Movin' on up!

Those folks who pay attention to these things may have noticed that we've been in the Top 20 at Wikio (Health) for quite some time, most recently at #16. I just received confirmation from the Wikio folks that that's about to change:

"I am contacting you about the new Wikio ranking for July. Your blog InsureBlog moved from 16 to 11 this month."

Awesome!

While I'm still relatively clueless about how those rankings are determined, it stands to reason that readership plays at least some part, and so I'd like to thank our loyal (and brilliant, of course) readers.

UPDATE: I've just received a follow-up email confirming that we're #10.

Read More

Movin' on up!

Those folks who pay attention to these things may have noticed that we've been in the Top 20 at Wikio (Health) for quite some time, most recently at #16. I just received confirmation from the Wikio folks that that's about to change:

"I am contacting you about the new Wikio ranking for July. Your blog InsureBlog moved from 16 to 11 this month."

Awesome!

While I'm still relatively clueless about how those rankings are determined, it stands to reason that readership plays at least some part, and so I'd like to thank our loyal (and brilliant, of course) readers.

UPDATE: I've just received a follow-up email confirming that we're #10.

Read More

Another Ethical Conundrum: Little Hailey

When is someone too sick to be helped?

"Two airlines this weekend declined to fly Miranda Goranflo and her daughter Hailey to Beijing, where the 5-year-old was to receive stem-cell treatments for a rare fatal disease."

Little Hailey (and her baby brother) suffers from Late Infantile Batten Disease, which causes loss of muscle co-ordination and seizures that do not respond to anticonvulsant drugs. It is (apparently) always fatal. Other than this new, experimental treatment, there is no cure; a patient's life expectancy is about age 12.

Once Hailey (and her mother) had reached Vancouver, Air Canada insisted on making their own determination as to whether or not she was fit to fly. Unfortunately, during the wait for the Air China flight, Hailey's health went from bad to worse, and she was admitted to Vancouver's Children's Hospital. When it was apparent that her health hadn't improved enough to make the flight to China, she was flown home, by air ambulance, to Kentucky.

It now appears that she will be unable to take advantage of the stem-cell treatment that may have extended her life expectancy.

This is just sad, on so many levels.

As a parent, I can certainly respect and empathize with her folks' desire to exhaust every single avenue, no matter the cost or the effort. But I can also see the airlines' perspective: if her health had deteriorated that fast just waiting for the next flight, how well would things have gone once they were in the air and over the Pacific*? And what liability would the airline face in the event that she suffered even more? And finally, what about the safety of the other passengers?

There's also the question of "what now?" Hailey's family is exploring the possibility of a direct commercial flight to China, or even ponying up the $125,000 cost of an air ambulance there. Since this is an experimental treatment, it's unlikely any insurance carrier would agree to foot that bill.

I'm curious about our readers' take on this.

UPDATE: Thanks and a Tip o' the Hat to commenter Foilwoman for catching my geographical faux pas.

Read More

Another Ethical Conundrum: Little Hailey

When is someone too sick to be helped?

"Two airlines this weekend declined to fly Miranda Goranflo and her daughter Hailey to Beijing, where the 5-year-old was to receive stem-cell treatments for a rare fatal disease."

Little Hailey (and her baby brother) suffers from Late Infantile Batten Disease, which causes loss of muscle co-ordination and seizures that do not respond to anticonvulsant drugs. It is (apparently) always fatal. Other than this new, experimental treatment, there is no cure; a patient's life expectancy is about age 12.

Once Hailey (and her mother) had reached Vancouver, Air Canada insisted on making their own determination as to whether or not she was fit to fly. Unfortunately, during the wait for the Air China flight, Hailey's health went from bad to worse, and she was admitted to Vancouver's Children's Hospital. When it was apparent that her health hadn't improved enough to make the flight to China, she was flown home, by air ambulance, to Kentucky.

It now appears that she will be unable to take advantage of the stem-cell treatment that may have extended her life expectancy.

This is just sad, on so many levels.

As a parent, I can certainly respect and empathize with her folks' desire to exhaust every single avenue, no matter the cost or the effort. But I can also see the airlines' perspective: if her health had deteriorated that fast just waiting for the next flight, how well would things have gone once they were in the air and over the Pacific*? And what liability would the airline face in the event that she suffered even more? And finally, what about the safety of the other passengers?

There's also the question of "what now?" Hailey's family is exploring the possibility of a direct commercial flight to China, or even ponying up the $125,000 cost of an air ambulance there. Since this is an experimental treatment, it's unlikely any insurance carrier would agree to foot that bill.

I'm curious about our readers' take on this.

UPDATE: Thanks and a Tip o' the Hat to commenter Foilwoman for catching my geographical faux pas.

Read More

What's Your Sign?

Are you predisposed towards nearsightedness? Is there a chance you might be (or become) schizophrenic? What's your risk of cancer or heart disease?

According to some psychiatrists the month and time of year you were born gives some indication of your future health.

The association between birth season and health, meanwhile, has been confirmed repeatedly by studies published in peer-reviewed journals.

It was first noticed with the neurological disorder schizophrenia; subsequent research has shown the month of birth can influence your risk of suicide and chance of developing certain cancers, Crohn's disease, coronary heart disease and brain tumors, says psychiatrist Emad Salib of Peasley Cross Hospital in Britain,

That's a fairly broad association if you ask me.

Literature reviews, meanwhile, show that more patients with schizophrenia, Alzheimer's disease, epilepsy and narcolepsy are born in December and January. Those with affective disorders—alcohol dependence, autism, dyslexia and multiple sclerosis—are reported more frequently in those born during spring and summer months.

And what is the correlation?

A mother's health is the root of several possible explanations. For instance, the fetal origins hypothesis holds that early environmental conditions in utero and during infancy can program human immune development. Some of these factors include a mother's access to fresh vegetables or vitamins, or her exposure to an infectious disease such as influenza that might harm the brain of a developing fetus.

OK, I might be willing to buy into that.

So is there any good news?

"Children born in autumn will tend to be the biggest, strongest and most developed in their school year," he said. "So they are more likely to do better in sport, which may motivate them to stay active.

But then there is this . . .

Of course there will always be October-born people who are sedentary and June babies with perfect vision. Season of birth research is in its infancy, so it shouldn't weigh into family-planning decisions.

As a September baby, I am more inclined to think I am in the bigger, stronger category.

Wonder what my horoscope says for today?

Read More

What's Your Sign?

Are you predisposed towards nearsightedness? Is there a chance you might be (or become) schizophrenic? What's your risk of cancer or heart disease?

According to some psychiatrists the month and time of year you were born gives some indication of your future health.

The association between birth season and health, meanwhile, has been confirmed repeatedly by studies published in peer-reviewed journals.

It was first noticed with the neurological disorder schizophrenia; subsequent research has shown the month of birth can influence your risk of suicide and chance of developing certain cancers, Crohn's disease, coronary heart disease and brain tumors, says psychiatrist Emad Salib of Peasley Cross Hospital in Britain,

That's a fairly broad association if you ask me.

Literature reviews, meanwhile, show that more patients with schizophrenia, Alzheimer's disease, epilepsy and narcolepsy are born in December and January. Those with affective disorders—alcohol dependence, autism, dyslexia and multiple sclerosis—are reported more frequently in those born during spring and summer months.

And what is the correlation?

A mother's health is the root of several possible explanations. For instance, the fetal origins hypothesis holds that early environmental conditions in utero and during infancy can program human immune development. Some of these factors include a mother's access to fresh vegetables or vitamins, or her exposure to an infectious disease such as influenza that might harm the brain of a developing fetus.

OK, I might be willing to buy into that.

So is there any good news?

"Children born in autumn will tend to be the biggest, strongest and most developed in their school year," he said. "So they are more likely to do better in sport, which may motivate them to stay active.

But then there is this . . .

Of course there will always be October-born people who are sedentary and June babies with perfect vision. Season of birth research is in its infancy, so it shouldn't weigh into family-planning decisions.

As a September baby, I am more inclined to think I am in the bigger, stronger category.

Wonder what my horoscope says for today?

Read More

Unfair to Men

Tova Hack of Valencia, California is now paying more for her health insurance. She just got a renewal on her Blue Cross plan and the premium has increased 20% to $119 per month.

Because she is a woman.

She is crying foul.

"I don't think it's fair at all," said Hack. "I'm in perfectly fine health."

So?

Would she have been satisfied with the increase if her health was poor?

as far as Blue Shield is concerned, Hack and all other women are somehow more accident-prone, or more likely to break a bone, or more susceptible to costly ailments.

Why? Because they're women.

Says who?

"Our egghead actuaries crunched the numbers based on all the data we have about healthcare,"

Egghead actuaries.

Is that their official title?

And then there is this.

Individual health insurance typically costs more than group coverage because the risks can't be spread among a large number of people. Such risk pools allow all people with group policies to be insured equally, without biases for age or gender.

That's not a quote from Blue or any other carrier. So what idiot reporter inserted that bit of information?

Idiot reporter.

That is their official title.

But parsing rates according to gender is a relatively new phenomenon

Another non-quote from our idiot reporter.

Back to the pricing differential . . .

By age 20, women are paying $119 monthly, while men are charged $110.

Sounds like men need to complain they are being under-charged and that isn't fair.

Where is our idiot reporter when we need them?

Read More

Unfair to Men

Tova Hack of Valencia, California is now paying more for her health insurance. She just got a renewal on her Blue Cross plan and the premium has increased 20% to $119 per month.

Because she is a woman.

She is crying foul.

"I don't think it's fair at all," said Hack. "I'm in perfectly fine health."

So?

Would she have been satisfied with the increase if her health was poor?

as far as Blue Shield is concerned, Hack and all other women are somehow more accident-prone, or more likely to break a bone, or more susceptible to costly ailments.

Why? Because they're women.

Says who?

"Our egghead actuaries crunched the numbers based on all the data we have about healthcare,"

Egghead actuaries.

Is that their official title?

And then there is this.

Individual health insurance typically costs more than group coverage because the risks can't be spread among a large number of people. Such risk pools allow all people with group policies to be insured equally, without biases for age or gender.

That's not a quote from Blue or any other carrier. So what idiot reporter inserted that bit of information?

Idiot reporter.

That is their official title.

But parsing rates according to gender is a relatively new phenomenon

Another non-quote from our idiot reporter.

Back to the pricing differential . . .

By age 20, women are paying $119 monthly, while men are charged $110.

Sounds like men need to complain they are being under-charged and that isn't fair.

Where is our idiot reporter when we need them?

Read More

Carnival of Personal Finance is up

This week's edition is overflowing with helpful finance tips and info. Host Greener Pastures presents his CoPF with a "green" theme, which is interesting.

Check it out!

Read More

Carnival of Personal Finance is up

This week's edition is overflowing with helpful finance tips and info. Host Greener Pastures presents his CoPF with a "green" theme, which is interesting.

Check it out!

Read More

Uninsured Skating on Medical Bills

[Welcome Kaiser Network readers!]

Much is made of the uninsured, and especially when the press reports how much they are "overcharged" for services. But very little is made of how much the uninsured actually PAY for medical services.

Grady Hospital in Atlanta is in crisis and services have been cut and more cut's will continue. A more recent casualty of mismanagement at Grady is the impending cutback in ambulance services.

According to the AJC, the Grady medical transport unit lost some $8.7 million in the recent year.

The reports indicate it costs Grady on average about $322 to transport a patient. Figures by type of patient play out as such.

Medicare patients totaled 15,358 with total charges of $6,907,870 against total receipts of $5,254,123 or $342 per patient.

Medicaid patients totaled 15,269 with total charges of $4,970,887 against total receipts of $4,140,589 or $271 per patient.

Patients with insurance totaled 7,421 with total charges of $4,329,658 against total receipts of $3,129,299 or $422 per patient.

UNINSURED patients totaled 28,871 with total charges of $18,709,722 against total receipts of $309,630 or $11 per patient.

Read that again.

Uninsured patients paid an average of $11 for services rendered. They comprised 44% of the trips but only paid 3% of the revenue.

Seems like it is time for the uninsured to pay their "fair share".

Read More

Uninsured Skating on Medical Bills

[Welcome Kaiser Network readers!]

Much is made of the uninsured, and especially when the press reports how much they are "overcharged" for services. But very little is made of how much the uninsured actually PAY for medical services.

Grady Hospital in Atlanta is in crisis and services have been cut and more cut's will continue. A more recent casualty of mismanagement at Grady is the impending cutback in ambulance services.

According to the AJC, the Grady medical transport unit lost some $8.7 million in the recent year.

The reports indicate it costs Grady on average about $322 to transport a patient. Figures by type of patient play out as such.

Medicare patients totaled 15,358 with total charges of $6,907,870 against total receipts of $5,254,123 or $342 per patient.

Medicaid patients totaled 15,269 with total charges of $4,970,887 against total receipts of $4,140,589 or $271 per patient.

Patients with insurance totaled 7,421 with total charges of $4,329,658 against total receipts of $3,129,299 or $422 per patient.

UNINSURED patients totaled 28,871 with total charges of $18,709,722 against total receipts of $309,630 or $11 per patient.

Read that again.

Uninsured patients paid an average of $11 for services rendered. They comprised 44% of the trips but only paid 3% of the revenue.

Seems like it is time for the uninsured to pay their "fair share".

Read More

Paging Dr Willy Wonka: Chocolate Update

Over the years, we've touted the benefits of chocolate-based health care: whether you're pregnant, overweight, or just suffering from high blood pressure, chocolate seems to be the "go to" dietary hero (well, maybe next to tomatoes). It's not enough, apparently, for scientists merely to acknowledge cocoa's seminal role in the health care arena; now they want to map the delicious pod's genome:

"Government scientists are launching a five-year project Thursday aimed at safeguarding the world's chocolate supply by dissecting the genome of the cocoa bean."

It seems that there are a host of challenges that affect cocoa crops, from fungi to droughts, and researchers believe that they can learn more (and better) techniques for protecting the world cocoa bean supply by more completely understanding what makes it "tick."

It's actually a pretty interesting venture, with leading edge genetic research which promises to have positive, real-world impact.

Read More

Paging Dr Willy Wonka: Chocolate Update

Over the years, we've touted the benefits of chocolate-based health care: whether you're pregnant, overweight, or just suffering from high blood pressure, chocolate seems to be the "go to" dietary hero (well, maybe next to tomatoes). It's not enough, apparently, for scientists merely to acknowledge cocoa's seminal role in the health care arena; now they want to map the delicious pod's genome:

"Government scientists are launching a five-year project Thursday aimed at safeguarding the world's chocolate supply by dissecting the genome of the cocoa bean."

It seems that there are a host of challenges that affect cocoa crops, from fungi to droughts, and researchers believe that they can learn more (and better) techniques for protecting the world cocoa bean supply by more completely understanding what makes it "tick."

It's actually a pretty interesting venture, with leading edge genetic research which promises to have positive, real-world impact.

Read More

Nationalized Health Care: Ruh Ro!

"(T)he chairman of a government committee reviewing...health care this year...concluded that the system is in "crisis."

For example:

"Sylvia de Vires....afflicted with a 13-inch, fluid-filled tumor weighing 40 pounds, was unable to get timely care."

And she's far from the only one:

"At some hospitals, seriously ill patients are kept in ambulances for hours so as not to run afoul of the regulation."

Wow, sure sounds like we need to switch to a Canadian-style, nationalized health care system, and right away!

Or maybe not: "the chairman" cited above is actually considered the "the father of Quebec medicare," the system on which Canadian health care is based. And he made those remarks recently, adding "(w)e thought we could resolve the system's problems by rationing services or injecting massive amounts of new money into it," and proposing a much greater role for private health care for our Neighbors to the North©. In fact, he's "proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice."

And poor Mrs de Vires? Well, she's from Ontario, and because the Canadian system wouldn't approve treatment for her, she took a little trip down to Michigan. There, a surgeon successfully removed her tumor, and none too soon: the surgeon estimated that "she could not have lived longer than a few weeks more."

And you may be wondering about the folks being "stored" in ambulances. In Britain, it has become commonplace for acute care patients to have long waits before being seen, much less treated. So the Ministry of Health promulgated a new rule requiring that those in need of emergency care receive it inside four hours. All well and good in theory, but the Law of Unintended Consequences trumps a mere gummint regulation, and so hospitals refused to allow the patients inside; that four hour meter didn't start ticking until they hit the actual door.

I'll give "the father of Quebec medicare" the last word on this:

"We are proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice."

[Hat Tip: RWN]

Read More

Nationalized Health Care: Ruh Ro!

"(T)he chairman of a government committee reviewing...health care this year...concluded that the system is in "crisis."

For example:

"Sylvia de Vires....afflicted with a 13-inch, fluid-filled tumor weighing 40 pounds, was unable to get timely care."

And she's far from the only one:

"At some hospitals, seriously ill patients are kept in ambulances for hours so as not to run afoul of the regulation."

Wow, sure sounds like we need to switch to a Canadian-style, nationalized health care system, and right away!

Or maybe not: "the chairman" cited above is actually considered the "the father of Quebec medicare," the system on which Canadian health care is based. And he made those remarks recently, adding "(w)e thought we could resolve the system's problems by rationing services or injecting massive amounts of new money into it," and proposing a much greater role for private health care for our Neighbors to the North©. In fact, he's "proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice."

And poor Mrs de Vires? Well, she's from Ontario, and because the Canadian system wouldn't approve treatment for her, she took a little trip down to Michigan. There, a surgeon successfully removed her tumor, and none too soon: the surgeon estimated that "she could not have lived longer than a few weeks more."

And you may be wondering about the folks being "stored" in ambulances. In Britain, it has become commonplace for acute care patients to have long waits before being seen, much less treated. So the Ministry of Health promulgated a new rule requiring that those in need of emergency care receive it inside four hours. All well and good in theory, but the Law of Unintended Consequences trumps a mere gummint regulation, and so hospitals refused to allow the patients inside; that four hour meter didn't start ticking until they hit the actual door.

I'll give "the father of Quebec medicare" the last word on this:

"We are proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice."

[Hat Tip: RWN]

Read More

Cavalcade of Risk #55: Submissions Due

Our friend Jay Norris hosts next week's Independence Day edition of the Cavalcade of Risk. Submissions are due by next Monday (June 30th), and Jay requests that you include:

■ Your blog's url
■ Your post's url
■ The post's trackback URL (if available)
■ A (brief) summary of the post

You can submit your post via Blog Carnival or email.

We're scheduling late summer, so please drop us a line to reserve your Cav.

Read More

Cavalcade of Risk #55: Submissions Due

Our friend Jay Norris hosts next week's Independence Day edition of the Cavalcade of Risk. Submissions are due by next Monday (June 30th), and Jay requests that you include:

■ Your blog's url
■ Your post's url
■ The post's trackback URL (if available)
■ A (brief) summary of the post

You can submit your post via Blog Carnival or email.

We're scheduling late summer, so please drop us a line to reserve your Cav.

Read More

UHC in the (Bad) News

[Welcome Industry Radar readers!]

Well, it must have seemed like a good idea at the time:

"Weeks before the deal was signed, UnitedHealthcare sent 176,000 letters to customers. Many of the letters incorrectly warned people that their doctors would be out of network."

Ooops.

At the time, UHC was in the midst of negotiations with super-sized health care provider OhioHealth. Since doc's like nothing more than to field calls from irate patients, the thinking must have been along the lines of "hey, let's rile up our customer-base, and point them at their own doctors and hospitals." It was probably considered to be a no-lose situation: "hey, we're just the poor ol' insurance company, looking to save our policyholders a few bucks. What y'all do with this information is strictly up to you."

Unfortunately (for UHC, at least), it didn't work out quite that way:

"The investigation was sparked by those complaints and media attention, as well as the fact that UnitedHealthcare is one of the health plans offered to state employees."

Gotta love that last: given that at least a few of their policyholders would almost have to be DOI employees, one would have thought that UHC might have been more, um, circumspect about the whole thing.

The issue will boil down to whether or not any laws or regulations were broken by this perhaps ill-advised venture; it calls to mind the Anthem vs Premier kerfluffle a couple of summers back. Regardless, "investigating" doesn't mean "found guilty." It may well be (and I suspect that it will be) that nothing will come of this.

We'll keep you posted.

[Hat Tip: IB reader Jeff Milne]

Read More

UHC in the (Bad) News

[Welcome Industry Radar readers!]

Well, it must have seemed like a good idea at the time:

"Weeks before the deal was signed, UnitedHealthcare sent 176,000 letters to customers. Many of the letters incorrectly warned people that their doctors would be out of network."

Ooops.

At the time, UHC was in the midst of negotiations with super-sized health care provider OhioHealth. Since doc's like nothing more than to field calls from irate patients, the thinking must have been along the lines of "hey, let's rile up our customer-base, and point them at their own doctors and hospitals." It was probably considered to be a no-lose situation: "hey, we're just the poor ol' insurance company, looking to save our policyholders a few bucks. What y'all do with this information is strictly up to you."

Unfortunately (for UHC, at least), it didn't work out quite that way:

"The investigation was sparked by those complaints and media attention, as well as the fact that UnitedHealthcare is one of the health plans offered to state employees."

Gotta love that last: given that at least a few of their policyholders would almost have to be DOI employees, one would have thought that UHC might have been more, um, circumspect about the whole thing.

The issue will boil down to whether or not any laws or regulations were broken by this perhaps ill-advised venture; it calls to mind the Anthem vs Premier kerfluffle a couple of summers back. Regardless, "investigating" doesn't mean "found guilty." It may well be (and I suspect that it will be) that nothing will come of this.

We'll keep you posted.

[Hat Tip: IB reader Jeff Milne]

Read More

Patient Care: Something New Under the Sun?

Consumer-centric health care begins with (what else?) the consumer. On an obvious level, this means choosing the right health insurance plan, knowing its benefits and limitations, and being aware of how it works best. It also means keeping the line of communication between yourself and your providers (doctors, pharmacists, specialists, etc) open, and not being afraid to ask a lot of questions.

But sometimes, the world of health care can be a frustrating set of numbers, codes and phone numbers (and even, sometimes, actual human beings). Wouldn't it be nice to have someone on your side who knows how to navigate the maze that is health care?

That's the premise behind Assurant's new initiative: Patient Care. Well, actually, it's not Assurant's initiative per se: they're making available a "new" service called Patient Care. The company itself was started in 2001, and bills itself as "an independent advocacy company whose sole purpose is to resolve a healthcare problem or assist a member with health insurance and benefit issues." One can avail oneself of PC's services for the (ahem) "modest" fee of $1,000 (or up to $3,000 for a family).

Or, one could simply purchase a new Assurant major med plan, and it's a freebie. Not a bad deal.

This is the latest in what appears to be a wave of new "value added" services that carriers are pushing to help differentiate themselves (and their products) in an increasingly homogenous-looking market. We saw it recently in Companion Life's new "medical tourism" benefit, and I'm sure we'll see it in other forms, from other carriers, in the near future.

While I still maintain that choosing the right product design in the first place is more important than these little "gimmies," they do help with brand identification and, perhaps, as an added incentive to purchase.

Read More

Patient Care: Something New Under the Sun?

Consumer-centric health care begins with (what else?) the consumer. On an obvious level, this means choosing the right health insurance plan, knowing its benefits and limitations, and being aware of how it works best. It also means keeping the line of communication between yourself and your providers (doctors, pharmacists, specialists, etc) open, and not being afraid to ask a lot of questions.

But sometimes, the world of health care can be a frustrating set of numbers, codes and phone numbers (and even, sometimes, actual human beings). Wouldn't it be nice to have someone on your side who knows how to navigate the maze that is health care?

That's the premise behind Assurant's new initiative: Patient Care. Well, actually, it's not Assurant's initiative per se: they're making available a "new" service called Patient Care. The company itself was started in 2001, and bills itself as "an independent advocacy company whose sole purpose is to resolve a healthcare problem or assist a member with health insurance and benefit issues." One can avail oneself of PC's services for the (ahem) "modest" fee of $1,000 (or up to $3,000 for a family).

Or, one could simply purchase a new Assurant major med plan, and it's a freebie. Not a bad deal.

This is the latest in what appears to be a wave of new "value added" services that carriers are pushing to help differentiate themselves (and their products) in an increasingly homogenous-looking market. We saw it recently in Companion Life's new "medical tourism" benefit, and I'm sure we'll see it in other forms, from other carriers, in the near future.

While I still maintain that choosing the right product design in the first place is more important than these little "gimmies," they do help with brand identification and, perhaps, as an added incentive to purchase.

Read More

Health Wonk Review is up

HWR is one one my favorite "carnivals:" it appeals to my "inner geek," and I almost always discover a new (to me) health blog. This week's 'Review is particularly well done: host Jaan Sidorov adds his own "take" on most of the entries, which spices things up even more.

Some 10 years ago, when HIPAA was a newborn, my CE partner and I did the unthinkable: we actually read the whole thing (200+ pages), and developed what became our most popular class. Ray found a little nugget called the "National Provider Number" (NPI). Sounds innocuous enough, but as Dr Zagreus Ammon explains, there's a lot more than meets the eye.

Read More

Health Wonk Review is up

HWR is one one my favorite "carnivals:" it appeals to my "inner geek," and I almost always discover a new (to me) health blog. This week's 'Review is particularly well done: host Jaan Sidorov adds his own "take" on most of the entries, which spices things up even more.

Some 10 years ago, when HIPAA was a newborn, my CE partner and I did the unthinkable: we actually read the whole thing (200+ pages), and developed what became our most popular class. Ray found a little nugget called the "National Provider Number" (NPI). Sounds innocuous enough, but as Dr Zagreus Ammon explains, there's a lot more than meets the eye.

Read More

Business Insurance vs the IRS

Don't know how I missed this, but tax-blogger extraordinaire Joe Kristan has a compelling post about the tax implications of a business insurance claim. Joe explains, in easy to follow terms, why a "no brainer" may have some drastic consequences.

If you own a business, you need to read this.

Read More

Business Insurance vs the IRS

Don't know how I missed this, but tax-blogger extraordinaire Joe Kristan has a compelling post about the tax implications of a business insurance claim. Joe explains, in easy to follow terms, why a "no brainer" may have some drastic consequences.

If you own a business, you need to read this.

Read More

Much Ado About, Well, Not Much

Back in the day, now-ubiquitous TV pitch man Billy Mays introduced us to the wonders of OxyClean. I must admit, it's one of my favorite products: it's reasonably priced, and it really works. The question is, does that kind of success transfer to less tangible products, such as health insurance?

Recently, the bearded wonder became the official spokeman for something called "iCan Benefit," a website that purports to offer great deals on health insurance. They actually offer two "flavors:" a guaranteed issue, limited benefit (mini-med) plan and a "regular" (i.e. underwritten) major medical plan.

Neither is particularly special; the mini-med plan seems to have pretty much all the features of any of its ilk, and is priced accordingly. That is, it's competitive but not particularly so.

The major med plan is underwritten by Assurant, which is a very decent carrier, with good service and decent products. I haven't been especially impressed with their underwriting or pricing (although they do at least try to offer less generic products). Keep in mind, though, that this is not a group plan, which means that full underwriting applies.

What does that mean, exactly?

Simply this: you'll still need to complete a full application, disclosing your medical history, current problems and any med's you're on (or have been on recently). And Assurant can exclude conditions or med's, or even turn you down altogether. Of course, that's typical of the individual major med market, but it's important to remember that joining iCan doesn't buy you an underwriting (or pricing) break.

It does mean that you'll pay an extra association fee, though.

iCan suggests that "You can think of us like a close friend who knows all about health insurance." Not a bad pitch: after all, we often suggest that you ask friends, neighbors, and the like for a referral to a good agent. But that doesn't mean that these folks are ipso facto experts on insurance; merely that they've had good experience with a particular agent or carrier.

Bottom line: seek out a professional, independent agent with at least 5 years of relevant experience, and who represents more than just the one company.

You'll be glad you did, and it'll give you time to check out Billy's other fine products.

Read More

Much Ado About, Well, Not Much

Back in the day, now-ubiquitous TV pitch man Billy Mays introduced us to the wonders of OxyClean. I must admit, it's one of my favorite products: it's reasonably priced, and it really works. The question is, does that kind of success transfer to less tangible products, such as health insurance?

Recently, the bearded wonder became the official spokeman for something called "iCan Benefit," a website that purports to offer great deals on health insurance. They actually offer two "flavors:" a guaranteed issue, limited benefit (mini-med) plan and a "regular" (i.e. underwritten) major medical plan.

Neither is particularly special; the mini-med plan seems to have pretty much all the features of any of its ilk, and is priced accordingly. That is, it's competitive but not particularly so.

The major med plan is underwritten by Assurant, which is a very decent carrier, with good service and decent products. I haven't been especially impressed with their underwriting or pricing (although they do at least try to offer less generic products). Keep in mind, though, that this is not a group plan, which means that full underwriting applies.

What does that mean, exactly?

Simply this: you'll still need to complete a full application, disclosing your medical history, current problems and any med's you're on (or have been on recently). And Assurant can exclude conditions or med's, or even turn you down altogether. Of course, that's typical of the individual major med market, but it's important to remember that joining iCan doesn't buy you an underwriting (or pricing) break.

It does mean that you'll pay an extra association fee, though.

iCan suggests that "You can think of us like a close friend who knows all about health insurance." Not a bad pitch: after all, we often suggest that you ask friends, neighbors, and the like for a referral to a good agent. But that doesn't mean that these folks are ipso facto experts on insurance; merely that they've had good experience with a particular agent or carrier.

Bottom line: seek out a professional, independent agent with at least 5 years of relevant experience, and who represents more than just the one company.

You'll be glad you did, and it'll give you time to check out Billy's other fine products.

Read More

CDC: Sealing the Deal

Red Green touts duct tape as "The Handyman's Secret Weapon." Little does he know that the brilliant scientists of the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta have their own take on the ubiquitous adhesive:

"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has revealed a unique, high-tech use of its own – sealing off potentially fatal bioterror bacteria."

The brainiacs at the Center's Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratory, which cost over $200 million dollars (or in gummint-speak, "chump change"), have been using roll after roll of the silver stuff trying to prevent the escape of the potentially fatal "airborne Q fever."

In their defense, the scientists claim that the duct tape is merely an "enhancement;" insurance (if you will) added to bolster the containment systems already in place. Of course, we've all heard that before.

I sure hope Bob's got a roll of his own.

Read More

CDC: Sealing the Deal

Red Green touts duct tape as "The Handyman's Secret Weapon." Little does he know that the brilliant scientists of the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta have their own take on the ubiquitous adhesive:

"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has revealed a unique, high-tech use of its own – sealing off potentially fatal bioterror bacteria."

The brainiacs at the Center's Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratory, which cost over $200 million dollars (or in gummint-speak, "chump change"), have been using roll after roll of the silver stuff trying to prevent the escape of the potentially fatal "airborne Q fever."

In their defense, the scientists claim that the duct tape is merely an "enhancement;" insurance (if you will) added to bolster the containment systems already in place. Of course, we've all heard that before.

I sure hope Bob's got a roll of his own.

Read More

Oh Yeah, It CAN Happen here

Over the years, we've chronicled the reckless, often deadly exploits of the MVNHS© (Britain's Much Vaunted National Health System©). Indeed, only a few weeks ago, we reported on the tragic case of an English grandmum who was denied potentially life-saving treatment. There are those who think that such things could never happen here; we know how to balance the good of the many with the needs of the few.

Think again:

"State officials have offered a lung cancer patient the option of having the Oregon Health Plan, set up in 1994 to ration health care, pay for an assisted suicide but not for the chemotherapy prescribed by her physician."

That's right, Barbara Wagner's been offered an admittedly effective (if draconian) treatment alternative: death. Granted, this would end her suffering and save untold thousands of taxpayer-provided dollars. But does anyone else think that this might be, um, drastic?

The good news, such as it is, is that nasty ol' Big Pharma has stepped up to the plate:

"(A) drug manufacturer that it will provide the expensive medication, estimated to cost $4,000 a month, for the first year and then allow her to apply for further treatment."

And yet we're constantly told that private sector-based health care is bad, while gummint-provided care is good. Maybe in Bizarro World, but apparently not in The Beaver State.

To add insult to (grevious) injury, Dr. John Sattenspiel (senior medical director of the company that runs Oregon's health plan) averred that there was "no intent to upset her, but we do need to point out the options available to her under the Oregon Health Plan."

Gee, I feel better already.

Read More

Oh Yeah, It CAN Happen here

Over the years, we've chronicled the reckless, often deadly exploits of the MVNHS© (Britain's Much Vaunted National Health System©). Indeed, only a few weeks ago, we reported on the tragic case of an English grandmum who was denied potentially life-saving treatment. There are those who think that such things could never happen here; we know how to balance the good of the many with the needs of the few.

Think again:

"State officials have offered a lung cancer patient the option of having the Oregon Health Plan, set up in 1994 to ration health care, pay for an assisted suicide but not for the chemotherapy prescribed by her physician."

That's right, Barbara Wagner's been offered an admittedly effective (if draconian) treatment alternative: death. Granted, this would end her suffering and save untold thousands of taxpayer-provided dollars. But does anyone else think that this might be, um, drastic?

The good news, such as it is, is that nasty ol' Big Pharma has stepped up to the plate:

"(A) drug manufacturer that it will provide the expensive medication, estimated to cost $4,000 a month, for the first year and then allow her to apply for further treatment."

And yet we're constantly told that private sector-based health care is bad, while gummint-provided care is good. Maybe in Bizarro World, but apparently not in The Beaver State.

To add insult to (grevious) injury, Dr. John Sattenspiel (senior medical director of the company that runs Oregon's health plan) averred that there was "no intent to upset her, but we do need to point out the options available to her under the Oregon Health Plan."

Gee, I feel better already.

Read More

Grand Rounds: Hold the Phone edition

The fine folks at Shrink Rap answered the call to host this week's roundup of the best med-posts.

Literally.

This is truly a "grand" 'Rounds, built around the recent introduction of the new iPhone. It's really fun, and each entry relates in some way to the new gizmo. Kudos!

Here's something new: "mystery patients." We've all heard of "mystery shoppers" who help retail stores keep sales staff on their toes. The Samurai Radiologist reports that it's happening in health care, too.

Read More

Grand Rounds: Hold the Phone edition

The fine folks at Shrink Rap answered the call to host this week's roundup of the best med-posts.

Literally.

This is truly a "grand" 'Rounds, built around the recent introduction of the new iPhone. It's really fun, and each entry relates in some way to the new gizmo. Kudos!

Here's something new: "mystery patients." We've all heard of "mystery shoppers" who help retail stores keep sales staff on their toes. The Samurai Radiologist reports that it's happening in health care, too.

Read More

George Carlin: An Insurance Connection

Over 25 years ago, my first job in the insurance biz was as an agent with one of the few remaining "debit" companies.

[ed: many years ago, a lot of companies sold (relatively small) policies with premiums collected weekly. Agents were assigned a territory, or "debit," from which to collect and, hopefully, make new sales. I'm not aware of any carriers which still do this, although one might argue that payroll deduction, or "worksite marketing," plans are the natural evolution of this market]

My debit included a relatively affluent area, and a high-rise apartment building wherein lived a number of retirees. One evening, as I sat in the apartment of one such couple, they asked me if I enjoyed stand-up comedy. I replied that I did, and they told me that their daughter was married to a stand-up comedian, and perhaps I'd heard of him. At the time, HBO had a series of "specials" highlighting new talent, and I thought that maybe they'd mention one that I'd seen. So I innocently asked "which one?" The lady of the house replied almost apologetically (perhaps thinking that I'd never heard of her son-in-law), "well, our daughter is married to a comic named George Carlin. Have you ever heard of him?"

Of course, my jaw nearly broke as it hit the floor. Had I ever heard of George Carlin?! I'd basically grown up (so to speak) on his humor. I had had no idea that there was a hometown connection, let alone that I'd be sitting in his in-laws' living room. Mrs Hosbrook asked if I'd like one of his albums (they had "a few" laying around), and I said "oh, sure!" It turned out to be an autographed copy of (if I recall correctly) "Class Clown." What a treasure!

I left that carrier some 24 years ago, and lost touch with the delightful couple. But I never parted with the album (although I currently have no turntable on which to play it), and always felt a connection (feeble though it may have been) with the comic legend.

G'bye, Al Sleet and company!

Read More

George Carlin: An Insurance Connection

Over 25 years ago, my first job in the insurance biz was as an agent with one of the few remaining "debit" companies.

[ed: many years ago, a lot of companies sold (relatively small) policies with premiums collected weekly. Agents were assigned a territory, or "debit," from which to collect and, hopefully, make new sales. I'm not aware of any carriers which still do this, although one might argue that payroll deduction, or "worksite marketing," plans are the natural evolution of this market]

My debit included a relatively affluent area, and a high-rise apartment building wherein lived a number of retirees. One evening, as I sat in the apartment of one such couple, they asked me if I enjoyed stand-up comedy. I replied that I did, and they told me that their daughter was married to a stand-up comedian, and perhaps I'd heard of him. At the time, HBO had a series of "specials" highlighting new talent, and I thought that maybe they'd mention one that I'd seen. So I innocently asked "which one?" The lady of the house replied almost apologetically (perhaps thinking that I'd never heard of her son-in-law), "well, our daughter is married to a comic named George Carlin. Have you ever heard of him?"

Of course, my jaw nearly broke as it hit the floor. Had I ever heard of George Carlin?! I'd basically grown up (so to speak) on his humor. I had had no idea that there was a hometown connection, let alone that I'd be sitting in his in-laws' living room. Mrs Hosbrook asked if I'd like one of his albums (they had "a few" laying around), and I said "oh, sure!" It turned out to be an autographed copy of (if I recall correctly) "Class Clown." What a treasure!

I left that carrier some 24 years ago, and lost touch with the delightful couple. But I never parted with the album (although I currently have no turntable on which to play it), and always felt a connection (feeble though it may have been) with the comic legend.

G'bye, Al Sleet and company!

Read More

Carnival of Personal Finance is up!

This week's collection of all things finance is hosted by Mrs Micah. Mrs M presents a veritable smorgasbord of interesting posts, all with helpful context.

Check it out.

Read More

Carnival of Personal Finance is up!

This week's collection of all things finance is hosted by Mrs Micah. Mrs M presents a veritable smorgasbord of interesting posts, all with helpful context.

Check it out.

Read More

IRS and HSA: Good News Update

[Welcome Kaiser Network readers!]

According to the NAABC, the Internal Revenue Service recently issued two positive items on HSAs:

First, many people aren't aware that you can fund your HSA (Health Savings Account) with money you have socked away in an IRA (regular and/or decaf, er, Roth). This is a one time deal, not something you can do on a regular basis. According to the Service, if you decide to make the transfer, it won't be subject to the normal 10% penalty s a "distribution." This method is typically used to "seed" the account at start-up.

Good deal.

And it gets better:

The Health Opportunity Patient Empowerment Act of 2006 clarified (among other things) how one calculates one's maximum HSA contribution in a given year. Basically, it affirms that the amount you can contribute isn't necessarily limited to your deductible. Even if your plan's deductible is less than the max, you can contribute the maximum.

Sweet.

And finally, for those who actually received their "Stimulus" checks (and you know who you are), even more good news:

If your check was deposited directly into your HSA, you can safely withdraw it. This would apply to folks who had their regular tax rebates deposited directly to their HSAs.

As always, check with your own tax advisor to see whether (and how) this would affect you.

Read More

IRS and HSA: Good News Update

[Welcome Kaiser Network readers!]

According to the NAABC, the Internal Revenue Service recently issued two positive items on HSAs:

First, many people aren't aware that you can fund your HSA (Health Savings Account) with money you have socked away in an IRA (regular and/or decaf, er, Roth). This is a one time deal, not something you can do on a regular basis. According to the Service, if you decide to make the transfer, it won't be subject to the normal 10% penalty s a "distribution." This method is typically used to "seed" the account at start-up.

Good deal.

And it gets better:

The Health Opportunity Patient Empowerment Act of 2006 clarified (among other things) how one calculates one's maximum HSA contribution in a given year. Basically, it affirms that the amount you can contribute isn't necessarily limited to your deductible. Even if your plan's deductible is less than the max, you can contribute the maximum.

Sweet.

And finally, for those who actually received their "Stimulus" checks (and you know who you are), even more good news:

If your check was deposited directly into your HSA, you can safely withdraw it. This would apply to folks who had their regular tax rebates deposited directly to their HSAs.

As always, check with your own tax advisor to see whether (and how) this would affect you.

Read More

Interesting Cancer News

What if you had the power to cure cancer, your own cancer, already inside you? That's the promise of a new treatment protocol recently unveiled Across the Pond:

"A cancer patient has made a full recovery after being injected with billions of his own immune cells in the first case of its kind, doctors have disclosed."

Regular IB readers may be wondering if this could possibly be the work of the MVNHS©. Sadly, no:

"Ed Yong, health information manager at Cancer Research UK, said: "It's very exciting to see a cancer patient being successfully treated using immune cells cloned from his own body."

The bad news is that, at this early stage, the treatment is quite expensive, and is likely to remain so for a while. This makes sense: new tech R&D is generally expensive. As it becomes more widespread and economies of scale come into play, costs tend to decline.

The major difference between this technique and earlier regemins is that it shows that "simply growing vast numbers of the few immune cells in the body to attack a cancer can be safe and effective."

Sounds promising.

Read More

Interesting Cancer News

What if you had the power to cure cancer, your own cancer, already inside you? That's the promise of a new treatment protocol recently unveiled Across the Pond:

"A cancer patient has made a full recovery after being injected with billions of his own immune cells in the first case of its kind, doctors have disclosed."

Regular IB readers may be wondering if this could possibly be the work of the MVNHS©. Sadly, no:

"Ed Yong, health information manager at Cancer Research UK, said: "It's very exciting to see a cancer patient being successfully treated using immune cells cloned from his own body."

The bad news is that, at this early stage, the treatment is quite expensive, and is likely to remain so for a while. This makes sense: new tech R&D is generally expensive. As it becomes more widespread and economies of scale come into play, costs tend to decline.

The major difference between this technique and earlier regemins is that it shows that "simply growing vast numbers of the few immune cells in the body to attack a cancer can be safe and effective."

Sounds promising.

Read More

But I Want to Pay More . . .

[Welcome Industry Radar readers!]

An odd thing happened a few days ago. A new client asked if they could pay more than the quoted premium.

"Well, sure . . . but why would you want to?"

First a little background information.

My client is actually a parent looking for coverage for his son. Currently his son has half a policy and is paying an outrageous amount.

The policy only covers hospitalization, no outpatient coverage at all. While many believe the hospital bill will kill your finances, it is what happens outside the hospital, and after you are discharged that usually is an amount equal to what you paid the hospital.

The dad asked for a high deductible, "bare bones" kind of plan. I ran the numbers and suggested a plan for $48 per month.

A very simple plan, true "bare bones" that is more than adequate for the large claim. In network claims up to $5,000 are discounted up to 70% and apply toward the deductible. Claims over the deductible are also discounted but paid in full by the carrier.

The most the insured will pay in any one year is $5,000.

All this for less than $600 per year.

That's pretty amazing if you ask me.

I sent the proposal over for review and added my comments and suggestions. A few days later his dad asked if he could pay more and get a lower deductible.

Dad figured if the big claim were to hit he would be the bank for the amount up to the deductible.

"Well, yes, you can pay more but you don't really get more."

This always throws people off. They think if you pay more you get more.

With most items this is true.

For $6 you get a salad. For another $8 you get an appetizer. Add another $20 and you get an entree.

Not so with health insurance.

For $62 (instead of $48) he can get the same plan as originally quoted but with a $3,000 deductible.

That is the point of diminishing returns. Anything over that is throwing your money away.

He can buy a plan with a $2500 deductible and $35 office copays for $101. But when a big claim hit's his OOP (out of pocket) is $4500 plus copays.

He can also buy a plan with a $1000 deductible and copays for $166 and his OOP on a big claim is $3000 + copays.

Or he can buy a $0 deductible plan for $236 and limit his out of pocket on a major claim to $500 + copays.

So in reality the $62 plan is the best buy.

But consumers don't want to believe that, so they end up paying more than is necessary and then complain about the high cost of health insurance.

At my suggestion he bought the $62 plan and pocketed the $100 in extra premium he would have paid if he had never contacted me.

To my way of thinking, an extra $100 per month will almost cover the increased cost of gas and groceries.

Paying more is just silly.

Read More

But I Want to Pay More . . .

[Welcome Industry Radar readers!]

An odd thing happened a few days ago. A new client asked if they could pay more than the quoted premium.

"Well, sure . . . but why would you want to?"

First a little background information.

My client is actually a parent looking for coverage for his son. Currently his son has half a policy and is paying an outrageous amount.

The policy only covers hospitalization, no outpatient coverage at all. While many believe the hospital bill will kill your finances, it is what happens outside the hospital, and after you are discharged that usually is an amount equal to what you paid the hospital.

The dad asked for a high deductible, "bare bones" kind of plan. I ran the numbers and suggested a plan for $48 per month.

A very simple plan, true "bare bones" that is more than adequate for the large claim. In network claims up to $5,000 are discounted up to 70% and apply toward the deductible. Claims over the deductible are also discounted but paid in full by the carrier.

The most the insured will pay in any one year is $5,000.

All this for less than $600 per year.

That's pretty amazing if you ask me.

I sent the proposal over for review and added my comments and suggestions. A few days later his dad asked if he could pay more and get a lower deductible.

Dad figured if the big claim were to hit he would be the bank for the amount up to the deductible.

"Well, yes, you can pay more but you don't really get more."

This always throws people off. They think if you pay more you get more.

With most items this is true.

For $6 you get a salad. For another $8 you get an appetizer. Add another $20 and you get an entree.

Not so with health insurance.

For $62 (instead of $48) he can get the same plan as originally quoted but with a $3,000 deductible.

That is the point of diminishing returns. Anything over that is throwing your money away.

He can buy a plan with a $2500 deductible and $35 office copays for $101. But when a big claim hit's his OOP (out of pocket) is $4500 plus copays.

He can also buy a plan with a $1000 deductible and copays for $166 and his OOP on a big claim is $3000 + copays.

Or he can buy a $0 deductible plan for $236 and limit his out of pocket on a major claim to $500 + copays.

So in reality the $62 plan is the best buy.

But consumers don't want to believe that, so they end up paying more than is necessary and then complain about the high cost of health insurance.

At my suggestion he bought the $62 plan and pocketed the $100 in extra premium he would have paid if he had never contacted me.

To my way of thinking, an extra $100 per month will almost cover the increased cost of gas and groceries.

Paying more is just silly.

Read More

Is This Really Necessary?

It's bad enough that the science is still out on the value (let alone safety) of the HPV vaccine for young ladies. So what are we to make of this:

"Now researchers are looking into whether the vaccine should be given to boys as well, both to prevent the transmission of HPV, and to prevent the rarer, but no less deadly, cancers that can occur in men from the virus."

Give. Me. A. Break.

As we've noted before, "vaccinated boys were 2.5 times more likely to have neurological disorders (such as autism) than those who had not "had all their shots." So would increasing the number of vaccines reduce cancer risks? We really don't know.

We do know that "it's not been tested for effectiveness in younger girls, and administering the vaccine to girls as young as 9 may not even protect them at all." So why would we take this chance with boys, as well?

On the one hand, it's claimed that "(t)he vaccine, Gardasil, is proven to prevent infection from four particularly dangerous strains of HPV in women." That would seem to be a "slam dunk" insofar as vaccine's effectiveness is concerned.

And yet:

"HPV prevalence is thought to be high in men as well, but none were studied."

So what's the rush?

Read More

Is This Really Necessary?

It's bad enough that the science is still out on the value (let alone safety) of the HPV vaccine for young ladies. So what are we to make of this:

"Now researchers are looking into whether the vaccine should be given to boys as well, both to prevent the transmission of HPV, and to prevent the rarer, but no less deadly, cancers that can occur in men from the virus."

Give. Me. A. Break.

As we've noted before, "vaccinated boys were 2.5 times more likely to have neurological disorders (such as autism) than those who had not "had all their shots." So would increasing the number of vaccines reduce cancer risks? We really don't know.

We do know that "it's not been tested for effectiveness in younger girls, and administering the vaccine to girls as young as 9 may not even protect them at all." So why would we take this chance with boys, as well?

On the one hand, it's claimed that "(t)he vaccine, Gardasil, is proven to prevent infection from four particularly dangerous strains of HPV in women." That would seem to be a "slam dunk" insofar as vaccine's effectiveness is concerned.

And yet:

"HPV prevalence is thought to be high in men as well, but none were studied."

So what's the rush?

Read More

Chaperone Insurance

Time once again for a brief walk on the P&C side of the insurance biz. As one who's shuttled kids back and forth to various afterschool activities, dances, practices and the like, I'm always mindful of the potential for a mishap. Thank goodness (and my personal liability unbrella) it's never been a problem for me, but that doesn't mean it can't be:

"A nearly $700,000 verdict against a chaperone of a cheerleading trip to Hawaii is enough to give a chaperone pause."

Seven hundred thousand dollars?!

For what?!

Turns out, Susanne Sadler (a New Jersey resident) offered to chaperone a cheerleaders' trip to Hawaii, where they were to perform in the Hula Bowl. Prior to that exciting opportunity, though, one of the students apparently decided it'd be a good idea to have a drink or two. She subsequently fell off a balcony and died. Ms Sadler isn't accused of giving or getting her the drink; nonetheless, she was sued and found to be at least partially responsible for the tragedy.

And now must cough up almost $700,000.

Which raises a number of questions:

Would your homeowner's liability policy cover you? What if it's over a few hundred thousand dollars?

Do you have an umbrella policy? Would it cover this kind of thing?

It's something I would never have thought to ask my co-worker (who's also my P&C agent). Until now. (For the record, he said "coverage? I've never seen you before in my life." So I've got that going for me) Seriously, ask your agent. Do it soon.

Something else to consider is whether or not the organization which sponsors such a trip has a liability policy. And it's not just an expense issue, either. According to the president of a school booster club:

"If we decided not to have any insurance, at some point a year or two from now, some parents might say they can't take the risks."

Good point.

Read More