Caleb Medley was a happy-go-lucky guy before James Holmes walked into a midnight screening of the new Batman movie theater last week and shot 70 people, killing 12. He was shot in the eye. Caleb, an employee of a local Target store and aspiring stand-up comedian who had just advanced to the finals of a local stand-up competition the night before he was shot in a Colorado movie theater, has been saddled with a $2M hospital bill. He does not have health insurance.
To make matters stranger, his wife gave birth on Monday while her husband remained in critical condition in the same hospital.
The situation highlights America’s glaring healthcare problem – some of the victims may now be saddled with debt for the rest of their lives due to their simple misfortune of being in the movie theater that James Holmes chose to unleash his chaos upon. It is not “their fault” and they should not have to now have the rest of their lives ruined financially.
Health is not a for-profit business. People shouldn’t have to die and go into bankruptcy just to make a health insurance companies hospital’s bottom line look better.
(Source: Caleb Medley Help)
July 26, 2012 at 8:54 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Well someone has to say it: Why is this guy having babies with no healthcare insurance? Married couples have babies on purpose, so don't bother telling me differently. How is he going to pay for the childbirth?
July 26, 2012 at 11:37 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
He wasn't planning on getting shot in the eye, you idiot.
July 26, 2012 at 9:01 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
As for the "It is not their fault” position, his getting shot and almost killed is NOT their fault. But it did happen to them, and as much as that may suck, they have the responsibility to deal with it. It sounds like they are saying that since it isn't "their fault", they shouldn't have to pay the huge medical bills. But who should pay them? Me? My fellow tax payers? Why? Why go directly to me? Most people who get sick or hurt can claim it "wasn't their fault", but does that automatically mean everyone else should chip in? The nut who did the shooting is responsible for every dime being spent on care now…and we all know he can't pay. So let's go to the deepest pockets in the country, the US taxpayer.
July 26, 2012 at 11:40 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
We are responsible for helping our fellow men out, like most all of the civiized countries on earth do. "Health" is not a "for profit" system. Why does America have such a "fuck you buddy i've got mine" mentality? What about helping others? Jesus fucking christ, man…
July 26, 2012 at 11:43 pm, Laura Chandler said:
Actually. most states have a crime victim fund to pay and then go after the estates of the assailants. And hey, if you get hit by an uninsured driver and become a quadriplegic, I'll be sure to remind you of your stance on this.
July 27, 2012 at 5:07 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Yo Ned…I'm not responsible for anyone, besides myself. I am not responsible for you, you are not responsible for me.
July 27, 2012 at 5:12 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
If you were hurt, and I had to pay $5 to help you, I would. That's the difference. The universal healthcare is like a Netflix payment for helping other people. But I suppose your "Atlas Shrugged" boner couldn't subside long enough for you to consider that.
I guess it comes down to who's-the-bigger-asshole, huh?
July 27, 2012 at 5:13 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Ned Hepburn, "Health" is not a "for profit" system…but heathcare is. It's called capitalism. It's a business. For those like you who do not want to pay for their healthcare, it's a charity. Some pay, like I do, and same demand it for free, like you. Bottom line, I pay the bills around here. You think it's "a right" to get free health care…communist.
July 27, 2012 at 5:15 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
The entire rest of the world must be communists too, then, because America is the only first-world country to not have universal health care.
i can do this all day, dude.
July 27, 2012 at 5:17 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
Scott W. Hutchings you've been brainwashed. Only in America is "healthcare" a completely for-profit system. I'm sorry, but you're so far off base. You've been taught that the turd you hold is a diamond and you're not letting go of the idea that you've been swindled by insurance companies.
July 27, 2012 at 5:25 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Ned, using your "example" that "I had to pay $5.00 to help you". Who decides that Ned MUST pay $5.00 to Scott? Who? WHo decides that Ned MUST give me $5.00? It's your money Ned, right?
July 27, 2012 at 5:26 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Ned Hepburn, you may have the freetime to "do this all day", but that doesn't mean you are correct. Not by a longshot.
July 27, 2012 at 5:30 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
I decide that because I'm for helping out other people. That's what this issue comes down to. Would you help somebody else, would Americans pay a small fee to help somebody else, other than themselves? If there was a choice between someone dying or being bankrupt forever, would I do something to save them?
Perhaps your anger is because deep down you know that you wouldn't want to help someone else. That's OK. The apparent modern Republican mindset is "fuck you, buddy, I've got mine! get your own!" – that's OK. That's one way to live and I'm not going to knock you for it. A lot of politics has a lot of grey areas and isn't as black and white as some people make it out to be; you should be allowed to believe that you want.
Yet this healthcare issue comes down to a very basic question about community and American morals: Would you help someone in need?
Your answer is no.
July 27, 2012 at 5:34 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
No Ned, I would help someone in need. I help people in need a lot. But I don't like being told I MUST help people. I don't like polititions taking my money and deciding who THEY should help, using MY money. Someday you'll have a good paying job, and a few dollars in your pocket. Only then. when you go from "taker" to "giver" will you understand. Until that happens…you will take.
July 27, 2012 at 5:36 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Ned Hepburn, and this healthcare isssue comes down to more than 2 very basic questions. There is a third question, Ned: Who will pay? Do you think all this shit is free?
July 27, 2012 at 5:36 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
Uh, I have a job and make decent money, dude. Stop it with the name calling – is that you're entire argument?
Oh wait it is. Oh.
July 29, 2012 at 5:50 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
If I was to get hit by an uninsured driver, and becoame crippled, I would NOT declare my plight is now the responsibility of the taxpayer to solve.
August 07, 2012 at 5:31 am, Devon Smith said:
They're not saying they "shouldn't pay the medical bills". Their friends decided to help them because they would ask people to help them. Every CIVILIZED country in the world has medical care for their populace, regardless of ability to pay. It's only in the U.S., a declining world power, that a killer's right to assault weapons is more important than quality medical care for all.
July 26, 2012 at 9:02 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
I guess I should ask: Does the wife and new mommy have health insurance, or are we paying all the bills here?
July 26, 2012 at 11:38 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
America is the only major country without a form of healthcare and you're saying no American should have a child unless they pay their INSURANCE company? How fucking brainwashed are you?
July 26, 2012 at 11:44 pm, Maria Djalova said:
Very well said, sir!
July 26, 2012 at 11:46 pm, Laura Chandler said:
I can't believe this Scott W Hutchings guy is so bored and such an ass that's he's trolling a thread about a totally tragic event. Then again, looking at his page, he calls all women "broads" and "tramps" so I can only assume his profile picture is a stock photo or that poor woman is on some depression medication.
July 27, 2012 at 8:06 am, William Crafton said:
Lol, takes one to know one.
July 27, 2012 at 12:12 pm, Paul Lysiak said:
Aw yes that sense of entitlement.
July 27, 2012 at 5:19 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Laura Chandler, lighten up doll, broads like you get worked-up too easily. And I never said you were a tramp, you hussy.
July 27, 2012 at 5:22 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Ned Hepburn, Hey cememnthead Ned. I'm saying you should not have children unless you (not me, asshole) can pay for them and support them. Why should a taxpayer pay for another persons children?
July 27, 2012 at 5:27 pm, Laura Chandler said:
Like I said. Stock photo.
By the way? We are all willing to pay for your penis enlargement if you are willing to ACT like less of a dick.
July 27, 2012 at 5:30 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Honey, I have a giant penis. But I digress.
July 27, 2012 at 5:37 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
Let's just ignore him. He'll get tired and go to bed.
July 27, 2012 at 5:41 pm, Laura Chandler said:
Scott W. Hutchings You said HAVE instead of AM. Nap time.
July 26, 2012 at 11:46 pm, Mikael Andrew Clower said:
The taxpayers SHOULD be chipping in to help this guy. What happened to being a community and helping those who need it the most? I'm disgusted with this situation. I hope this guy gets the money he needs.
July 27, 2012 at 5:15 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
But what if I, as a taxpayer, don't want to "chip in" to help this guy. Afterall, it is MY money. What if I don't want to chip in?
July 27, 2012 at 5:21 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
The world doesn't work like grade school.
July 27, 2012 at 5:27 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
How does the world work..your world? Tell me.
July 27, 2012 at 5:39 pm, Laura Chandler said:
Something NOT akin to grade school?
August 07, 2012 at 5:27 am, Devon Smith said:
Scott W. Hutchings Then you are a selfish prick.
July 26, 2012 at 11:58 pm, Sherry Marie Dill said:
I'm mystified when people take such a haughty stance on an issue and choose an article lamenting a tragedy as a place to spew their (misguided) opinions. I hope for his sake he never has to experience something like this and that an asshole troll won't set up a soap box to harp on him while he's lying in a hospital having never seen his new born child.
Praying for everyone involved. xo
July 27, 2012 at 12:02 am, Sherry Marie Dill said:
AND, if I had it, I would gladly, without question offer my financial assistance to every party involved. To me, that is what being an American is all about. Helping out your fellow citizens when they are down, congratulating them when they're up and most importantly being grateful for every blessing, no matter how small.
July 27, 2012 at 1:47 am, Sherry Marie Dill said:
i also like how he fails to mention that those with the "deepest pockets in the country, the US taxpayers" are paying for the killer's defense/stay in jail. there's something to bitch about. we're paying to feed/defend the killer, but let's bitch about the poor guy we're helping who is ill in a hospital bed"- can't stop being upset about tactless/tasteless arguments but i wan't to be.
July 27, 2012 at 3:40 am, Dallas Swindell said:
Hey Sherry, all the author's proposing that we do is help fellow citizens by creating a safety net that doesn't saddle people with additionally outrageous obstacles when they're already down. But, I won't debate you on the idea of healthcare (and giving a percentage of your "financial assistance" over time to help others in need) though, because it's obviously you've chosen a side on that issue and i'll respect that you won't be swayed by my interpretations and ideas on it.
As to your other point, anyone who's read up on the criminal justice system (which it seems like you have since you've reported that the tax payers fund defense lawyers and food in prisons) would know that it's cheaper to keep someone in prison for life than to execute them (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29552692/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/execute-or-not-question-cost/#.UBIL2GmXRfE). So what seems odd about your suggested stance is that you're choosing to lament about paying for James Holmes to stand trial and eat in prison, but then making a suggestion that we pay more to just kill him and make yourself (and presumably people like you) feel better.
Fianlly, you may want to call the author of this post out, ad hominem, for being draconian in advancing his political views: i.e. using a tragedy surmounted with another tragedy (being shot, then being put in debt til death). But it's just as draconian and callous to claim the moral high ground in ARGUING over who's interpretation of a tragedy is more correct. As well, it's a bit poor form to, in the same breath as taking the moral authority, wish death upon someone else regardless of how evil we may find them. You gotta either wash the feet of others and turn the cheek, or stop making moralized arguments and just leave your political beliefs on your sleeve. The author's suggestion is simply looking out for one another. Is it overly dramatic and a bit insensitive? Yes. But does he make a valid point? Yes. Think, don't react; hear, don't listen; communicate, don't judge.
Sorry if it feels like i gave you undue (and uninvited) attention, gotta use my liberal arts degree when i can.
July 27, 2012 at 3:52 am, Sherry Marie Dill said:
I tried to message you personally as it's late and i'm not functioning in the way i'd like to write back in a public forum…(it won't allow me to, it seems your account is private…) but I appreciate your stance, your well thought out reply and the manner in which you've presented it. I typically never comment on articles as ethos/logos goes out the window but I couldn't silence myself on this. I actually don't wish death on anyone, I am vehemently against the death penalty (yes, coming from a Texan) and I was merely trying to comment on the splitting oh hairs (money) I felt Scott was trying to do. Either way, I'm glad to have spoken out and I am glad to have connected with people that actually care what is going on in this big world. Once again, please forgive me if this sounds spacey, I am typing this from bed.
July 27, 2012 at 4:05 am, Sherry Marie Dill said:
okay, so i responded to you multiple times and it kept disappearing..
–I tried to message you personally as it's late and i'm not functioning in the way i'd like to write back in a public forum…(it won't allow me to it seems you're private…) but I appreciate your stance, your well thought out reply and the manner in which you've presented it. I never comment on posts usually, but I clearly was very heated at this (and his multiple responses on other posts) and of course all ethos/logos goes out the window when you're passionate.
However, I AGREE with the author, and was merely showing my distaste to the commenter below. I absolutely think there should be affordable healthcare for one and all. I don't think anyone should be killed, I am vehemently against the death penalty (yes, this coming from a Texan) and if anything, I think we're treating many prisoners unfairly.
Either way, glad to connect with intelligent and passionate, like-minded individuals, and I hope this finds you well.
Sorry if spacey, in bed as i've said.
July 27, 2012 at 4:07 am, Dallas Swindell said:
Gotcha, I'm a bit hazy myself, long days and long nights. I think you're right that politics has no place in this, but i think we've all agreed that good thought comes from tough conversation and trying times. Have a great night. No ill will meant!
July 27, 2012 at 5:16 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Like every taxpayer, I hate the idea of paying to keep this nut fed and housed, and provided free lawyers.
July 27, 2012 at 5:34 pm, Ned Hepburn said:
A trial by jury is in the constitution. Quit your whole Yosemite Sam act, man.
July 27, 2012 at 5:38 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Cartoons? Ned, how old are you? Does your mom know you are fucking around on-line?
July 27, 2012 at 5:39 pm, Laura Chandler said:
I don't think it's an act, Ned. I think he's really just that much of a jerk.
July 27, 2012 at 12:24 am, Larr Slick said:
What we need is afford health care.
July 26, 2012 at 9:13 pm, Two Million Dollar Medical Bill? | The New Web Courant said:
[...] This is why we need universal health care; Aurora victim saddled with $2M hospital bill [...]
July 27, 2012 at 4:06 am, Mike Shelton said:
Technically, this guy could have had healthcare if he was a full time employee at Target, but then for a family of 3, it would probably mean they would have to bring a baby home to an unsafe, shittier apartment. Hell….if he found out his wife was pregnant, it would be too late to get insurance….PRE-EXISTING-CONDITION. I'm ok with helping this guy because he was working every day and trying to better himself in numerous ways and was married before having a child. He shouldn't be fucked for life because he did what he thought was best….young people don't think they need insurance, so it's understandable. Should his family be punished for life by the greedy motives of rich fuckers that waste millions in their "not-for-profit" hospitals that have billions in the bank? Not true, the local medical system I use to work for would brag about having a billion dollars in the bank for a rainy day, while they were one of the largest regional employees that had horrible wages…..Not for Profit my ass!
July 27, 2012 at 8:03 am, William Crafton said:
I lol'd at this. It's also the same reason why we need gun control, right? Because psychos shoot up movie theaters during insane bouts of cosplay? RIIIIIIIIGHT.
What we need are strong, rational people who don't seethe morality from the hip like children often do; people that make logical, rational decisions based upon intrinsic ethics and personal culpability.
July 27, 2012 at 2:14 pm, Laura Chandler said:
You laughed out loud that an innocent young man was shot through the eye? That's….
I don't know what that is.
July 29, 2012 at 8:41 am, William Crafton said:
It's called context. You should read about it sometime before you go taking it out of such semantic discussions.
July 29, 2012 at 9:03 am, Laura Chandler said:
You have no idea what you are talking about, do you?
July 29, 2012 at 9:51 am, William Crafton said:
I could ask you the same question, but I am a tactful individual. Should I pay you a fee to cross the bridge you're living under?
July 29, 2012 at 4:52 pm, Laura Chandler said:
Like I said.
July 29, 2012 at 5:46 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Laura, you tramp, you don't have much of value to add, do you?
July 29, 2012 at 6:17 pm, Laura Chandler said:
Look who woke up from their nap.
July 29, 2012 at 7:00 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
For a broad with little to offer, I do appreciate your sense of humor.
August 02, 2012 at 6:26 am, William Crafton said:
Lol. Pandering.
July 27, 2012 at 7:06 am, Wounded and Pregnant, an Aurora Family Without Health Coverage – Truthdig | Health Insurance Scheme said:
[...] now they are …Aurora Shooting Victims Hurt by Lack of Health InsuranceThe Atlantic Wire (blog)This is why we need universal health care; Aurora victim saddled with $ 2M …Death and Taxesall 902 news [...]
July 27, 2012 at 9:40 am, Hot Links July 27, 2012 - Robot Mutant said:
[...] at 9:40 am By Matt Sager Leave a Comment Uninsured Aurora tragedy victim has $2M hospital bill. [Death and Taxes]Being the hairstylist on Breaking Bad is shear bliss. [HyperVocal]Oh good, we’ve invented [...]
July 27, 2012 at 5:09 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
None of you crying socialist bothered to answer my question: Did this couple have insurance to cover the baby they just had? He doesn't have insurance for his bullet wound…Someone answer my question…if you can.
July 27, 2012 at 5:23 pm, Laura Chandler said:
Well, I don't KNOW the couple. I also don't know how that's your business. Or why you are such an asshole.
July 27, 2012 at 5:26 pm, Laura Chandler said:
I also don't know if you have a dictionary or understand what Socialism is.
July 27, 2012 at 5:34 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
So since you don't know the answer to my question, you call me an asshole? What a tramp.
July 27, 2012 at 5:38 pm, Laura Chandler said:
Your logic is unarguable, genius.
July 29, 2012 at 9:56 am, William Crafton said:
I believe the word you're searching for is "unparalleled".
July 29, 2012 at 7:03 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
William! Are you beating-up on me too?
August 07, 2012 at 5:33 am, Devon Smith said:
Who the fuck cares? Giving birth to a child is not a major medical expense. Most babies are discharged from hospital within a day of the mother giving birth. It is in no way comparable to being shot and being in a medically induced coma for over two weeks, you mouth breathing neanderthal.
July 27, 2012 at 5:20 pm, Scott W. Hutchings said:
Well? Did this couple have health insurance to pay for childbirth? Yes or no?
July 27, 2012 at 5:26 pm, Laura Chandler said:
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Answer the Question!!!
July 27, 2012 at 9:06 pm, Alyssa Dupree said:
Like everyone else in the country, I was deeply saddened to hear about this tragedy, and the hits keep coming when reports tell us who the victims were, what they were doing in life and more.
What pains me more, though, is when I see fake-patriotism. I'm tired of hearing everyone say things like, "That's so sad, I wish there were something I can do," while they deposit $25 into a fund to help the families bury their dead, or the injured pay their hospital bills. Yet nobody thinks about the long-term effect. As someone who grew up with a disabled Grandmother, I can tell you that the hospital bills and initial injury are just the tip of the iceberg.
For Medley, I hope that he recovers with only slight damage. But because I don't know the depth of his condition, I feel it safe to assume that he's going to have long-term issues once he leaves that hospital. He might not be able to work, and his child could very well grow up in a home with a father that is handicapped in some way, while the mother is working to help support the family and pay for medical supplies. Recovering from a blow like this is an uphill battle regardless, but it won't end there. Even if he doesn't have brain damage, he'll probably need physical therapy to help him get back to a normal, daily routine.
Tragedy happens. Whether its public or private, it's not something we can avoid. We are mortal beings, and our health isn't promised to us. For anyone that wants to say that Ned's article is insensitive, I hope you're pointing a finger at every article that talks about whether or not we should have gun control in light of this situation. Likewise, point your finger at anyone that has made the claim that this could have been avoided had someone been in possession of their CHL and a concealed handgun. This isn't insensitive. This is reality, and we are merely commentators on a tragedy. We can point the blame at anyone or anything, but the reality is that some people just do things beyond our comprehension. The actions, regardless of the motive, never feels justified.
Look back at our own history now. What about the building fire in New York, I believe, that claimed the lives of MANY women and children in the early 1900s. Sure, it was a long time ago, but after that tragedy, we recognized that the working conditions were neither safe, nor humane. That one instance changed things like minimum wage, work hours and even child labor laws. People didn't wait five years to talk about what happened – they recognized a failure within their own system and demanded that their government implement laws to protect them.
We claim to be the greatest nation on the planet, and we claim to be free individuals with a "democratic" system. But why is it that we want to point fingers and call names as soon as someone addresses a glaring truth? I have a five year-old cousin sitting in the hospital right now, dying of leukemia. His parents have done everything they can to help him, but the truth is that even with healthcare, health care is not affordable. I don't want to see anyone hit with something like a bullet, or cancer, or even a car and not be able to get the help they need because they cannot afford it.
I'm glad to hear that so many of you aren't drowning in medical bills. I've seen enough death and cancer in my young life to know that good health is something so often taken for granted. But don't wait for tragedy to strike your life to realize that there's something wrong in a society and government that treats medical care like an option. Medical bills shouldn't be a scary sight. They're not credit card payments, and unless it's plastic surgery, your reason for said medical care wasn't optional like buying expensive boutique clothing with interest.
Life is not an option. None of us choose to be here, and none of us choose to become injured or sick. Our only certainty in life is death and taxes. Why make life worse? We're all here for a short time, so let's be good to each other while we are.
Anyway, bravo, Ned. I've been following D+T for years, and I've always seen articles that raise questions or give thought-provoking commentary on issues that other places won't. This site never fails to entertain me, nor does it cease to keep me on my toes. I miss the magazine, and you're still a total badass.
July 30, 2012 at 8:57 pm, Links said:
[...] Death+Taxes: This is why we need universal health care; Aurora victim saddled with $2M hospital bill [...]