Much is made about the disenfranchised who, try though they may, cannot obtain health insurance.
While some of the reports are true, most are exaggerated at best while some are totally misleading.
Take the case of 5 year old Logan Swaim.
According to the report, Logan was determined to be "short for his age". AFTER receiving this "diagnosis" (more like an observation than a diagnosis) his mom tried to buy health insurance.
(Comment. Insurance is something that is bought before the need, not after).
Two insurers accepted the Swaims and three of their children for new coverage, but they rejected Logan, fearing his height — 40½ inches — might indicate a glandular problem that could be expensive to treat.
Out of how many?
Might have a glandular problem.
For two years, the Swaims paid all of Logan's medical bills themselves, about $4,300. Eventually they got test results showing there was nothing wrong with him.
Why did it take them 2 years to have the tests done?
Even so, the insurers wouldn't cover him, Theresa Swaim says, because the time to appeal the denial of coverage had expired.
So what's wrong with trying a new carrier? Or even a new application on the boy?
Something smells here.