Reader comments:

• The old Sponge House" still lives. It is located behind the Church of God - Full Gospel Hall - On South Church Street. It was moved there after the War and used for a school. Also, one of the Germans was married in Cayman - Dick Arch
  
   
• Last week, on the Rooster's talk show, it was pointed out to the Minister for Health, Mr Gilbert McLean, that any applicant to Cinico is required to produce letters of refusal from two other insurance companies. This requirement can be quite frustrating and onerous to the handicapped. It is also a ridiculous requirement, because the applicant is asked to apply to two private companies for insurance that s/he knows they can never get.
  
  Why should an "uninsurable" waste time, effort and money applying to insurance companies when they already know the answer will be NO?
  
  What may be a simple exercise for a fit person can be an onerous exercise for a person with a disability. Remember, some of these applicants depend on others for transport/ money. To apply to an insurance company, requires a trip to the doctor's office to complete a medical/get a doctor's letter. Money will be needed to pay the doctor.
  
  It seems to me that proof of disability should be sufficient when applying to Cinico. A doctor’s letter identifying the applicant's disability should be sufficient for Cinico.
  
  The Minister agreed that proof of disability should be sufficient and gave his undertaking that before that day was out (last Wednesday, I think), he would have investigated this point with Cinico with a view to having this ridiculous requirement relaxed, especially since Cinico has a defined application period.
  
  I wonder if Cayman Net News could chase up this point and see if Cinico has relaxed this requirement or indeed, if the Minister did do anything about it as he promised he would do.
  
  Remember, Cinico's deadline for accepting applicants is May 31, 2004. We need to know fairly soon whether Cinico will relax their ridiculous requirement and accept proof of disability or whether Cinico will persist in presenting another hurdle in the path of the uninsurables' frustrating drive to obtaining health insurance .
  
  It is cruelly ironic that the people who need insurance the most are the ones who can't get it - Direct Current
  
   
• I agree totally with Direct Current about CINICO's requirement being unreasonable and ridiculous. I think it’s an exercise in futility, really.
  
  What's the point of going through all that rigmarole of applying to private insurance companies if you have a known disability? Why bother? Private insurance companies will always answer with a loud No whenever an uninsurable applies to them for insurance coverage.
  
  Why can't these unfortunate uninsurables be automatically grafted into CINICO's programme? Government has approx 10,000 people that they are responsible to provide insurance coverage for. Among that number are civil servants, pensioners, uninsurables and indigents. The very fact that some one with a medical disability is on the Government list should be evidence enough that they are in the class known as uninsurable. No further evidence required. They should automatically be included in CINICO's programme. If they choose to leave that programme, then that's up to them.
  
  Then, can some one explain to me why CINICO has a deadline in which one can apply? Some one may be fine today and in July they may learn they have a medical problem. Will CINICO tell them, "Sorry we're not accepting any more applications. Our deadline was May 31, 2004." Please bear in mind that Sickness does not respect deadlines.
  
  I agree that CINICO is merely erecting further hurdles for the uninsurable to surmount as they struggle through life. These poor people have to jump through hoops for everything in their life.....just to prove they are as good as anyone else. Why did we think CINICO's insurance would be different?
  
  Were we really expecting an insurance company that was committed to serving its target group with compassion & dignity? Seems like all we have in CINICO is an insurance company that is consumed with a desire to appease the competition, rather than providing a compassionate service for the very people it was set up to serve.
  
  I am very disappointed in CINICO and hope that its ridiculous requirement will be lifted as soon as possible to allow the uninsurables to move smoothly from the Government list to CINICO - Juicy Fruit
  
   
• I read the article from Juicy Fruit with great interest, and would just like to mention some positive experiences I have had with CINICO.
  
  First of all, the closed enrolment period is not really "closed". In fact, anyone can join all year around, provided they meet the basic requirements. However, in order to keep premiums low (a very necessary requirement for those who cannot afford health insurance) certain controls must be put in place including the proof that a person really is health impaired. This may sound easy, but it's not.
  
  In any event, I also understand that CINICO has amended it's requirements for the health impaired, so that ANYONE who can evidence serious illness in the last 12 months can join CINICO without evidence of being declined from two approved providers. Furthermore, anyone who becomes sick or turns 60 can join at any time throughout the year, regardless of the May 31st deadline.
  
  I think we should applaud Government for being proactive in meeting a desperate need in the Islands and we must bear in mind that in order to keep premiums at an absolute minimum, certain fiscal constraints have to be put in place - Anonymous
  
   
• Dear Caymanians and Residents of the Cayman Islands:
  
  My biggest gripe at the moment is health insurance in the Cayman Islands...we are being ripped off, big time… I thought CINICO would alleviate some of the stress that uninsurables face, but they are proving to be just as bad as the private insurance companies, with their ridiculous requirement and their “band aid coverage."
  
  In a recent meeting with this letter writer, CINICO's manager was very compassionate and knowledgeable about insurance, both locally and internationally. I was very impressed with her credentials, international experience and her courteous open door policy. However, I am NOT impressed with CINICO's product. The coverage they offer their target groups leave much to be desired.
  
  First of all, they advertise their requirement of 2 letters of refusals when an uninsurable applies to CINICO. The anonymous writer above responded to my earlier letter by saying CINICO relaxed this requirement… I went down to CINICO only to hear that yes, they can waive this requirement if they are convinced of the individual's disability and they can accept me with a doctor's letter as proof of my disability, but my coverage would only extend to inpatient care. I would still have to pay for my monthly medications and all outpatient care.
  
  I told their manager that I was interested in a plan that would cover my monthly medications, dental & optical...in other words...out patient treatment was my biggest requirement. Why pay $150.00 per month and then also pay my monthly medication bill and my doctor and dentist's bill as well? I may as well self-insure, I say. I can get upgraded to Plan 2 in January, she says… so if I join now, I would only be covered for in patient care (Plan 1) and when I'm upgraded in Jan., it would cover me for in and out patient care. She did not go into details of Plan 2, but I'm sure that has some limits on it as well.
  
  I left that meeting and did some very basic research. Following are some thoughts that trouble me.
  
  Health insurance coverage is sorely lacking in the Cayman Islands. People pay for coverage, only to find out at the doctor's office that they have to pay the first $300.00 before the insurance kicks in (my kids' AETNA plan), or that their plan only covers inpatient care (many local insurances' basic plan). This is simply NOT good enough and is not comparable to health insurance plans offered overseas.
  
  The bottom line is that Government needs to require the insurance companies to deliver more than they are doing. The plans are outlined in the Health Insurance Law. Therefore, Government has the opportunity to set in place the type of coverage local insurances can & will deliver. Why are they passing up that golden opportunity to obtain the best possible coverage for the people of the Cayman Islands? Why leave it to the insurance companies, who are focused on the bottom line?
  
  Another serious point: Government needs to require that insurance companies stop discriminating against people who have a medical problem… insurance companies are turning people away who are 20 lbs overweight or who have a sinus problem… trivial matters. They can't get away with that in the USA or UK, why are we allowing them to get away with murder here in Cayman? People need to challenge the insurance companies more in Cayman… their refusals can be appealed. How many people in Cayman are aware of this?
  
  Also, when a consumer company is shopping for health insurance for their employees, they can demand certain things. In Cayman, people meekly accept what the insurance company offers, rather than holding out for what they want. For example, a consumer company may have 30 employees… 29 may be perfectly healthy and 1 may have a health problem. The insurance company will refuse coverage for the 1 employee who is health impaired and offer coverage for the 29 healthy ones. In a situation like that, the consumer company should hold out for coverage of all 30 employees or go elsewhere. If all of the consumer companies played hard ball in this way, we would see a serious change in attitude in the local insurance industry.
  
  Many people overseas are appalled at what insurance companies are allowed to get away with in Cayman.
  
  I've concluded that these insurance companies can get away with these atrocities here because people do not speak up or challenge them or appeal their decisions… certain practices would definitely NOT be tolerated in other countries.
  
  Sorry to be so long winded, but this cause is very near and dear to my heart… and it affects us all.
  
  Contact the Health Minister and ask him to demand more from the local insurance companies… and from CINICO.
  
  If CINICO is to truly fulfill its purpose, it has to do more than it is currently doing in the way of insurance coverage. Also, if indeed CINICO's ridiculous requirement has been relaxed, then they should amend their advertisement to reflect that amendment.
  
  The people of the Cayman Islands require more in insurance coverage from the private insurance companies… and from CINICO - Direct Current
  
   
• Can anyone help please? I am trying to find an old friend of mine who I think is still on Grand Cayman working in a restaurant. The name is Chris Weaver, from the U.K. We worked together on the island in early nineties. Any help would be great. Thanks - Colin Howlett
  • Editor’s note: If any of our readers can help Mr Howlett, we will be happy to pass on letters or e-mails. Send them to us at PO Box 10707 APO or caymanet@candw.ky
    
     
• Maybe this is where we are headed also:
  
  When watching the corporate-dominated media in America, any intelligent observer suffers inevitable anguish and disgust. All major media are essentially the same in terms of personnel, format, even timing of subject matter in each broadcast. Whether male or female, white, black, or of some other ethic ancestry, media broadcasters are virtual clones of one another. Personnel are well-dressed and impeccably groomed, handsome in appearance and all trained to use certain gestures, including facial expressions and nods of the head to imply knowingness and understanding. But once the tongues start to move and the words are heard, it becomes very clear that the minds of media broadcasters are so shallow as to be almost comical.
  
  Thus, "war on terror" is never questioned, even though any intelligent person just screams for answers. How is it that Americans can launch bombs from missiles and submarines into populated areas and kill civilians without being classed as terrorists, while Palestinian martyrs are terrorists when they attach bombs to their own bodies or vehicles to defend themselves against illegal Israeli occupation? The well-groomed media pundits and broadcasters are not trained to think of such matters, or as questions in that regard.
  
  How is it that the U.S. could recruit, fund, and train Islamist fighters from around the entire Muslim world to fight the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, and yet complain when Muslim jihadists come to Iraq to defend their faith in that country against America's illegal occupation?
  
  Why is it so hard to understand the bombing of the U.N. offices in Baghdad, when the U.N sponsored sanctions against Iraqi civilians for over a decade, leading to the loss of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi lives? Why can the American media never bring itself to analyze that issue?
  
  Why does the media not even begin to question the Alabama judge who claims to be a Christian who is so obsessed with the Ten Commandments, when Christ said he came to fulfill the Law Covenant and thus made the Ten Commandments obsolete and no longer part of Christian doctrine?
  
  Why are Israeli and American armed forces allowed to kill at will, to execute alleged enemies without any proof of guilt? Why do so-called "terrorists" not even have to be proved to be guilty of terrorism? How can the U.S. media fail to question the moral rightness of killing people by simply declaring them to be terrorists, and even pulling them from intensive care units of hospitals, as the Israelis have now done?
  
  Why does the media not question the irrationality of the Bush Administration's so-called "environmental" policies for the National Forests, which policies advocate cutting down forests in order to save them from fire, including selling off the most fire-resistant trees to pay for thinning the small tinder that causes fires to spread rapidly? Why cannot the media see through the shallowness of cutting down forests to make them "healthy"?
  
  Why is the media still acquiescent to the idea that removing Saddam Hussein from power was "a good idea" or "the right thing to do", when there is no evidence that he was in a position to harm the U.S., and when more importantly, the U.S. and Britain are using Saddam-like tactics of killing armed insurgents?
  
  Why was it wrong for Saddam to kill insurgents, using American weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. made those weapons available to him, and yet the U.S. can use any weapon in their own formidable arsenal to stifle Iraqi dissent in the aftermath of the "war of liberation"
  
  The media is blind, and it is deaf, and without a doubt, it is dumb! The media broadcasters are good looking, well-dressed, well-coifed, and ignorant as can be. They have no ability to question authority, because they cannot think critically. The closest the media broadcasters come to thinking critically is deciding which makeup to wear, and which tie goes with which suit, or which lipstick to wear with which outfit.
  
  No wonder the American public is uninformed! There is essentially no basis on which the masses of American citizenry can become informed on critical issues of the day. And of course, the corporations and their government want it to be that way, and cause it to be that way - Joseph (Lebbie) Yates

Back...