Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_inKarlate
If somebody has some sort of weird insurance that would pay for the forensic work, why would one Not submit a claim to cover the costs? I suppose the victim's family might have some personal reason(s), and those should be respected, but it's essentially a waste of taxpayer money, premiums paid, or both to just dismiss that possibility out of hand.
It's only double taxation if the victim is Required to have the insurance and/or to submit the claim, whether we're talking murder or rape. So long as they have the option to not have such insurance and to not file if they do have it, there is no problem.
|
What you're omitting here is that most health insurance claims are accompanied by co-pays or deductible satisfaction. On my health plan, for instance (a very good one), I've gone the HRA route. I have to satisfy a $1000 deductible and then the plan starts paying for things for me. My company gives me $500 toward satisfying it so the net effect is that the first $500 is on them, the second $500 on me, and then insurance covers just about everything over $1000 (this is an over-simplification, but the ins and outs of my health plan aren't really relevant).
So, if my hypothetical wife on my insurance plan were raped, assuming the prices quoted here, it may cost her and me up to $500 to report the rape.
We're
already paying taxes to cover such things as law enforcement and prosecution of crimes anyway. If a municipality like Palin's is going to charge victims of crimes (or, by proxy, their insurance, assuming they have it) with the cost of the investigation of the crime, why bother having a police force at all? At least give the people their money back so that they can seek recourse privately.