'SiCKO' Truth Squad
Setting the Record Straight | Characters | Further Reading
Amanda's insurance company suggested in writing that she might try another less desirable plan. However, Amanda reports that when she called, they were discouraging, indicating again that if she lost weight she could reapply. She tried with another company and was able to get insurance, but those premiums eventually became unaffordable. She now has a "bare bones" policy with another company.
We are happy to say that after fighting with her insurance company for
several months, Laura's insurer finally stopped billing her for her
Newsday did a nice article on Frank.
We are happy to report that Blue Cross of California has settled Tarsha's case. As reported in the Dallas Morning News, "A spokesman for the insurance company … said Ms. Harris' case has been settled, adding that he thinks she is satisfied with the outcome, although he declined to give details. 'Many of the Americans featured in Sicko were not as lucky as Tarsha,' said her attorney, Lourdes DeArmas, of the Quisenberry Law Firm in Los Angeles. 'They didn't receive the care they needed before the insurance company pulled the financial rug out from under them.'" -- Jason Roberson, "Sicko Touches Sore Spot," Dallas Morning News, June 30, 2007
Dawnelle's case went to the Supreme Court of California, where the court confirmed the facts of her case as portrayed in 'SiCKO.' She won her case, but her damages were capped at a fraction of what the jury felt was fair due to a California law that limits compensation in medical malpractice cases. Dawnelle testified in Congress on June 20, 2007 about Mychelle’s case.
Linda sent us a statement that helps describe her ordeal and an update on her life today.
Julie testified before Congress on June 20, 2007 about Tracy's case. In response to Sicko, some industry spokespeople have questioned whether a bone marrow transplant for her late husband Tracy would have been an effective treatment. According to Tracy's doctors at the Blood and Marrow Transplant Program at the University of Kansas Hospital, it clearly would have been. They argued strongly for the transplant, citing (and including in letters to Tracy's insurer) "strong evidence" supporting the efficacy of this treatment, which could "give him a chance to achieve complete remission." In fact, they called this treatment "his only chance of survival."
"'SiCKO' Was Right" -- Letter to the Editor, Miami Herald, July 3rd, 2007
Response to St. Joseph's Medical Center Statement Regarding Portrayal in Sicko of Events Concerning Tracy Pierce -- July, 3rd, 2007
CAROL ANN REYES
In May 2007, Kaiser Permanente agreed to settle with the Los Angeles City Attorney's office in their lawsuit over Carol Ann's case. Kaiser said they would stop patient dumping, and pay additional fines. However, the problem of patient dumping involving other hospitals continues. In late June 2007, the Los Angeles City Attorney's office filed complaints against more hospitals and transportation services "including one highly publicized case in which a paraplegic man wearing a colostomy bag was found crawling in a gutter near a skid row park in February." Cara Mia DiMassa, Richard Winton, "Legal actions target patient dumping on L.A.'s skid row; City attorney's office files civil complaints against two L.A. County hospitals and a transportation services company," Los Angeles Times, June 27, 2007. Union Rescue Mission Director Andy Bales testified in Congress on June 20, 2007 about this problem.
LARRY AND DONNA SMITH
We are happy to report that Larry and Donna have just managed to move out of their daughter's storage room and into an apartment. But as Donna reports to us, "financially, we scrape the bottom right now paying our rent, our utilities, our gas, our food, our insurance and our prescriptions. There is no room for error. Will we make it long term? We do not know. But we do not know how we could have made it any longer as we were."
The Olympian wrote a nice piece about Eric.
A jury found that Blue Shield of California breached its contract with Maria. She was not completely satisfied with the verdict, however -- which her attorneys say was due to an error by the presiding judge -- and Maria is appealing.