Man refuses Obama care, now going blind. Blames Obama

[mr friendly guy]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/b ... 96283.html

Who should save sight of SC man who can’t afford surgery?

By Ann Doss Helms

ahelms@charlotteobserver.com



Tweet
LinkedInGoogle+PinterestRedditPrintOrder Reprint of this Story To start a lively discussion of America’s health care system, let’s consider who’s responsible for saving the sight of Luis Lang.

Lang, a 49-year-old resident of Fort Mill, S.C., has bleeding in his eyes and a partially detached retina caused by diabetes.

Dr. Malcolm Edwards | The Eye & Laser Center

“He will lose his eyesight if he doesn’t get care. He will go blind,” said Dr. Malcolm Edwards, the Lancaster ophthalmologist who examined Lang.

Lang is a self-employed handyman who works with banks and the federal government on maintaining foreclosed properties. He has done well enough that his wife, Mary, hasn’t had to work. They live in a 3,300-square-foot home in the Legacy Park subdivision valued at more than $300,000.

But he has never bought insurance. Instead, he says, he prided himself on paying his own medical bills.

That worked while he and his wife were relatively healthy. But after 10 days of an unrelenting headache, Lang went to the emergency room on Feb. 25. He says he was told he’d suffered several ministrokes. He ran up $9,000 in bills and exhausted his savings. Meanwhile, his vision worsened, and he can’t work, he says.

That’s when he turned to the Affordable Care Act exchange. Lang learned two things: First, 2015 enrollment had closed earlier that month. And second, because his income has dried up, he earns too little to get a federal subsidy to buy a private policy.

Lang, a Republican, says he knew the act required him to get coverage, but he chose not to do so. But he thought help would be available in an emergency. He and his wife blame President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats for passing a complex and flawed bill.

“(My husband) should be at the front of the line, because he doesn’t work and because he has medical issues,” Mary Lang said last week. “We call it the Not Fair Health Care Act.”

Anyone who’s remotely familiar with insurance knows there’s no system that lets people skip payments while they’re healthy and cash in when they get sick. Public systems tax everyone. Private ones rely on the premiums of the well to cover the costs of those who are ailing.

And Democrats might point out that the ACA was designed to provide Medicaid coverage for people whose income falls below the poverty line. The federal government pays 100 percent of the ACA expansion to cover low-income, able-bodied adults, but 21 Republican-led states, including North Carolina and South Carolina, declined to participate.

For now, Lang qualifies only for a South Carolina Medicaid plan that covers checkups and family planning. The aged (65 and older), blind and disabled get more extensive coverage. Lang says he hasn’t applied for Social Security disability benefits because it takes too long.

The S.C. Department of Health and Human Services is still reviewing whether he might qualify through a vocational rehabilitation program. If so – and if he can find a surgeon who takes Medicaid – South Carolina taxpayers will share the cost with the federal government.

Last week, Lang went back to Dr. Edwards, who had previously provided injections to control the bleeding in his eyes at a discounted rate. That’s when he learned that his problem had worsened, including the detached retina.

“He’s in a very bad situation,” Edwards said after Lang signed a privacy release. “The longer he waits, the poorer his results will be.”

Edwards said he would provide care at no cost, but Lang now requires surgery and follow-up treatment that is beyond his expertise. His Eye & Laser Center has a network of specialists who work on a sliding scale and organizations that sometimes help with donations. But Lang requires such extensive and ongoing work that there’s no way to guarantee there won’t be significant bills, Edwards said.

Lang says he has called charities that work with diabetes and blindness, but he doesn’t seem to fit anyone’s cause. “I’m either too young or too old,” said Lang, who has launched a GoFundMe.com page in hopes of garnering donations.

There’s a lot of talk about personal responsibility in health care reform, so it’s probably fair to note that Lang is a smoker who has, by his own account, been inconsistent in his efforts to control his diabetes. Edwards says it’s not uncommon to see patients who don’t take the treatment regimen seriously until they’re facing major problems. Bleeding in the blood vessels of the eyes often foretells similar problems with the kidneys and feet, he said.

When I started covering health care last summer, Newsday columnist Lane Filler wrote a column that was striking in its candor. He argued for employers to get out of the health insurance business, shift the money they spend on premiums into employee wages and give everyone the freedom to decide whether they’ll spend it on insurance.

“If I were just free, I could buy no health insurance, instead banking the money to pay medical bills as they came due,” Filler wrote. “But ‘just free’ societies must have onerous consequences for the imprudent and the unlucky. If we want to be allowed to buy health insurance or not, we must be willing to let folks who choose wrong be bankrupted by medical bills. Worse, we must be willing to let them die for lack of care, and listen to them wail from the gutters.”

That kind of argument can be easy to defend in an intellectual debate and hard to hold on to when you’re face to face with someone who’s going to die – or go blind – when they could be saved.

On the other side, you have single-payer advocates who say it’s time to stop arguing over who deserves to be denied coverage or care. Instead, they say, it’s time to treat health care like fire and police protection: Tax everyone and provide the aid when it’s needed.

Lang’s story drew national attention after it was posted on charlotteobserver.com Tuesday morning. Liberal bloggers across the country blasted him for blaming Obama for problems created by his own actions and South Carolina legislators. His fundraising page, which had gotten no donations in the first 24 days, raised more than $2,000 in the first 11 hours after the post went online. Most of it was small amounts from self-identified liberals and ACA supporters, who urged him to change his views.

“You’re a poster child for what you claim to be against, and like most of the donors here, I don’t believe ANYone deserves to suffer without proper medical care,” wrote Andrew Knight, who gave $5. “I wish you all the best. I hope you’ll come to see ACA and healthcare for all as a basic right.”

A staffer with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services emailed the Observer to say Lang’s case had been “discussed here in DC at a fairly high level” in hopes of finding a solution. If the family income were to rise above the poverty level ($15,730 for a couple), he could qualify for special enrollment, the staffer said.

For Lang’s doctor, the overwhelming feeling is frustration at knowing that one of his patients could lose his sight for lack of a way to pay for care that’s readily available in modern American society.

“That’s probably the worst thing that can happen to someone outside of death,” Edwards said. And he added that if Lang doesn’t get help now, he’s likely to end up dependent on the government: “It’s extremely costly to let a person go blind.”

I might have more sympathy for this guy if he admitted he was wrong, instead of trying to blame Obama for this one.

[His Divine Shadow]

Fair, since when does someone voting republican think of the fair word as anything but a disgusting curse?

[salm]

Do I understand this correctly: If a family earns more than 15,730 dollars you can get discounted health care. If the family earns less you get nothing?

I don´t really see why anybody would give this fuck nut money via a fundraiser page. He´s got a wife that could get a job, even if it´s just burger flipping in order to have an income above 15730 dollars and he´s got a valuable house to sell. He has financial options to avoid blindness.
Plenty of other people who need medical assistance do not have these options and any money wasted on this assholes fundraiser would be spent a lot better on these people.

[Korvan]

Do I understand this correctly: If a family earns more than 15,730 dollars you can get discounted health care. If the family earns less you get nothing?

If I understand the situation (and I probably don't), there are programs for those earning less than $15,730, but the guy's state opted out of them.

[salm]

Do I understand this correctly: If a family earns more than 15,730 dollars you can get discounted health care. If the family earns less you get nothing?

If I understand the situation (and I probably don't), there are programs for those earning less than $15,730, but the guy's state opted out of them.

Yeah, that´s how I understood it as well. Seems really grotesque.

[Lost Soal]

Do I understand this correctly: If a family earns more than 15,730 dollars you can get discounted health care. If the family earns less you get nothing?

If I understand correctly, thats because he should be covered under Medicaid but because his state is run by ideologues the Republican Governor has opted out of the expansion which would have covered him. So naturally, its Obama's fault

[Flagg]

South Carolina man should move to New York or Massachusetts, or any other state that has the Medicaid expansion to cover people like him, but he won't because he's a stupid asshole.. So better Idea! Suffer the consequences and stay in South Carolina and go blind, since you almost certainly voted for the stupid bitch who thinks "ideology before the healthcare needs of my states' citizens is just swell and how it should be! So fuck you Obama! I won't take the billions in free money to set up a Medicaid expansion that will guarantee healthcare to people like this asshole Carolinian who deserves to suffer the consequences of his ballot."

I wish I could say that, I really do. But voting for the wrong person because you are a stupid ex-Dixiecrat, current Republican, and have an IQ of 57 doesn't mean you should go blind. I just think it's sad, because I'm sure the charities are either tapped out or damned close to it, so this dumb motherfucker better get as many sunsets in as he can.

[Soontir C'boath]

If he somehow doesn't obtain insurance, he may have to pay the penalty as well next year for not having it. His home is valued at more than three hundred grand. He should sell it and find a place to rent.

There’s a lot of talk about personal responsibility in health care reform, so it’s probably fair to note that Lang is a smoker who has, by his own account, been inconsistent in his efforts to control his diabetes.

Looks like he only has himself to blame.

Do I understand this correctly: If a family earns more than 15,730 dollars you can get discounted health care. If the family earns less you get nothing?

I don´t really see why anybody would give this fuck nut money via a fundraiser page. He´s got a wife that could get a job, even if it´s just burger flipping in order to have an income above 15730 dollars and he´s got a valuable house to sell. He has financial options to avoid blindness.
Plenty of other people who need medical assistance do not have these options and any money wasted on this assholes fundraiser would be spent a lot better on these people.

It should be noted that he is on Medicaid, but it is a limited form and doesn't cover what he needs. What he needs to do is apply for SSI and hope they consider him disable so he can get on a better plan.

For now, Lang qualifies only for a South Carolina Medicaid plan that covers checkups and family planning. The aged (65 and older), blind and disabled get more extensive coverage. Lang says he hasn’t applied for Social Security disability benefits because it takes too long.

But, not applying for SSI because it takes too long? Get the fuck outta here! He's going blind with no steady source of income. What a dick.

[Soontir C'boath]

After edit window ended post: Since I realized he does have Medicaid, he doesn't have to pay the penalty.

[Eternal_Freedom]

This bit here:

"Lang, a Republican, says he knew the act required him to get coverage, but he chose not to do so. But he thought help would be available in an emergency."

That says it all really. If i were anything other than this condition, or a terminal one, I would laugh so hard I'd fall off my chair. As it is an eye condition which I'm quite sensitive about, I'll just snigger quietly.

[slebetman]

This part specifically:

"But he thought help would be available in an emergency."

Isn't this called Universal Health Care? Wasn't universal coverage one of those things that Republicans campaigned to exclude from Obamacare? If I remember correctly they called it the Death Panel.

So technically he is correct, it is Obama's fault... for conceding to Republican demands .

He would have been covered in countries with universal health care like the UK - he'd have to wait in a queue though, which if I recall was another one of the things Republicans complained about: having to wait in queues.

[Raw Shark]

Having to wait in queues is for poor people. Rich Republican overlords will still be able to buy priority medical service under the new world order; despite their dishonest mewling to the contrary; they only object to being denied premium insurance for free when others get basic service on the public dime, which is, by any definition I am familiar with, classic bitch / asshole behavior.

[TheFeniX]

Lang is a self-employed handyman who works with banks and the federal government on maintaining foreclosed properties. He has done well enough that his wife, Mary, hasn’t had to work. They live in a 3,300-square-foot home in the Legacy Park subdivision valued at more than $300,000.

But he has never bought insurance. Instead, he says, he prided himself on paying his own medical bills.

This is so incredibly dumb. My dad is self-employed and at the age of 10 I knew how stupid an idea this was. Even having insurance isn't a catch-all because a self-employed person has to not only worry about having uninsured medical expenses wipe out their saving, but not being able to work will also wipe out said savings.

This came to a head when my dad broke his leg on his motorcycle. The absolute worst case scenario for our family was him ending up incapacitated in some form. Dieing (at least for his family) would be the more preferable consequence because he has a pretty badass life insurance policy. My mom shamed him into not using the insurance money to buy another bike with this information.

People honestly believe medical expense are like "one big hit, then you recover" ignoring that chronic conditions are a sure-fire way to end up in the poor house. So the whole "I don't want your expenses on my dime" is just as dumb because they reach a point where they qualify to use a system they then can't pay into because their condition deteriorated so much: they can't work at all.

People obviously get sick because they are terrible. That's the real answer.

[Ralin]

This part specifically:

"But he thought help would be available in an emergency."

Isn't this called Universal Health Care? Wasn't universal coverage one of those things that Republicans campaigned to exclude from Obamacare? If I remember correctly they called it the Death Panel.

I think that means "Literally walk into an emergency room and they have to provide treatment until you're not in immediate danger."

The American health insurance cartel does manage to combine the worst of all possible worlds

[His Divine Shadow]

People obviously get sick because they are terrible. That's the real answer.

Well that seems true in th is case.

[TheFeniX]

People obviously get sick because they are terrible. That's the real answer.

Well that seems true in th is case.

I've heard the same argument used against people without means to help themselves. One in particular was a conversation with a coworker who was complaining that one of his daughter's middle-school friends was a diabetic due to obesity and was getting "free" healthcare.

Ignoring her mom worked two jobs because the father was disabled and was making so little as to qualify for Medicaid. Ignoring that the mother didn't have time or energy for home-cook meals, so they ate fast-food all the time. All information provided by my coworker (through his daughter) came down to "a young-girl and overworked mom should be more responsible: I shouldn't have to pay for that." It doesn't even matter if the story is true: his opinions on the information provided made him an asshole.

It's like when assholes complain about "junk food" (read: what they don't think poor people should be eating) being bought with food stamps when you can get upwards of 4 times the calories than you can with healthier food that can spoil. They do this because they feel morally superior and if these people just weren't so fucking terrible: they'd be awesome like the rest of us.

[Geodd]

People obviously get sick because they are terrible. That's the real answer.

Well that seems true in th is case.

I've heard the same argument used against people without means to help themselves. One in particular was a conversation with a coworker who was complaining that one of his daughter's middle-school friends was a diabetic due to obesity and was getting "free" healthcare.

Ignoring her mom worked two jobs because the father was disabled and was making so little as to qualify for Medicaid. Ignoring that the mother didn't have time or energy for home-cook meals, so they ate fast-food all the time. All information provided by my coworker (through his daughter) came down to "a young-girl and overworked mom should be more responsible: I shouldn't have to pay for that." It doesn't even matter if the story is true: his opinions on the information provided made him an asshole.

It's like when assholes complain about "junk food" (read: what they don't think poor people should be eating) being bought with food stamps when you can get upwards of 4 times the calories than you can with healthier food that can spoil. They do this because they feel morally superior and if these people just weren't so fucking terrible: they'd be awesome like the rest of us.

Not to mention, middle school? Odds are that's type 1 diabetes, to avoid that she'd need a time-traveling bullet filled with some sort of magical genotherapy.

[Napoleon the Clown]

I think it's important to note that the article mentions the guy has diabetes that he didn't care for properly.

So he has a chronic condition that is widely known to put you at higher risk of several health problems that aren't immediately life-threatening, he doesn't keep on top of it like he should, and then he neglects to get health insurance. He doesn't deserve to go blind, but this is a case where he's the reason this even happened. If he'd stayed on top of his diabetes, the risk of vision problems would be substantially lower. He likely wouldn't be having such a severe problem right now. If he'd signed up for health insurance, he'd be less financially fucked by getting treatment. But he did two really stupid things. Someone with a chronic health condition like diabetes is far, far more likely to need health insurance down the road than someone with no major health problems.

Hopefully he can find a way to get treatment before he loses his sight completely, but he quite honestly has nobody to blame but himself.

[Lord MJ]

I thought he would still have the option to purchase private insurance even though he won't get subsidies.

Does the "No Denial for Pre-Existing Conditions" only apply to plans purchased via the exchange?

[Gaidin]

I thought he would still have the option to purchase private insurance even though he won't get subsidies.

Does the "No Denial for Pre-Existing Conditions" only apply to plans purchased via the exchange?

IIRC that came in a year or so before the exchanges, although I can't remember the schedule very well. His biggest difficulty would basically be the administrivia between the treatment plan and the insurance plan, and getting the insurance plan to fully accept the treatment plan as sometimes there's a "No try this first" hoop depending on what you're dealing with. Though based on what he's dealing with I have my doubts it would really apply. Of course, the question remains, with his lack of experience, would he know which "level" of plan to buy to be able to cover this so easily?

[Broomstick]

First, a few comments on the article in the OP:

To start a lively discussion of America’s health care system, let’s consider who’s responsible for saving the sight of Luis Lang.

Lang, a 49-year-old resident of Fort Mill, S.C., has bleeding in his eyes and a partially detached retina caused by diabetes.

Let's start with who is responsible for the health of an adult human being. That sort of complication is usually indicative of neglected diabetes, diabetes not properly treated for years.

Lang is a self-employed handyman who works with banks and the federal government on maintaining foreclosed properties. He has done well enough that his wife, Mary, hasn’t had to work. They live in a 3,300-square-foot home in the Legacy Park subdivision valued at more than $300,000.

Oh, so they have an asset. He can use the equity in that home to finance surgery. Is that what a responsible, rugged individual should do under the Republican approach to things?

But he has never bought insurance. Instead, he says, he prided himself on paying his own medical bills.

Given how things turned out, I have to wonder if he ever spent any money on preventive care, or only went to the see the doc if something sudden and acute came up?

That worked while he and his wife were relatively healthy. But after 10 days of an unrelenting headache, Lang went to the emergency room on Feb. 25. He says he was told he’d suffered several ministrokes. He ran up $9,000 in bills and exhausted his savings. Meanwhile, his vision worsened, and he can’t work, he says.

:::: groan ::::

$9k in savings is nothing when it comes to major medical costs. That's why health insurance is so damn important. That's why universal coverage is better than the jacked-up system the US currently has.

That’s when he turned to the Affordable Care Act exchange. Lang learned two things: First, 2015 enrollment had closed earlier that month. And second, because his income has dried up, he earns too little to get a federal subsidy to buy a private policy.

Lang, a Republican, says he knew the act required him to get coverage, but he chose not to do so.

In other words, he drank the Republican Kool-Aid and voted in something that was actually against his long-term interests. THEN he failed to obey the law which required him to get insured anyway.

But he thought help would be available in an emergency.

Yes. If your life is in imminent danger you will be provided whatever care is required to stablize you and get you out of that danger. THAT IS ALL. Your LIFE will be preserved. Not necessarily anything else, including your eyesight or ability to work.

“(My husband) should be at the front of the line, because he doesn’t work and because he has medical issues,” Mary Lang said last week. “We call it the Not Fair Health Care Act.”

Poor baby – you are now among those parasitic losers known as the “poor” and “unemployed” that most likely you and your husband despised in the past, voting to gut social safety nets and help for those folks. You are now reaping what you sowed.

Anyone who’s remotely familiar with insurance knows there’s no system that lets people skip payments while they’re healthy and cash in when they get sick. Public systems tax everyone. Private ones rely on the premiums of the well to cover the costs of those who are ailing.

^ This

For now, Lang qualifies only for a South Carolina Medicaid plan that covers checkups and family planning. The aged (65 and older), blind and disabled get more extensive coverage. Lang says he hasn’t applied for Social Security disability benefits because it takes too long.

This guy is a fucking idiot. Yes, it takes time to get approved for SSD that's why you need to start immediately. Get the damn surgery, put your house up as collateral on a loan if you need to, apply for SSD, then, when you finally get approaved and get back benefits pay off the bills that have piled up and go forward.

The other thing is that they calculate your benefits based on your income for the prior ten years from the date you file for benefits. That means if you've worked up until this year they'll count the prior 10 years income in calculating your benefits. If you wait, say, 5 years before applying you'll again have the prior 10 years taken into account... but maybe for 5 years you earned nothing – which means your averaged income will be HALF what it would have been if you applied promptly, which will drastically lower your benefit. But I'm pretty sure Mr. Lang is clueless about that.

He needs to man up and accept that he can't do this without some serious help. Although it seems he's willing to beg even if he's not willing to purchase insurance, obey the law, or apply for government benefits.

But Lang requires such extensive and ongoing work that there’s no way to guarantee there won’t be significant bills, Edwards said.

And this, boys and girls, is why you should treat diabetes as the life and limb-threatening illness it is instead of dicking around and ignoring it.

Lang says he has called charities that work with diabetes and blindness, but he doesn’t seem to fit anyone’s cause. “I’m either too young or too old,” said Lang, who has launched a GoFundMe.com page in hopes of garnering donations.

And that is why private charities don't and will not fill the gap – they pick and choose who they will help, and you may not be in the “help” category no matter how deserving.

There’s a lot of talk about personal responsibility in health care reform, so it’s probably fair to note that Lang is a smoker who has, by his own account, been inconsistent in his efforts to control his diabetes. Edwards says it’s not uncommon to see patients who don’t take the treatment regimen seriously until they’re facing major problems. Bleeding in the blood vessels of the eyes often foretells similar problems with the kidneys and feet, he said.

In other words, he hasn't taken care of himself for years, maybe decades, and now he wants the doctors to make it all better. He's also likely to have other problems going on just as serious as his eye problems.

“If I were just free, I could buy no health insurance, instead banking the money to pay medical bills as they came due,” Filler wrote. “But ‘just free’ societies must have onerous consequences for the imprudent and the unlucky. If we want to be allowed to buy health insurance or not, we must be willing to let folks who choose wrong be bankrupted by medical bills. Worse, we must be willing to let them die for lack of care, and listen to them wail from the gutters.”

That kind of argument can be easy to defend in an intellectual debate and hard to hold on to when you’re face to face with someone who’s going to die – or go blind – when they could be saved.

The other problem is that 90% of Americans will NEVER have the level of income or investment to truly insulate them from catastrophic medical problems. Which is why insurance was invented and why so many countries have moved to publicly funded universal coverage.

On the other side, you have single-payer advocates who say it’s time to stop arguing over who deserves to be denied coverage or care. Instead, they say, it’s time to treat health care like fire and police protection: Tax everyone and provide the aid when it’s needed.

^ My vote is for this.

A staffer with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services emailed the Observer to say Lang’s case had been “discussed here in DC at a fairly high level” in hopes of finding a solution. If the family income were to rise above the poverty level ($15,730 for a couple), he could qualify for special enrollment, the staffer said.

Guess the happy home-maker needs to woman up and get a job – oh, wait, entry level positions are usually minimum wage and won't give a couple that high an income. Guess she'll need two jobs.

Welcome to the reality of poverty in America.

“That’s probably the worst thing that can happen to someone outside of death,” Edwards said. And he added that if Lang doesn’t get help now, he’s likely to end up dependent on the government: “It’s extremely costly to let a person go blind.”

AND Mr. Lang will wind up on “welfare” of one sort or another, they'll have to lose the house to lower their assets sufficiently to qualify for things like food stamps, and while he might be “rehabbed” he is unlikely to have the means to afford the sort of assistive aids that really allow a blind person to be independent.

Do I understand this correctly: If a family earns more than 15,730 dollars you can get discounted health care. If the family earns less you get nothing?

Not quite that simple.

People earning below the poverty line are supposed to be the responsibility of the state in which they reside, which means Medicaid. Those earning above the poverty line are under the Federal program.

The thing is, it's up to the individual state to decide who qualifies for Medicaid. Some states are quite generous. Others will not cover any able-bodied adult (and since Mr. Lang has not attempted to be declared disabled he is considered able-bodied by the bureaucracy), or an adult without children, or a man older than 18. I don't know the rules for South Carolina.

It's not just a matter of being in a Republican state. My own state is thoroughly red, but for the past 7 years my household has been a program set up and run by the State of Indiana for those who don't qualify for Medicaid. I don't make above poverty line, either, the Feds won't subsidize my insurance either, but my state does... even through it's solidly Republican, because even a lot of Republicans can recognize there is a problem here. It's not the most fantastic coverage but we've been covered, my spouse gets his diabetes meds, and such procedures as necessary to keep him healthy, out of the hospital, and oh yes, save his sight and kidneys.

(As of this year they're also covering dental and vision, too – which is why I'm able to get a bad tooth taken care of next Thursday, BEFORE it's an emergency, and we'll both be getting vision exams and if needed new glasses this year. Yay.)

So it's not just that this guy is an idiot, his state is also run by a bunch of dickish assholes. In my state, as soon as you have contact with the Public Aid office they ask if 1) you need food stamps, 2) need any sort of emergency aid, 3) do you need health coverage, and 4) are you registered to vote? And almost every other time you have contact with Public Aid.

I thought he would still have the option to purchase private insurance even though he won't get subsidies.

Does the "No Denial for Pre-Existing Conditions" only apply to plans purchased via the exchange?

IIRC that came in a year or so before the exchanges, although I can't remember the schedule very well. His biggest difficulty would basically be the administrivia between the treatment plan and the insurance plan, and getting the insurance plan to fully accept the treatment plan as sometimes there's a "No try this first" hoop depending on what you're dealing with. Though based on what he's dealing with I have my doubts it would really apply. Of course, the question remains, with his lack of experience, would he know which "level" of plan to buy to be able to cover this so easily?

If you have bleeding in the eyeballs and detached retina surgery IS the “try this first” option, there really isn't much else to do.

The problem is that, despite the fact they guy managed to earn some decent money (presumably, with a $300k house) he sounds a bit uneducated and ignorant. I am smart, college-educated, and I worked for the fucking industry for nearly a decade and a half and I still have difficulty navigating health insurance and coverage in the US. It is NOT as easy as it could be. This guy is going to have serious problems with this, particularly if he's having vision problems because of all the damn forms you have to read. He is probably unaware that there are both professional social workers and charitable volunteers that can help him, but you have to be willing to accept such help.

That, and his wife might really need to get a job. That will not be easy if she's never worked outside the home, but life can suck that way. Big box retailers are one place to start looking, as well as fast-food chains, which are used to hiring either inexperienced or minimally experienced people.

What he SHOULD have done, in addition to purchasing health insurance, is ALSO get some disability insurance. If he could afford a $300k house he could have afford that, too. Anyone who's an entrepreneur/self-employed should get that if at all possible, to provide income in the event you are either temporarily or permanently incapacitated. But hey, this guy obviously doesn't understand insurance, and why it's a good idea.