Super User burleytog Posted March 13, 2009 Super User Posted March 13, 2009 Should wounded US soldiers be forced to pay for their injuries using their private insurance?
Siebert Outdoors Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 Is this in the line of duty or an accident they did farting around? If it is combat or during training. ABSOLUTELY NOT. If its a soldier screwing around and gets hurt just like any of us, yes he/she should.
atx_newbie Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 Is this in the line of duty or an accident they did farting around? If it is combat or during training. ABSOLUTELY NOT. If its a soldier screwing around and gets hurt just like any of us, yes he/she should. /thread
TeamBerettaGold Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 Is this in the line of duty or an accident they did farting around? If it is combat or during training. ABSOLUTELY NOT. If its a soldier screwing around and gets hurt just like any of us, yes he/she should. x2
done Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 Was there something local that happened you bring this question on?
dallas0996 Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 From the point of view of a former Squid... Active duty personnel should be covered 100% under all conditions as this is part of the agreement; they are on call 24/7 regardless of the situation. Should they get injured by doing something stupid, etc. and it inhibits their ability in fulfilling their duties; then it needs to be addressed under the UCMJ.
Super User fishfordollars Posted March 13, 2009 Super User Posted March 13, 2009 NO, and I don't care what the circumstances are. When you sign up to defend this country and put your life on the line, you are under the umbrella of our military doctrine. Private insurance policies have written declarations stipulating that coverage ceases when joining active military service. At least the ones I write here in Texas do. Any application submitted on anyone in the active military will automatically be declined for coverage
fish-fighting-illini Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 Not enough info to really comment but with what's given I'd say them paying from private is ridiculous. I think I've read on private insurance that a few things are not covered and that war is one of them. So assuming military covering I'd say no out of pocket for war or work duties. Maybe a VERY SMALL deductible for home accidents or for family but $100 or less. Keep in mind that although they get housing and medical many military salaries are extremely low. I heard a former army guy say he didn't know a single military person who wasn't on food stamps. Keep that in mind when you think of our military people.
Uncle Leo Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 This should not even be questioned. When you are in the military you are government property. All health care is provided regardless of the nature of the injury. If it is unbecoming there are other provisions made for that. I speak from experience, I was in the Navy and had a wild side. I was cared for and punished as government property, this is understood.
done Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 NO, and I don't care what the circumstances are. When you sign up to defend this country and put your life on the line, you are under the umbrella of our military doctrine. Private insurance policies have written declarations stipulating that coverage ceases when joining active military service. At least the ones I write here in Texas do. Any application submitted on anyone in the active military will automatically be declined for coverage Well to your point, I would say our military guys give far more service to this nation and risk far more than any congressman and they get lifetime coverage along with their salary. As let us not forget convicted felons get medical treatment at the prisons . As a taxpayer, I can't say I would call money spent on treating our men and women in uniform and their immediate families frivolous, or wastefull. IMO, for all they give and sacrifice, it is not too much to ask in return.
Super User bilgerat Posted March 13, 2009 Super User Posted March 13, 2009 What's up Burley , is this something that you were thinking about or is it based on something you saw or read ?
Eddie Munster Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Heard something about this on Foxnews today. Lady blurted out Obama wanted the servicemen to pay for their insurance. Dunno if it's true or not. IMO, as someone else posted Military personnel should be covered 24/7/365 regardless of how it happens. When I was in the Air Force, they told you upfront, you do something stupid and you may be charged under the U.C.M.J. (Uniformed Code of Military Justice) with destroying government property. If they own you like that, they need to maintain you 100%. End of story.
ejtaylor822 Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Should wounded US soldiers be forced to pay for their injuries using their private insurance? No.
Super User Bassn Blvd Posted March 14, 2009 Super User Posted March 14, 2009 IMO any wound/injury received during their enlistment (activated during war time) should be covered w/out the use of private insurance for life and at no cost to them. But, I'm not so certain they should receive full medical benefits for life if they are out of the service unless, like I said, it happened while they were enlisted. Off topic I suppose but is their life insurance policy canceled if they are killed in combat?
bigmountaineer Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 No, that's why the whole Line of Duty determination was founded way back when. Trust me if I get into a car wreck and I wasn't wearing my seat belt the AF probably wouldn't pay my life insurance. Garbage for those injured guys,
frogtog Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 Once they serve this country they should have medical ins the rest of there lives. We give it to the criminals and this includes but not limited to congress etc. There has never been but two people to lay down their life for you and that is Jesus Christ and the American Soldier. Just my .02 worth.
Super User flechero Posted March 16, 2009 Super User Posted March 16, 2009 I think they should be covered regardless of how or when. If I screw around and get hurt in my off time, my employer provided medical insurance still pays. The time of day or nature of activity shouldn't matter for Soldiers either. Once they serve this country they should have medical ins the rest of there lives. We give it to the criminals and this includes but not limited to congress etc. Agreed, and don't forget the illegal aliens! :-X
fathom Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 actually, burley has a point. this is in connection with the administration's plans to require private insurance companies to pay for "service-connected injuries". breitbart.com
CGH Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Never!!! Not just never, Freeeeeeeeking Never!!! US ARMY VET Just my two Cents........ >
Super User Micro Posted March 17, 2009 Super User Posted March 17, 2009 This not a "hypothetical." This is something our new administartion says it is going to do. It's unconscionable. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/17/vets-group-blasts-obama-plan-private-insurance-pay-service-related-health-care/
done Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Yeah I was reading this today. I do not think it has any chance of passing. If it does, i would urge each and every one of Americas wounded soldiers to sue the US. If I get hurt at my job, I can do this. I would say US military fighting overseas is a dangerous job. I would also argue lack of proper backup, anti-mine vehicles, proper equipment, etc etc could be used as negligence on part of the US contributing to their injury. I would hate to have it go there but had someone told me that a US president would ever consider such a thing, I would have told them they were smoking crack. Now, here i read it. I am only hoping this is a statement taken out of context by a reporter (like they ever do that) and not a real initiative he is going to try. It just seems too much like political suicide to even think about attempting it.
Super User South FLA Posted March 18, 2009 Super User Posted March 18, 2009 Using public money to bail out companies that are on the brink of disaster and then cutting veterans benefits is right up a politician's alley. If any local representative backs this, he is not going to get my vote. I am surprised Mr. Populist's administration thought this up.
Super User roadwarrior Posted March 18, 2009 Super User Posted March 18, 2009 This legislation will never be enacted or even formally proposed. There is exactly -0- support for this asinine proposal.
Recommended Posts