Hillary talked about woman with no health care for her adopted children?

Question

Last night, Hillary talked about meeting a woman who adopted 2 children with Autism, then she came down with cancer and has no health insurance. Who in their right mind would adopt two kids in need of medical attention when they don't have medical insurance to take care of themselves? And then they want to say that universal Health care is important for them? I wasn't even aware that you were allowed to adopt without being fully capable of meeting the child's needs. Maybe with all those thousands of dollars this woman spent adopting those kids, she could have used taking care of herself and getting health insurance. Is this the typical attitude of a Democrat supporter? Or is Hillary just blowing sunshine up our buns?

Answer 1

I listened to her but I didn't correlate as you did. STAR FOR YOU!!!

Answer 2

you could try to obtain as much as resource as you can by search the keyword in search engine,if you have good luck there,then your problem solved.however,if you could not find the answer by doing that,here is the relevant resource i prefered.http://heath-insurance.tips-free.info/he...

Answer 3

you hateful people. I am sure you think of yourselves as christians. My insurance company, United American Health, dropped me when I had a heart attack, now I have a pre existing illness and cannot get insurance, I make $1000,000.00 a year, I do not need mcbains tax credit, I need insurance.

Answer 4

Hillary did say the woman had cancer - sometimes people who get that sick lose their jobs and also lose their health insurance.  She probably had health insurance when she adopted and then lost it.

Answer 5

This is a very interesting question. Usually, prospective adoptive parents are "vetted" on all levels before a child is placed with them. If she had no health insurance, then the state should have voided the adoption. There's something in the telling of this story that doesn't ring true. I wonder if Hillary "massaged" the facts in her rendition last night?

Answer 6

Liberals do not believe in personal responsibility and Hillary is now and always has been a liberal.

Answer 7

Yep, that is pretty much the desire of the typical Democrat supporter.  Democrats don't let financial realities stop them from helping people in need.  Also, hindsight is 20/20.  This woman adopted the children before being diagnosed with cancer.  How could she know she would need to hoard her meager resources for herself down the road?  She isn't a Republican; if she could help, she was going to.

Answer 8

Could it have been that her husband died? Her work changed and now has no insurance?  She's sick and lost her insurance?

Situations change.

Oh how quickly cons like to  put blame on others.

Answer 9

the usa is the only country in the western world who doesnt have universal healthcare. If it can afford 12 trillion for a war in iraq that doesnt need to have happened then it can afford unversal healthcare

americans deserve better than a second rate healthcare system

Answer 10

I don't know what she is blowing.( I'm sure it wasn't Bill). Democrates want you to depend on them solely or support them with your hard earned money. Everything the government takes control of, price goes up quality goes down. Grady hospital in Atlanta was a free clinic. The doors have come close to closing.  

Answer 11

I thought the same thing. It is like the person on welfare having more kids. Makes you want to scream.

Answer 12

As someone who is well versed in stateside and international adoptions, I can tell you no judge would have given the seal of approval to finalize an adoption, particularly that of special needs kids, if the adoptive parent(s) didn't have the means to provide medical care.  Something must have happened to this woman's ability to provide medical care to these children after the adoption was finalized.  I did catch that, too.

Answer 13

Maybe the woman HAD health insurance AND a job but BOTH were shipped offshore by an OUTSOURCING Republican owned company !!

Answer 14

That story sounds exreme and doesn't do anything to support her Universal Healthcare ideas.  There really are certain instances where people need to think first.  People need to stop relying on the government for everything and expecting the government to live their lives for them.  I don't want the government to provide me with everything. That sounds far to socialistic; didn't we study how awful that kind of life is in our history classes?

Answer 15

Um i doubt it cost the woman much to adopt autistic kids... meaning i don't think people are jumping to adopt them or you fighting to adopt other sick kids that one on wants to take care of.

I'm assuming she had health care through a job and probably got too sick to work lost her health and got diagnosed with cancer.

And i think the point of the story was kids deserve health care no matter what and that you shouldn't have to contemplate feeding your family or getting medical attention... it should be both with a little money left over, i don't think the right to live and be healthy is too much to ask...do you?

Oh i forgot to say can a single woman not raise kids? it seems like that can because they have been doing it for years!

Answer 16

You don't know if she lost her health insurance.  Some ins companies tend to drop you if you have a really serious illness.  In that case, her children would be dropped too.

Her husband may have left her.  You don't know the whole situation.

Stop judging.

Answer 17

i caught that too..     and had similar questions.  

maybe the woman's circumstances changed after the adoption process.

and as far as the kids go, isn't a little one on one love better than being in an institution where there is no time for that attention and care?  

i also found it strange a young boy would talk to hillary about his mother's income.  i would never think of such stuff when i was a kid.  it's unfortunate that children have such stresses today and can't just be kids.  

Answer 18

I watched the same speech last night.  In the real world, you can be happily going on with your life, and everything is hunky-dory, and the next minute you can find out you have cancer.  You must either be really young and naive, or really short-sighted.  What wasn't mentioned was whether or not she had health insurance when she started the adoption process.  Adoption is not like going to Wal-Mart and buying a TV.  It is more like getting a mortgage, but way more lengthy.  Months could have went by, and after the adoptions process was complete, THEN she heard the bad news.  Hillary had a fixed amount of time to fill in with a dynamite speech, and she apparently left out some details.  In retrospect, the details are not really that important.  What IS important is that a very large number of law-abiding, thrifty, hardworking Americans do not have health insurance, and do not have access to health insurance regardless of their ability to pay for it.  Most Americans have access to health insurance through their jobs and careers.  Very few of us are wealthy enough to pay cash for a very expensive treatment regimen like that for cancer.  If you are afraid of your taxes going up because of other people's health problems, I would worry more about suddenly finding out you have a serious illness that your health insurance won't cover.  THAT is the point of Hillary's speech last night.

Answer 19

Liberal democrats always use the exceptional cases that are rare to highlight a problem and try to expand that to national issues.  Usually the cases have merit and do highlight how that particular person needs help.  The problem is thinking that the fed. gov. can simply open up the program for everyone equally and expecting every case to be as justified.

In this case, this is sad, but the real tragedy is not the lack of healthcare but the lack of planning and oversight on the person's that adopted.  I agree that this one seems to strain the bounds of credibility.