Every time Debbie Shank, a woman living in Jackson, Mo., asks about her son Jeremy, she has to be retold that he was killed in Iraq.
She starts to cry uncontrollably because each time is like hearing it for the first, again and again.
Shank was in a horrific car accident in 2000 that stripped her away completely of her short-term memory. She did not even remember the interview she had with CNN that allowed her and her husband Jim to tell their story.
They are one of the many victims of humanity vs. corporation. Eight years after her accident, she lives in a nursing home. Her husband Jim has prostate cancer.
In 2000, she started working for Wal-Mart as a shelver and got on its health care and benefits plan. All was well because the Shank’s settled the accident in court for $ 470,000. This money went into a trust fund to help care for Debbie, cover living expenses and eventually would be used to help send their youngest son to college.
Their lawyer made Wal-Mart aware of the damages the Shanks’ received. Within the fine print of its health care policy, it states "Wal-Mart has the right to recoup medical expenses."
In laymen’s terms, since Wal-Mart covered the majority of her medical bills, supposedly Wal- Mart was entitled to the equivalent of the money its insurance company paid out in damages.
Wal-Mart is currently suing the Shanks’, ironically for $470,000. They only have $277,000 left of their trust fund. According to its policy, Wal-Mart is right, but morally, severely wrong.
The corporate typhoon Wal-Mart’s net profit for the third quarter in 2007 was $90 billion. You have to keep in mind that it was its net profit; the money Wal-Mart received after all the bills were paid, from light bill to employee salary.
The $470,000 only makes up .0005 percent of its profits. Because of this, Jim had to divorce Debbie to receive Medicaid. They were forced to give up their rights of matrimony, the ultimate expression of unconditional love one could display for another.
But it is still not enough.
If Wal-Mart wins, they lose everything. They will not be able to afford to send their youngest son to college and afford housing.
Jim will lose his car and the remainder of their medical bills will be theirs to be reckoned with. Collecting bills is the a hobby that keeps on taking.
The Shanks have gone to court twice already. Both times the judge ruled in Wal- Mart’s favor. Next: The Shanks are taking their case to capital hill, the U.S. Supreme Court. Hopefully, third time will not be a charm for Wal-Mart.
As a result, I’ve included my own recommendation for what Wal-Mart’s new tagline should be:
Always low prices. But it will cost you.
source: The Shield - USI
No comments:
Post a Comment