Hacker News Reader

Comment by carlgreene | Hacker News Reader

I'm trying to figure out if these deaths caused by insurance denials could actually be considered murder. I think they would definitely qualify as being premeditated, but can you consider them "killing"? They are causing death due to omission of expected care, but can the omission of something like medical care be considered the cause of death?

View on HN

I am not a lawyer, but I would assume that death due to omission of expected care fits pretty neatly under "negligent homicide".

Duty of care?

It is weird—I would expect only the folks who make decisions as to which procedures are medically necessary (just doctors ideally) to have a duty of care. But insurance companies are bouncing back procedures are not medically necessary, so maybe we’re due for a re-adjustment in the expectations as to who has that duty.

It is surprising if insurance companies what to sign themselves up for this sort of obligation. But obviously they’ll take all the privileges of the decision making process if we don’t also hold them to the responsibilities.

There are direct measures: someone needs a transplant or something of that nature, refusal is effectively shortening their life and some aggressive prosecutors might craft a case. There are less direct things, I expect a lot of them. say people dealing with long recoveries from things, there are good days and bad days and bouts of depression aren’t uncommon; could antidepressants prevent depression on related suicides? That’s an entire can of worms, people have fallen into depression because they’ve become addicted and can’t kick it, what if it was medical pain killers you’re addicted to? Then suppose some company spent half the funds on ED pills and breast augmentation and some more medically things were denied, you can spin that both ways as they might be doing what the bulk of their customers want. That one is interesting, you could break a bone and have surgical reconstruction and hopefully get a full recovery or maybe you just set it and naturally heal and maybe it’s not 100% fixed, only 85%, there is a substantial cost difference there…

For profit medicine and for profit health insurance is just riddled with moral hazard.

There is legal precedent establishing healthcare providers' obligations in life-threatening situations. The same moral responsibility should exist when insurers deny lifesaving care, it's just hidden behind bureaucracy.

Depends on your philosophy I suppose. For example, Christianity teaches that failing to do good is itself a sin. So that suggests that an omission could be considered to make someone guilty.

I suspect that all modern legal systems have the concept of negligence which could result in someone being considered guilty for someone's death. I imagine in that case whether that's "murder" would come down to whether you mean a legal definition (which might call it something else like "manslaughter") or the colloquial definition.

And guilt isn't a single bucket or item to be handed out to one person. Most if not all moral systems and laws admit of varying degrees of responsibility and culpability and work within that framework (see situations where a bank robbery goes wrong and one robber kills someone and the getaway driver is also charged as an accessory to the killing).

Ask yourself this question again when it's your partner/parent/child in the casket.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01651...

The doctor / hospital that refuses to treat when insurance declines is also involved in the “omission of expected care”. Would they also be guilty of premeditated murder?

Yeah.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com