[Alberta's Child]

I'm not so sure this is a bad thing. Yes, it's harsh ... but I don't see a problem with forcing people to tap their own net worth to pay their medical bills if they are uninsured. That's what the rest of us have to do, isn't it?

This approach actually does people a favor by allowing them to defer payment until after they die.

[Gaffer]

I agree. Most of the ‘heirs’ are thinking only of having one’s cake and eating it too. Without the cost of having to take care of their parents.

[sitetest]

Dear Alberta's Child,

I think that perhaps, at least for some people, the issue is that some folks are being forced onto Medicaid, whether they like it or not, because they are low-income, but don't want to be on Medicaid. I read of an older woman in, I think, Washington state who could afford a DeathCare policy with subsidy, but because her income was so low, DeathCare wouldn't permit her to sign up for it, but threw her into Medicaid.

This was a woman with some assets (a house, if I recall correctly) that would pass to her children. She wanted to buy a policy that, with the subsidies, was affordable to her, thus at least contributing to her own health care, but was unable. She was forced by the system into welfare.

And the salt in the wound is that now, her assets will be lost to her heirs because she was forced to take welfare that she didn't want.

sitetest

[lepton]

It depends. For many people Medicaid is junk. They are now forcing people on it. Are the reclaiming only the actual medical expenses, or also imputed premiums?

[LucyT]

I don't see a problem with forcing people to tap their own net worth to pay their medical bills if they are uninsured. That's what the rest of us have to do, isn't it?

Agree.