Canadian man diagnosed with brain tumour in Thailand speaks out for the first time

[webfact]

Canadian man diagnosed with brain tumour in Thailand speaks out for the first time

Sean Davidson, Multi-Platform Writer, CTV News Toronto

 

 

TORONTO -- A Canadian man diagnosed with a brain tumour in Thailand is speaking out for the first time from his hospital bed in Ottawa, thanking everyone for their support in getting him home.

 

Kitchener, Ont. resident Alex Witmer and his wife Jennifer Witmer, who had been living in New Brunswick, quit their jobs earlier this year and went on a six-week trip to Thailand before planning to relocate to Toronto.

 

The couple was about a month into their trip when the 30-year-old began suffering from a severe migraine. They went to the hospital in Koh Samui and after doctors completed scans they were given the devastating news that he had a cancerous tumour deep inside his brain.

 

Their insurance company, Allianz Global Assistance, initially rejected the $265,000 air ambulance flight home because Alex reported a headache during an emergency room visit in Moncton a month before their trip. Their insurance company eventually reversed the decision.

 

While the couple waited in Thailand on answers from the insurance company, they said Alex's condition deteriorated rapidly.

 

Full story: https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/canadian-man-diagnosed-with-brain-tumour-in-thailand-speaks-out-for-the-first-time-1.4732398

 

-- CTV News 2019-12-17

[Somtamnication]

Glad he made it home and to great healthcare. 

[ezzra]

Lucky for him that the insurance company relented of of compassion and agreed to foot the cost of the trip back to Canada, but the as everyone knows that tumures don't grow overnight or even weeks and pre existing conditions are not covered by any insurance policies...

[smedly]

and he couldn't fly because ?

 

oh that's right - the Thai hospital were earning big time and didn't want him to leave

[1FinickyOne]

Best of luck to you and Jennifer - - Be well and go on to have a wonderful life... 

[Sheryl]

3 hours ago, ezzra said:

Lucky for him that the insurance company relented of of compassion and agreed to foot the cost of the trip back to Canada, but the as everyone knows that tumures don't grow overnight or even weeks and pre existing conditions are not covered by any insurance policies...

They did not relent out of  "compassion" and this did not meet the policy contract's definition of pre-existing. See prior threads.

[RJRS1301]

21 minutes ago, smedly said:

and he couldn't fly because ?

 

oh that's right - the Thai hospital were earning big time and didn't want him to leave

I think he did fly, by air ambulance, and special care needs to be observed with people and brain tumours, possibly needing specialist care during the flight, and possible lower altitude flying required.

 

[Moonlover]

3 hours ago, ezzra said:

Lucky for him that the insurance company relented of of compassion and agreed to foot the cost of the trip back to Canada, but the as everyone knows that tumures don't grow overnight or even weeks and pre existing conditions are not covered by any insurance policies...

Yes, I agree, tumors do not grow overnight, but neither do they begin to present symptoms overnight. And unless and until a specific diagnosis has been made it cannot be regarded as pre-existing, even though it was there.

 

IMO The insurance company were well out of order in rejecting his claim and clearly they were made to realize that.

[NanLaew]

4 hours ago, ezzra said:

Lucky for him that the insurance company relented of of compassion and agreed to foot the cost of the trip back to Canada, but the as everyone knows that tumures don't grow overnight or even weeks and pre existing conditions are not covered by any insurance policies...

What I gleaned from the original insurance debacle that although standard personal life insurance policies typically have a 90-day post-purchase coverage exclusion period that reduces their risk of being exposed to claim from a customer with a genuine but previously unidentified or unknown per-existing condition, I was unaware that travel health insurers may include a similar exclusion period prior to the personal policy purchase date. In their line of business it makes perfect sense as I would assume these policies would be mostly one-off or limited usage.

 

My frequent international travel is mostly covered by a corporate insurance policy that has understandably higher premiums but doesn't seem to have this prior-to travel window of exclusion. But I better go and check the small print again, just in case that has changed.

[SkyFax]

10 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

Yes, I agree, tumors do not grow overnight, but neither do they begin to present symptoms overnight. And unless and until a specific diagnosis has been made it cannot be regarded as pre-existing, even though it was there. <CUT>

From AllianzTravel FAQ:

 

The illness, injury, or medical condition does not need to be formally diagnosed in order to be considered a pre-existing medical condition.

 

https://www.allianztravelinsurance.com/faq.htm

 

 

 

[NanLaew]

2 minutes ago, SkyFax said:

From AllianzTravel FAQ:

 

The illness, injury, or medical condition does not need to be formally diagnosed in order to be considered a pre-existing medical condition.

 

https://www.allianztravelinsurance.com/faq.htm

 

 

 

Yes, I saw that particularly odious bit of sidestepping in the original story. As I read it, it means that as far as Allianz are concerned, anyone unqualified can make a medical judgement call.

 

Hypothetical example, the taxi driver that takes you home from the ER or doctor can say, "He wasn't looking good and it looked like he had a brain tumor to me."

[Sheryl]

53 minutes ago, smedly said:

and he couldn't fly because ?

 

oh that's right - the Thai hospital were earning big time and didn't want him to leave

Read the other threads please.

 

He had increased intracranial pressure and could only be transported by air ambulance which is extremely costly.

[SkyFax]

10 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Yes, I saw that particularly odious bit of sidestepping in the original story. As I read it 

it means that as far as Allianz are concerned, anyone unqualified can make a medical judgement call.

 

Hypothetical example, the taxi driver that takes you home from the ER or doctor can say, "He wasn't looking good and it looked like he had a brain tumor to me."

Maybe but this is a travel insurance policy statement not a medical insurance policy statement.

[Sheryl]

13 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Yes, I saw that particularly odious bit of sidestepping in the original story. As I read it, it means that as far as Allianz are concerned, anyone unqualified can make a medical judgement call.

 

Hypothetical example, the taxi driver that takes you home from the ER or doctor can say, "He wasn't looking good and it looked like he had a brain tumor to me."

If a doctor had said it looked like a brain tumor than it would have been diagnosed and this provision is itrelevant.

 

This provision is quoted out of context however. It is preceded by specific limitations on what can be considered a pre-existing condition. The person must have sought treatment for the condition in the past 6 months. Which this man did not. He was treated for the flu a month prior at which time he had among other flu like symptoms a mild headache perfectly consistent with the flu. An over zealous loss adjustor tried to seize on that to claim the flu visit headache (which completely subsided) was actually due to the brain tumor. No evidence of this and as soon as it became evident the couple was fighting this the company reversed their devision. 

 

There is no problem with the terms of the policy. In fact the terms are unusually good, allowing cover even for known pre existing conditions if stable on a long standing tegimen of medication that has not tecently needed adjustment.

 

The problem was the company tried to avoid following the terms on a flimsy pretect that would never have stood up on appeal.

[Eric Loh]

So good to know that you are coping well. Best of luck, 

[SkyFax]

30 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

<CUT>

 

This provision is quoted out of context however. <CUT2>

The FAQ provision says:

"The illness, injury, or medical condition does not need to be formally diagnosed in order to be considered a pre-existing medical condition."

 

So what would be an example when the provision would be in context?
 

 

[SkyFax]

OK too late for me to edit the above but I will say the catch all non-diagnosed provision might apply if the gent in question went to doctors within the 120 day window complaining of headaches and the doctor(s) still did not diagnose the tumor then that provision might apply.

 

[Sheryl]

27 minutes ago, SkyFax said:

OK too late for me to edit the above but I will say the catch all non-diagnosed provision might apply if the gent in question went to doctors within the 120 day window complaining of headaches and the doctor(s) still did not diagnose the tumor then that provision might apply.

 

 

IF the headaches were due to the brain tumor.

 

But he did not go to the doctor with a primary complaint of headache.

 

He went with the flu and among several flu symptoms he had at that time a mild headache that then resolved when he got over the flu.

 

If he had gone to a doctor with a severe headache as primary complaint yes, the company would have a leg to stand on.

 

But this was grasping at straws. The burden would be on them to prove that a symptom commonly seen in the flu, in someone diagnosed with the flu, and which then went away after he recovered from the flu, was in fact actually due to an underlying brain tumor.

 

They can't possibly prove that.  Which is why the decision was reversed at higher levels when it got publicized and was obviously going to be appealed.

 

 

[SkyFax]

From the original OP after the claim had been denied based on the flu-episode:

The couple was about a month into their trip when the 30-year-old began suffering from a severe migraine.

"He got a migraine that didn’t go away," Jennifer Witmer told CTV News Toronto from a hospital in the southern Thailand island of Koh Samui on Monday. "It just got bad."

Jennifer Witmer said they went to the hospital and were expecting to be given pain medication for the migraine. .

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/canadian-diagnosed-with-brain-tumour-in-thailand-has-travel-insurance-declined-because-he-had-the-flu-a-month-ago-1.4722084

 

Doesn't sound to me that this was his first ever 'migraine'.

[RichardColeman]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

Their insurance company eventually reversed the decision.

 

Amazing what bad publicity can do

[Scouse123]

4 hours ago, Sheryl said:

They did not relent out of  "compassion" and this did not meet the policy contract's definition of pre-existing. See prior threads.

 

Agreed Sheryl,

 

And compassion and insurance companies never should be used in the same sentence.

 

Best of luck to the Canadian man.

 

Judging by the photo he seems to have got his appetite back!

 

 

 

[Sheryl]

Yes fortunately the delay seems not to have caused permanent harm...as it potentially could have.

[Sheryl]

1 hour ago, SkyFax said:

From the original OP after the claim had been denied based on the flu-episode:

The couple was about a month into their trip when the 30-year-old began suffering from a severe migraine.

"He got a migraine that didn’t go away," Jennifer Witmer told CTV News Toronto from a hospital in the southern Thailand island of Koh Samui on Monday. "It just got bad."

Jennifer Witmer said they went to the hospital and were expecting to be given pain medication for the migraine. .

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/canadian-diagnosed-with-brain-tumour-in-thailand-has-travel-insurance-declined-because-he-had-the-flu-a-month-ago-1.4722084

 

Doesn't sound to me that this was his first ever 'migraine'.

 

Doesn't matter if it was or was not. He did not seek treatment for migraine in the 120 days prior to taking out the policy so not excluded as pre existing condition under the terms of the policy.

 

The company never even raised migraine history  as an issue. So either he had no such history or it had not required treatment in the 120 day period.

[SkyFax]

Whether the company raised the issue or not, Mrs. Witmer in the Toronto TV interview doesn't sound surprised that her husband had a severe headache, only that it didn't go away.

 

The Allianz Travel FAQ on pre-existing conditions at 2. only says "presented symptoms", not that medical help was sought for those symptoms. And at this point, one can't say that he didn't have a severe headache 90 days prior to his ER visit for the flu whether he sought medical help or not -- maybe they just got "pain medication for the migraine" from the Rexall pharmacy.

 

[JCauto]

On 12/16/2019 at 8:20 PM, ezzra said:

Lucky for him that the insurance company relented of of compassion and agreed to foot the cost of the trip back to Canada, but the as everyone knows that tumures don't grow overnight or even weeks and pre existing conditions are not covered by any insurance policies...

"Insurance company" and "relented <out> of compassion" do not belong in the same sentence as they have never occurred in the wild. Insurance companies do not have compassion, they have actuaries. The actuaries in this case examined the likely blowback on the company when they decided initially to screw this guy and that was fine until it made the news and then they said "uh oh, we're gonna get blown up big time for this" and decided it was CHEAPER to pay the cost. You will note that this compassion did not inspire them to quickly resolve this poor fellow's problem and they were quite content to leave him here to rot. Fortunately it gained enough traction in social media that they had to act.

 

And he's Canadian, so once he got back to Canada there are no "pre-existing conditions" or other nonsense to deny people coverage for their critical health problems so he's now being treated. For free. So what's the lesson? Even in Canada, where you have universal health care, if you go abroad and are left to the tender mercies of the for-profit health insurance industry, you can be easily screwed.