Addendum to statement

 

In July of 2018 I contacted the Texas Insurance Commission for the second time. I invoked a specific process requesting a hearing within 30 days to which by law they were required to respond. Instead of responding and granting me a hearing within that time, I was forced to leave my housing arrangement in Fort Worth and travel back to Dallas and was on the streets for nearly a full year after that with still no response from the Texas Insurance Commission. It has been more than three years since that request was made to the Texas Insurance Commission. This has profound consequences outside of the authority of the specific administrative processes of the Texas Insurance Commission. 

 

One of the most important aspects of my request was provision of documentation of who in the State of Texas authorized the insurance billings for my treatment. I was TOLD and required to sign a piece of paper acknowledging I had been told that my “treatment” was being paid for by the Mental Health and Mental Retardation Act insurance network, meaning paid for by the State of Texas. I was REFUSED the possibility to leave the hospital – including after I had already missed my court hearing – until after I signed paperwork that I contended was fraudulent itself. By law, the Texas Insurance Commission must authorize these billings and provide documentation of the authorization. In over five years I have been refused provision of the information, including for more than three years BY the Texas Insurance Commission itself. 

 

This was NOT about “medical treatment.” On the wall in the “North Side” section of the Neuropsychiatric Center was a piece of paper that allegedly listed the amounts of the costs of the treatment that people were receiving while in the “hospital.” There was no patient’s rights information – that was in the other “South Side” room. This piece of paper said that the cost for “observation” was $212 a day. However, when I had arrived onsite at Ben Taub Hospital for the first time late in February to obtain information, I had read the entire “contract” agreement one has to sign in order to see a medical practitioner. It specifically said that one had to agree that “‘You are financially responsible for the cost of treatment.” I asked the clerk to clarify and she told me I could speak with a “financial counselor.” I did. The financial counselor gave me a sheet of paper that had TWO different rates of cost information on it depending upon the level of observation determined to be necessary based on the identified severity of the incident. One amount was listed at $1,000 a day; the other amount was listed at $1,800 a day. This sheet of paper was in my “attache case” that I had taken with me with the evidence of the “fraud” and “child abuse” I was attempting to report to mandated reporters. 

 

I did not get to see if there was a second amount besides the $212 listed on that sheet. When I read it I said out loud that it was not the same information as was on the sheet I had been given; THAT was when they “transferred” me to the “South Side.” It was obvious that this was not about my alleged “medical condition” but about something else. I understand that based on what I was given beforehand, that the first evening would have been billed at $1,000 and the other two at $1,800 – in addition to the cost of “medication.” But did other people who saw that sheet think they were responsible for medical billings at the rate of “$212” a day? So, three days at “$212?” Instead, of, what, two to three days at $1,000? Or two to three days at $1,800?
 

In light of what has come up SINCE then – including a Supreme Court decision that has been permitted to be handed down since I attempted to petition the Supreme Court of the United States regarding payment of health insurance costs by the government – what does this mean for people are being told they need to “pay” for their “healthcare” by virtue of their relationship to the “government?” In the context in which I was “detained” the “costs” that were “posted on the wall” were NOT what the “financial costs” of the treatment were. I know that – who else did? If one was “budgeting” for costs of treatment and given intentionally errant information on the costs ONLY AFTER THEY WERE ILLEGALLY ENTERED FOR ALLEGED MEDICAL TREATMENT how does one EVER “pay” for the “costs” of their “medical treatment?” Their “insurance?”

 

And what does it mean when the “Texas Insurance Commission” refuses to provide information on the costs – and who authorized the billings for those costs?

 

This was NOT medical treatment. 

 

11:24 am CST

March 26, 2022

Charity Colleen Crouse

 

11:48 am CST proofread