment? Is anything in writing ?

[purple_summer]

5 hours ago, Heidijoey said:

Can the Christian ministry decide what to pay for and what not to pay for? What if they are set to pay for something do something social media snooping and find the patient did something they don’t agree with ? Can they cancel the payment? Is anything in writing ?

It probably varies, but I went to school with someone who uses Samaritan. They require you actively attend church 3/4 weeks of the month and get a pastor’s recommendation letter. She has multiple children with treatable special needs (think speech related) but none of that is covered. I don’t know why she and her husband don’t buy traditional insurance, her “defense” of the program sounded pretty bad to me. 

[monkeyrocks71]

12 hours ago, purple_summer said:

It probably varies, but I went to school with someone who uses Samaritan. They require you actively attend church 3/4 weeks of the month and get a pastor’s recommendation letter. She has multiple children with treatable special needs (think speech related) but none of that is covered. I don’t know why she and her husband don’t buy traditional insurance, her “defense” of the program sounded pretty bad to me. 

Not to pry, but, do they get state insurance for the kids?  That will generally cover speech therapies and whatnot.  I actually suspect a LOT of fundies are on CHIP, at a minimum, and just don't disclose it because they feel like they "deserve" it, but don't want to be lumped in with the people who don't "deserve" it.

 

[purple_summer]

28 minutes ago, monkeyrocks71 said:

Not to pry, but, do they get state insurance for the kids?  That will generally cover speech therapies and whatnot.  I actually suspect a LOT of fundies are on CHIP, at a minimum, and just don't disclose it because they feel like they "deserve" it, but don't want to be lumped in with the people who don't "deserve" it.

 

She didn’t elaborate, but I just went back to check the post and she openly said that occupational therapy for one child isn’t covered at all but they did cover NICU bills (after negotiations) for the baby they added at birth. It doesn’t cover any preventative care including vaccines. 
 

Speaking from family experience, I wouldn’t be surprised if most don’t use CHIP as a supplement and instead go without care. 

[WiseGirl]

27 minutes ago, purple_summer said:

She didn’t elaborate, but I just went back to check the post and she openly said that occupational therapy for one child isn’t covered at all but they did cover NICU bills (after negotiations) for the baby they added at birth. It doesn’t cover any preventative care including vaccines. 
 

and instead go without care. 

Which is a shame because if they are in the USA  most states have birth to 3 programs which would include speech/OT services. (Bolding mine) I'm going to guess they homeschool if in the US because if they wete in the public educayption sphere they would get some services, including speech, OT, and PT through the special education department if they qualified. But evil public schools you know.

[monkeyrocks71]

I went down the rabbit hole, and, um, I'm not sure I'd want to be on a health insurance that doesn't have a basic understanding of biology.  From Samaritan's site: 

Ectopic Pregnancies—

Expenses Shared—Procedures related to a ruptured fallopian tube (including post-operative recovery of the mother, follow-up care, and treatment of any complications), and, where an ectopic pregnancy is diagnosed before a rupture, all pre-operative tests and consultations and expenses related to keeping the mother under medical care while determining what care should be offered for the mother and child.

Expenses Not Shared—Procedures directly related to the termination of a living, unborn child and/or removal of the living, unborn child from the mother due to an ectopic pregnancy are not shared (e.g. methotrexate, salpingectomy, salpingostomy), unless the removal of the child from its ectopic location was for the primary purpose of saving the life of the child or improving the health of the child.

(bolding mine).  

Not saving the life of the mother.  The zygote.  Which, as anyone with a basic understanding of biology knows, cannot be "reimplanted" somewhere else.  

On 8/12/2022 at 12:24 PM, WiseGirl said:

Which is a shame because if they are in the USA  most states have birth to 3 programs which would include speech/OT services. (Bolding mine) I'm going to guess they homeschool if in the US because if they wete in the public educayption sphere they would get some services, including speech, OT, and PT through the special education department if they qualified. But evil public schools you know.

Even if you homeschool, in a lot of states, the local district is required to provide therapies if the child qualifies.

 

Edited August 14, 2022 by monkeyrocks71

[HeartsAFundie]

1 hour ago, monkeyrocks71 said:

Even if you homeschool, in a lot of states, the local district is required to provide therapies if the child qualifies.

 

Exactly.  And that includes kids in religious and private schools too.   

When I taught in a Catholic school for three years I had a few students who needed reading assistance under Title One.  They were escorted to the public school across the street twice a week for these services.   

Another example:  My nephew was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome at age 5 and had coordination issues.  He attended Catholic school and his parents were given the option for him to attend adaptive physical education classes in the nearest public school.  (They refused it due to transportation issues and sent him to adaptive physical therapy sessions after school instead, but the point is, the services were offered.)     

The Massachusetts special education law, Chapter 766, was one of the first special education laws in the country and has been upheld as the model other states should follow.  The law states that any student ages 3-22 who needs special education services is entitled to it regardless of where they attend school.  And if the attending school cannot provide for these students, then allowances are made-such as what my former students did-or the students must attend a school that can provide the needed services.  At the school district's expense.    

Edited August 14, 2022 by HeartsAFundie

[SoSoNosy]

How could anybody think that the life of the child involved in ectopic pregnancy can actually saved?  Am I missing something, and it can be done???  Either way, my jaw is on the floor.