Scott Lloyd Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 (edited) I thought someone had quoted the MP's handbook saying that was the policy.I missed it if they did. So I looked it up (I have the handbook in my "Gospel LIbrary" app on my mobile device.) Here's what it says: If you need medical care, call your mission president immediately. He will know where the best medical care can be obtained. Visits to a physician or other health-care professional should be authorized in advance by your mission president or his representative. In an emergency, get help immediately and then inform your mission president as soon as possible. I have to say this strikes me as sound policy. If the missionary is sick or hurt enough to need medical care, the mission president needs to know about it, and soon. In fact, this kind of close watch-care is one of the things I find reassuring about having my son serve a mission. It helps prevent the missionary being victimized by charlatans or incompetent practitioners. If I knew my son was in difficulty, one of the first things I would want him or his companion to do would be to inform the mission president. And, as you will note, in an emergency there is no requirement for advance authorization. Edited October 16, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 (edited) Yep. That entitlement mentality of young kids who give up 18 months to two years of their lives in 24/7 service, at their own expense. Oh brother.I don't see it coming from any young kids at the moment. I see it coming from you. Edited October 16, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
Damien the Leper Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 (edited) I gave the article the benefit of the doubt, Smac. This was awful. The author started what seemed a reasonable exploration into a possible problem and did not just derail the article but put it on a separate plane of existence only to drag it back to the original and did so horribly.This is twice now today that I've read articles that inspire me to undergo a lobotomy and seek treatment for possible psychosis. Edited October 16, 2015 by Valentinus 2
toon Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 I don't see it coming from any young kids at the moment. I see it coming from you. Because we should expect otherwise healthy 18 year old kids to have the foresight to be concerned about health coverage for potential illnesses. Let me ask, does the Church as them to sign a waiver and release before going on a mission? Does the Church inform them that they will be financially responsible for any illness and injury incurred while on a mission?
Scott Lloyd Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 (edited) Because we should expect otherwise healthy 18 year old kids to have the foresight to be concerned about health coverage for potential illnesses. Let me ask, does the Church as them to sign a waiver and release before going on a mission? Does the Church inform them that they will be financially responsible for any illness and injury incurred while on a mission?Before our son left, we knew about the requirements with regard to health insurance, and we were certain to keep him on our policy that I have at work -- which, as it turns out, is DMBA, the insurer for employees of the Church and its associated companies. It wasn't a problem. No one has ever suggested to me that it is -- until you came along just now. Edited October 16, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
toon Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 Before our son left, we knew about the requirements with regard to health insurance, and we were certain to keep him on our policy -- which, as it turns out, is DMBA, the insurer for employees of the Church and its associated companies. It wasn't a problem. No one has ever suggested to me that it is -- until you came along just now. In the brief five minutes or so after my last post, I did a little digging. It appears there might be some authorization forms and waivers, but couldn't find out what those were. It also seems like there is no requirement to have health insurance, but that the Church advises those with coverage not to cancel, as that will be relied on. But there's also no guarantee that a particular policy will actually cover particular expenses, especially when incurred out of the country. It also seems like the Church will make initial payments, but will rely on health insurance to the extent it is covered. There are also a lot of unanswered questions, like what happens if there isn't coverage beyond initial payments or when a missionary returns home. I hadn't thought of the issue until I read some of the anecdotes in this thread today either. I've lived a pretty privileged life, so I tend to overlook things like this until they're pointed out to me. To the extent that there are missionaries who have incurred significant bills and debt as a result of illnesses and injuries suffered while on their missions, it still seems cheap and shortsighted, and a bit ungrateful, to leave them saddled with those bills. But it could indeed be that those anecdotes are not representative of how the Church treats these issues, in the past or currently.
jkwilliams Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 I missed it if they did.So I looked it up (I have the handbook in my "Gospel LIbrary" app on my mobile device.)Here's what it says:I have to say this strikes me as sound policy.If the missionary is sick or hurt enough to need medical care, the mission president needs to know about it, and soon. In fact, this kind of close watch-care is one of the things I find reassuring about having my son serve a mission. It helps prevent the missionary being victimized by charlatans or incompetent practitioners. If I knew my son was in difficulty, one of the first things I would want him or his companion to do would be to inform the mission president.And, as you will note, in an emergency there is no requirement for advance authorization.I think informing your mission president is sound policy. Saying you need permission to see a doctor is not, IMO. We just disagree.
Jeanne Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 And expecting the Church to pay your health insurance seems like entitlement mentality to me. So there you are. Why not have it buy your food and pay your rent as well?The tithing and missionary fund donated by family all these years and a missionary going out and giving his time..he/she is very much entitled to have health insurance from home if possible..then the church,
Duncan Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 The article is over-the-top and does a slight-of-hand exchange of the exceptions versus the rules; it seems like some isolated cases were presented as the norm. That being said, I am surprised that someone would question why an MP's wife has the qualifications to make medical decisions; this is the same church that has a member in every ward serving as the bishop for that ward, and a member of each Stake presiding as Stake President, and the overwhelmingly vast majority of them have absolutely no training in counseling, sociology, etc., and yet they are charged with counseling entire congregations and stakes. An MP's wife is about as qualified to make medical decisions as the carpenter, businessman, dentist, etc. who is serving as the current bishop is in counseling individuals and families during times of crisis. Bishops and Good Stake Presidents hopefully should know that they are shepherds and not veterinarians. I had a Bishop who reffered me to a specialist in something, thus freeing him up from the expectation of having to do something he doesn't know anything about and it was the best thing ever
Tacenda Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 Bishops and Good Stake Presidents hopefully should know that they are shepherds and not veterinarians. I had a Bishop who reffered me to a specialist in something, thus freeing him up from the expectation of having to do something he doesn't know anything about and it was the best thing everVeterinarians...Whatcha talkin' bout Willis?
Duncan Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 Veterinarians...Whatcha talkin' bout Willis? a vet is trained to diagnose with all the nitty gritty guts and junk-i.e.not a Bishop or stake pres. unless they are a trained therapist
Thinking Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 (edited) In Central America the disease de jour was " gambu " . Everyone got it eventually. If a couple of bottles of flat Coca Cola and a few intestinal pills didn't take care of it, it was time for a trip to the hospital. Prior to my arrival , the mission had problems with jaundice. It would reduce a missionary to bed rest for a month or more. We started getting gamagobulin ( sic) shots every few months and jaundice was practically eliminated. We gave each other the shots. What a gong show. Anyone know if specific instructions about missionary health care are outlined for mission presidents ? I served in Peru in the early 80's. We gave each other gamma globulin injections as prescribed by the mission home. Edited October 17, 2015 by Thinking
Stargazer Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 And expecting the Church to pay your health insurance seems like entitlement mentality to me. So there you are. Why not have it buy your food and pay your rent as well? Oh, yes! Make sure filet mignon is on the menu at least once per week. Thanks!
Thinking Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I don't see it coming from any young kids at the moment. I see it coming from you. And of course you're dialed in to all 80,000 missionaries and know how they feel about paying their own way.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 (edited) And of course you're dialed in to all 80,000 missionaries and know how they feel about paying their own way.It's closer to 85,000, last I heard. And I'm fairly confident virtually all are OK with it or they wouldn't be doing it. The Church doesn't force anyone to go on a mission. Just like it doesn't force anyone to pay tithing or fast offerings, or give time and labor to serve in Church callings. Edited October 17, 2015 by Scott Lloyd 1
Scott Lloyd Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I served in Peru in the early 80's. We gave each other gamma globulin injections as prescribed by the mission home.That gives me the creeps, frankly.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 The tithing and missionary fund donated by family all these years and a missionary going out and giving his time..he/she is very much entitled to have health insurance from home if possible..then the church,Tithing and missionary fund donations are free-will offerings from the faithful members of the Church. The money paid by missionary and his/her family members, friends and relatives to support him or her while on a mission is also a free-will offering. It all goes toward building the Kingdom of God on the earth. I can't see a faithful, devoted Church member begrudging any of it If the Church were required to fund health insurance for all 85,000 missionaries, it would be a huge drain on the tithing funds of the Church, and fewer missionaries could serve. . If you're worried about a particular missionary having to pay for his own health insurance or otherwise support himself, donate some money to offset it. I'm sure it would be appreciated. And it's really easy to do nowadays. You can donate online at lds.org. All you need is the ward's unit number, which you can obtain from the bishop or perhaps the missionary's family. Each missionary or his family is required to pay $400 a month. The money you give could offset that and free up funds that the family could use to pay for the missionary's health insurance (which, in many cases, they would probably be doing anyway if he were still at home). 1
Scott Lloyd Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I think informing your mission president is sound policy. Saying you need permission to see a doctor is not, IMO. We just disagree.I think you're imagining up a horrible scenario in which a mission president routinely refuses to approve needed healthcare for missionaries. That doesn't strike me as likely. The Church typically doesn't call iditos as misison prsidnets.
Thinking Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I think informing your mission president is sound policy. Saying you need permission to see a doctor is not, IMO. We just disagree. I think you're imagining up a horrible scenario in which a mission president routinely refuses to approve needed healthcare for missionaries. That doesn't strike me as likely. The Church typically doesn't call iditos as misison prsidnets. Or a scenario in which the missionary doesn't think it's an emergency (but it really is), and for whatever reason the attempted communication to receive the permission is not working.
jkwilliams Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 Or a scenario in which the missionary doesn't think it's an emergency (but it really is), and for whatever reason the attempted communication to receive the permission is not working.Exactly. There are lots of possibilities for failure that don't involve idiots. I am just not seeing an up side to the policy.
Recommended Posts