Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
A ראיה to this is from today’s Daf 23A in Gittin. Rashi says that קטן can’t be a שליח because the פסוק says “איש” in the פסוק that teaches us Shlichus. Rashi says a Katan isn’t an איש. This could ne because he hasn’t yet developed his דעת he is just an אדם.
As an aside it is not being “mechalel” Shabbos to go on a Hatzalah bank it is doing Melacha on Shabbos.
Hatzalah continues to render service in most places. משום איבה and they would be shut down if they didn’t contribute care. That behind said if they are able to safely care with shinuim they would do that. But that if true even with a Yid. In our city Hatzalah had a psak that they can’t cancel units or give hints on the radio in these cases.
I really enjoy your דברי תורה is there a way to get them emailed?
I am saying that I have encountered people who don’t want to go to the emergency room because they don’t have insurance or haven’t met their deductible. I am not saying this should necessarily be a consideration, just that it happens. If hatzolah bills those people will be less likely to call. Sometimes their not calling will lead to bad medical outcomes. The example you have is am extreme one but a subtle chest pain can be a heart attack. Hatzolah is built on the premise that even if one life is games it is with it too have the whole organization. If when one yiddeshe neshama is lost it is not worth implementing a something that will cause it.
If Hatzolah doesn’t collect from them then they will not gain much by billing insurance and they will chase away donors by billing in the first place that is exactly my point they are not gaining much and maybe even losing by billing insurance. This is only the financial negative of billing there is also the danger of people not calling thereby hurting the mission of Hatzolah in the first place.
Daas Torah
“They would still get whatever amount the insurance company pays.
It’s possibly insurance fraud, though.”
If a person hasn’t reached their deductible then insurance will pay nothing. Most people who are relatively healthy don’t reach their deductible.Hatzalah paying back deductibles would negate the whole purpose of billing insurance. Especially in today’s time of high deductibles. I really feel that the benefits don’t outweigh the negatives. Plus donations would definitely take a hit based on this model. I also agree aside from financial considerations biking would cause people to hesitate before calling which may weed out some abuse of the system, but may also cause some serious calls not to be made resulting in bad medical outcomes or C”V deaths.
I think billing will inhibit people from calling. Especially if hatzolah sends them a bill and they haven’t reached their deductible. If they are only “soft billing” then based on the fact that most people will not have reached their deductible hatzolah will not be making as much as they may think. That couples with the fact that billing insurance has costs and that findings will go down may make it not worth dealing with the hassle.
If hatzolah bills it may cause then problems financially. First of all today people have large deductibles. Would they have to pay out of pocket? Second of all if the billing doesn’t cover all their expenses won’t it be harder for them to fundraise if people know they bill insurance?
Angelino – I will try to see if I can ask the Rav one of the Rabbanim is Rabbi G. Whose shut is on Beverly closer to Fairfax. I will ask him about the telegram.
Gaon- the Rav that said about the Eidus says he was involved in us discussion with Rav Moshe and he is of the same caliber as the matirim so I don’t think that would fall into the same category as people on a chat being mevazeh.
Again to clarify I am just saying that it isn’t so poshut as was reported at the beginning of the chat. I personally don’t carry as the dissenters are the rabbanim my family in Los Angeles uses.
I apologize for coming off strongly. It just bothers me when people have opinions about Rabbanim that aren’t founded.Angelino Yid that is not what the Rabbanim who oppose it say. They also say they discussed it with Rav Moshe (or at least two of them that I have spoken to did) perhaps even with Rabbi Gruman, and that he was clearly against it. I would be happy to tell which Rabbanim these are if you want to discuss it with them. The problem I have with publicly giving their names is that people like You Don’t Say tend to be Mevazeh Rabbanim that don’t agree with them.
You Don’t Say-
The Rabbanim on both sides are Choshuva Poskim. I am just responding to the original post that states that no one argues about the LA Eruv. That is simply not true. The Rabbanim who oppose the LA Eruv did not get a written Tshuva they flew to New York and sat and discussed it with Rav Moshe. The rabbanim who are pro the Eruv agree that Rav Moshe said no. They are just saying that Rav Moshe Paskened based on wrong Metzius. You should be careful before disparaging Rabbanim whom you don’t even know. I am sure Rabbanim on both sides of the coin know a lot more than you or me. Again I am not attempting to say that I “agree” with either side as I don’t even know anything near the amount these Rabbanim know, when it comes to Halacha.Not sure if my original post went through-
The premise that no one argues about the LA Eruv is incorrect. There are Rabbonim who went to Rav Moshe about an Eruv in LA and Rav Moshe Paskened that LA can’t have an Eruv. A few Rabbanim after Rav Moshe was Niftar said that Rav Moshe was given the wrong Metzios. I personally heard directly from one of the Rabbanim who were part of the discussion with Rav Moshe say that he would not allow someone who uses the Eruv in LA to be an Aid at a Chasunah.Rav Moshe did pasken against the LA Eruv. It is a controversial Eruv. There are rabbanim that say that Rav Moshe wasn’t given the correct metzios. There are other rabbanim who were there when rav Moshe was asked who assur the Eruv. I even heard one of those rabbanim say that they would not use anyone who carries in that Eruv to be an Aid at a Chasunah.