A couple were told they faced a $200,000 (£146,500) medical bill when their baby was born prematurely in the US, despite them having travel insurance which covered her pregnancy.

  • stephen01king@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    Maybe they denied to cover them because of the ridiculously high bill, have you ever thought about that?

    Edit: It seems the cost of a normal birth in Germany is at most €7500 for a tourist with no insurance.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      Helllllo the baby was 7 weeks premature and in intensive care for 3 weeks. The cost of a normal birth is totally irrelevant. You didn’t read the article, obviously.

      I paid literally zero for either of my kids births right here in California.

      • Damage@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        My grandpa had a peacemaker installed, we received a (paid) bill for the cost of the operation (idk why or how, but I remember my mother showing it to me), it was 36k€. Sure the stay was shorter, but it’s also heart surgery on a frail patient with lots of other issues.

      • stephen01king@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        According to this study, the mean total cost of NICU in the UK for preterm babies at 31 weeks gestation is £27,401 and tourists should get charged the same if I’m reading this correctly.

        So no, not even close to $200,000 or even the €100,000 you pulled out of thin air. Clearly this is reason enough to believe the cost of the healthcare in the US is what made the insurance company try to avoid paying. I don’t know why you’re defending the healthcare cost in the US without even doing a bit of research of how it normally is in Europe where the couple and the insurance company comes from.