this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2026
847 points (99.0% liked)

Not The Onion

20543 readers
1851 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A couple were told they faced a $200,000 (£146,500) medical bill when their baby was born prematurely in the US, despite them having travel insurance which covered her pregnancy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Helllllo the baby was 7 weeks premature and in intensive care for 3 weeks. The cost of a normal birth is totally irrelevant. You didn’t read the article, obviously.

I paid literally zero for either of my kids births right here in California.

[–] stephen01king@piefed.zip 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

According to this study, the mean total cost of NICU in the UK for preterm babies at 31 weeks gestation is £27,401 and tourists should get charged the same if I'm reading this correctly.

So no, not even close to $200,000 or even the €100,000 you pulled out of thin air. Clearly this is reason enough to believe the cost of the healthcare in the US is what made the insurance company try to avoid paying. I don't know why you're defending the healthcare cost in the US without even doing a bit of research of how it normally is in Europe where the couple and the insurance company comes from.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

Thank you for doing that research. I have done nothing here to defend costs in the US. As you said, even the number I pulled out of thin air was 100% more expensive in the US. Do I owe you some kind of apology for not guessing even worse?

[–] Damage@feddit.it 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My grandpa had a peacemaker installed, we received a (paid) bill for the cost of the operation (idk why or how, but I remember my mother showing it to me), it was 36k€. Sure the stay was shorter, but it's also heart surgery on a frail patient with lots of other issues.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

How much shorter was the stay? Maybe we can apply some multiplier. At least the example you’re offering is a fully loaded in-and-out final bill, but all this trying to compare the costs of different medical procedures is fumbling in the dark. We know medical costs in the US are higher, and we usually know by how much. The numbers I see in a quick search are $13.4K per capita annually for the US and $9.6k for Switzerland, likely with better outcomes. Was higher costs the reason this couple’s insurance declined them? Maybe. It’s a fair guess, but that’s all. If someone wants to tell me there’s never any back and forth with their EU public health program before a bill gets paid, nor with the private insurance carriers every EU citizen that can afford them also has, then wow, that will have been the best thing I’ve ever heard about healthcare in the EU.

Whether cost was the sole issue would have been a great question for the reporter to ask someone. But as you can see, they don’t even need to work that hard at their job to get the outrage clicks they need.