Comments on: Nataline Sarkisyan Dies and Cigna Saves Money

By: BunnyX

BunnyX — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 08:48:16 +0000

Sorry, Joe, not so. This would only be true if the employer were self-funded, and not many are. That is what the employer pays the insurer for, for taking the financial risk.

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 01:36:02 +0000

Article title is misleading. CIGNA would not have saved any money by denying the transplant. The money would have come from her father’s employer. This is an example of how insurance is generally misunderstood by the public.

By: Jeannine Starkey

Jeannine Starkey — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:03:45 +0000

It’s easy to sit behind a desk, and make your assessment, if it were your child would you rationalize, is it worth it? Perhaps she would’ve died anyway, and maybe she would have lived a full life with a career, children, a husband, and all the other joys of life, but we’ll never know. The doctors were there, the liver was there, the equipment was there and the technology was there, only the money was missing. Yes i agree the doctors could have performed the surgery anyway, but the doctors are not the ones who collect our money pre-sickness. The insurance companies should never deny any treatment. These are INSURANCE companies who take our money month after month, so that we can be assured that should we become sick, we have recourse for that illness, I’ve yet to receive a check back from them for going many years without a sickness, they shouldn’t have a right to decide which course of action I want to take for my survival when i do get sick!

By: Chuck Zubritsky

Chuck Zubritsky — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 03:51:13 +0000

If she had acute graft versus host disease, her chances of survival a liver transplant long term would be close to zero. Actually, graft versus host is the opposite of organ rejection. The transplanted immune cells in the bone marrow mount an attack on the recipient’s organs, especially the lungs, liver and skin. It is a horrible way to die. The incidence of GVHD is very high for some forms of leukemia and mortality can reach a rate of 50 %. I think CIGNA has been another victim of media hype and bias. Reputable reporters would have researched this situation and found out that in almost every case, patients in need of organ transplants are immediately disqualified if they have been treated for cancer in the last five years! Of course, this would have gotten in the way of the media’s agenda. Shame on UCLA for even suggesting this procedure.

By: chappy

chappy — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 02:05:33 +0000

While it is always sad when a young life ends, this story of Nataline needs to be reviewed rationally and with an eye towards common sense and known science. It is hard to take the emotion out of a young death, but the decision to use a liver that could save a life and use it instead for someone whose life is already compromised and NEVER likely to live normally, just isn’t sound. The availability of organs is too scarce. But before even going to this debate, let’s be clear…..to all those who claim CIGNA KILLED NATALINE, this is untrue. Leukemia killed Nataline. I repeat: Leukemia killed Nataline. Specifially, it sounds from the reports, that Nataline died from the effects of Graft vs. Host disease—-and this complication was a direct result of her Bone Marrow Transplant. In this condition, the body wages a war against foreign material (her brother’s bone marrow) and in the process, it destroys its own organs (like lungs, liver, skin, eyes, etc.). Adding a new liver and a pair of lungs to this war would only intensify it. And in her already compromised state, it is doubtful that Nataline would have ever walked out of that hospital–even if her organs started being replaced with new ones serially.
I work in Health Care. And I would never imagine that I would defend an insurance company in its decision. But does anyone realize that once her lungs and liver were destroyed by her own body’s attack, any new ones would have been under an equal assault? Additionally, in one article ” Sarkisyan’s 21-year-old brother, Bedros, told reporters that UCLA had a liver available for transplant, but they could not perform the procedure because of Cigna’s refusal to cover it.” To be clear on another point of distortion, there is nothing I have read that prevented UCLA from performing the operation–except the promise of money. If the procedure was so essential, why didn’t the hospital do it anyway? And where are the voices accusing the hospital of witholding care? Where I work, insurance companies deny authorization all the time for treatments that the clinical staff recommends. If we believe the treatment is needed and essential, there are protocols in place for appealing insurance decisions.
In other words, the hospital didn’t need “permission” from CIGNA to perform the surgery.
In the end, it is a tragedy. A tragedy that a teenager died before she had a chance to live her life. But it is not CIGNA’s fault, and it is not the fault of the hospital (although UCLA has seemingly dodged any accountability thus far in the press), it was the leukemia’s fault.

By: Jodimaria Rosa

Jodimaria Rosa — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 20:23:51 +0000

I ache for poor Nataline and her brave family. I wish them strength. Such a beautiful girl and with such a beautiful voice. It is a travesty that she fell to the merciless hands of the “bean counters” as explained by Dr. John J. Ryan founder of iadmd.org. I say America stands up and supports Dr. Ryan’s “seeking support from the presidential candidates to review the IADMD health care plan where this never would’ve happened.” Too bad it was not considered in enough time for beautiful Nataline and her aching family and loved ones. And I say that Nataline’s death should not be in vain and that Dr. Ryan’s proposal for a “Nataline Law” so that this never happens again would be a phenomenal tribute to Nataline and her family and friends. If such a Nataline law could prevent this horrific result from reoccuring in the world’s leader on health care, then this tribute to Nataline would make her life and unfortunate death worth something honorable. God Bless Nataline and all who suffer from this travesty.