Iowa government bills woman $300K for vet's care

[Dual867PowerMac]

http://www.qctimes.com/news/local/article_421e3cf6-6900-11de-b675-001cc4c002e0.html

[Gospel Checker]

Good job, Iowa! Thanks for caring.

[notluzn]

Iowa's Government should shove the bill where the sun don't shine and twist it.

[jimjames418]

Iowa's Government should shove the bill where the sun don't shine and twist it.
This removes any remaining doubt that Iowa has gone over to the dark side. :frown:

[LouC]

"Everybody who gets Medicaid is told this is a government program for which we will be expecting repayment," DHS spokesman Roger Munns told the newspaper. "It's not fair for taxpayers — you and me — to pay if there are assets.

"It's not draconian. It's not meant to be cruel," he said.

When he or they accepted Medicaid they obviously did not bother to understand the terms.

Is that a shame, yes, is that evil intent on the part of the State, no.

Caveat emptor is "let the buyer beware", what would it be for "let the medicaid recipient beware"?

[Lima India Bravo]

Our medical care system is just fine as it is, and doesn't need any fixing. :think:

[ArmyMAJretired]

Our medical care system is just fine as it is, and doesn't need any fixing. :think:

Sounds like he got the treatment he needed and now his estate is asked to partially repay so others can get treatment.

The State veterans home should have explained the requirements better.

[jimjames418]

When he or they accepted Medicaid they obviously did not bother to understand the terms.

Is that a shame, yes, is that evil intent on the part of the State, no.

Caveat emptor is "let the buyer beware", what would it be for "let the medicaid recipient beware"?
The problem I have with this is that it is not up front. In most states to receive nursing home care a person must have first "spent down" all their assets execpt for a very low amount. That way there is no mistaking the requirements.

It appears that the state of Iowa provides the services without letting the person know up front what the cost will be, then, when the person dies they charge whatever they think the person's estate will have. Bad business all the way around. And if any business in the private sector tried this approach, they would be charged with fraud. :rolleyes:

[ArmyMAJretired]

The problem I have with this is that it is not up front. In most states to receive nursing home care a person must have first "spent down" all their assets execpt for a very low amount. That way there is no mistaking the requirements.

It appears that the state of Iowa provides the services without letting the person know up front what the cost will be, then, when the person dies they charge whatever they think the person's estate will have. Bad business all the way around. And if any business in the private sector tried this approach, they would be charged with fraud. :rolleyes:

Dave Ramsey calls them Welfare nursing homes.

[Lima India Bravo]

Sounds like he got the treatment he needed and now his estate is asked to partially repay so others can get treatment.

The State veterans home should have explained the requirements better.

Absolutely correct. I was being sarcastic. My point is that his companion of two decades should not potentially lose her share of the investment they made together because somebody didn't explain things to them adequately.

When my great aunt's husband became seriously ill and eventually ended up in a nursing home I was helping her wade through the river of paperwork involved. I'd consider myself to be at least fairly intelligent, and it was confusing as hell to me. I took the whole mess to an attorney friend and he explained that she would essentially be rendered penniless by the cost of keeping him in the nursing home after his policy limit on the supplimental Medicare policy they had was maxed out and his Medicare benefits had maxed out as well. My understanding was that Medicaid would require that she cash in liquid assets to give them half and pay half the value of their small mobile home before Medicaid would kick in. The only way she could have done that would have been to sell the home or mortgage it. They did everything they could to ensure they would have enough to support themselves. They worked hard and saved, but they obviously didn't save enough. One catastrophic illness wiped them out. Pretty sad state of affairs. Luckily I was in a position to pay for his care until his death and she retained her home, their savings account and her dignity.

[LouC]

The problem I have with this is that it is not up front. In most states to receive nursing home care a person must have first "spent down" all their assets execpt for a very low amount. That way there is no mistaking the requirements.

It appears that the state of Iowa provides the services without letting the person know up front what the cost will be, then, when the person dies they charge whatever they think the person's estate will have. Bad business all the way around. And if any business in the private sector tried this approach, they would be charged with fraud. :rolleyes:

Every state manages the programs differently it would seem.

I think there might a few major points at play here.

1) He failed to properly report his assets.

2) The Medicaid people failed to disclose all aspects of the program.

3) The people thought they understood all the details of the program but didn't.

4) The Medicaid people didn't do their job and the couple didn't do their diligence.

State run Veterans home?

[jimjames418]

State run Veterans home?
At one time the only help the veterans got was from their state, the feds provided no help at all.

Many states, most I think, still have programs that help the veterans with programs and help the feds do not provide.

National Association of State Veterans Homes (http://www.nasvh.org/about/about_purpose.cfm)

[LouC]

At one time the only help the veterans got was from their state, the feds provided no help at all.

Many states, most I think, still have programs that help the veterans with programs and help the feds do not provide.

National Association of State Veterans Homes (http://www.nasvh.org/about/about_purpose.cfm)

Thanks for the link.

[gdoane]

Every state manages the programs differently it would seem.

I think there might a few major points at play here.

1) He failed to properly report his assets.

Medicaid holds a lien on any assets recovered via a lawsuit resulting from an accident to pay for an injury. This guy received BIG BUCKS from the 1990 welding accident and didn't turn it over to the Medicaid system as the law requires. Instead he went on a shopping spree for houses. Those houses are basically stolen goods.


2) The Medicaid people failed to disclose all aspects of the program.

It's on the papers he signed. If he didn't read what he signed, too bad.

There's no reason for taxpayers to be out a quarter-million bucks and paying for the care for some fraudster who really owned three houses while claiming poverty.