She’s already paying property tax and utilities, and often utilities for a house will be far higher than for a small apartment. The proceeds of the house are to give Jean some breathing room to get her career going and back on her feet. I agree it’s not an optimal solution but if you can’t even come across the $80 to get treated for bad vision and insane blood pressure, not to mention she doesn’t have a car to get to work anymore, it’s kinda silly to ignore what’s probably her largest asset. A HELOC might be better since she keeps the house that way, but it would depend on her situation.
Honestly, Jean doesn’t have a good option and a bunch of bad options. She has a bunch of bad options, some of which are less bad than others. Having to sell your house is a bad option, but it’s a better option than dying of some malady that you can’t afford to get treated.
EDIT: on re-reading, dracoi makes a good point about medicaid and house value.
If she’s getting food stamps her EBT card should satisfy most proof of income requirements. If she’s not getting stamps, she probably could.
I agree with Mama Zappa about not selling the house. If she does that, the only real asset she has will be gone forever, and whatever money she gets from it will be gone soon, leaving her with nothing…and needing a place to live.
She might want to consider renting a room in her house to a student. Memphis has a university, and I think they have a law and possibly a medical school, maybe other graduate programs. Nothing against undergrads, but a grad student is more likely to be quiet/responsible, etc.
The University of Memphis ha a law school, but not medical. The University of Tennessee at Memphis has a medical school, but no law. Christian Brothers Uiversity has, well, the word “university” in its name. Rhodes College has high numbes of hot chicks who end up in pharma sales. LeMoyne-Owen has an even higher proportion of hot chicks but they don’t get the pharma jobs.
But you’re changing the hypothetical here. First, you’re talking about lying at the doctor’s office, now you’re talking about lying in the tub. I think at lot of posters in this thread might change their opinions about lying if it’s in the tub as opposed to at the office.
I don’t understand the dissent in this thread. Jean has an immediate and probably very serious medical condition and very little money. She obviously qualifies for the (almost) free clinic program. The only thing she lacks is the paperwork to prove it because of a Catch-22. The receptionist is only suggesting an easy way around the obviously bullshit bureaucracy of the situation yet people are rejecting it as a terrible moral dilemma for themselves and I don’t believe it for a second. I have to be extremely honest in my job as well but exceptions happen and I can hint how people can get around the rules when the situation warrants it when they are obviously not working as intended.
It is a close family member as well, not just a casual friend. I would do a lot more than that for a true family member if they really needed it including a felony, not just writing some bullshit down on a piece of paper. I guess everyone is in the exact same category in most of your mind’s but they are not in mine at all.
If some of you were as painfully honest as you claim, I am not sure how you get through life without being blocked by every incoherent or unfair bureaucratic rule out there. It is probably the same group that blocks traffic for miles on the interstate because, hey, the speed limit is a rule.
Team Lie Like A Rug. The organisation’s position appears to be “if you’re kinda struggling but have someone to support you then - hey! Cheap services! But if you’re REALLY struggling and have NOBODY to help- nothing for you.” That’s an asinine position and they’ve forfeited their right to accuracy from me.
She’s a low income person, so she has a right to low income services. I’m not helping her get something she doesn’t have a right to
As for the solution to the dilemma at hand, I won’t rule out deception entirely, but this is how I’d go about it (I presume I’m the Sharon person here). I tell Jean that I’ll pick up the tab today and help her with achieving a clean proof-of-income status after this crisis has been dealt with. If this is unacceptable to Jean, such that she threatens to leave without receiving medical care, I will consent to participate in the ruse.
However, once she is in the examination room, I will tell the receptionist to cancel that form, and pay for the visit myself.
Later, I’ll confess what I did, beg her forgiveness, and help her get her paperwork ducks in a row.
If the secretary is willing to get them to lie, then she should be willing to lie, too. She could simply lie about having seen the proper documentation.
I wouldn’t be willing to lie, especially since we’re apparently both apprehensive about it. That’s how I am anyway, but it’s reinforced by the characters in the hypothetical.
I would, however, offer to pick up the difference between what Jean expected to pay, and what she is being charged. Since she should only be paying the $20 anyway, and it’s only bureaucratic red tape that’s preventing her, I would hope that Jean would be able to accept the favor without compromising her pride.
I’m not comfortable with lying in this situation so I would pony up the $80 so Jean could address the immediate health problem. Otherwise, she’s gonna keel over from a massive stroke and we’ll both have bigger problems to address. After her blood pressure was under control, I’d try to help Jean with a long-term solution. As for Jean seling the house as one of those possible solutions, I’d need a ot more info than provided in the OP to make that call.
Skald, do you need me to resend that fabulous gluten-free chocolate chip cookie recipe? Apparently, you lost it 'cuz you haven’t made any for me yet. I’m waiting, and not patiently.
Yesterday, I stood at a crosswalk with no traffic in sight in either direction until the little pedestrian walk light came on. I consider it two minutes well-wasted.
See, I can, and very well. But I put that behind me over twenty years ago. For me, it’s all or none. I’d rather deal with the negatives that occasionally pop up from refusing to lie, than being a lying piece of shit scumbag, because for me there’s no middle of the road, just berms.
Neither person should lie. Lying on forms is always a bad idea, especially where (as here) it just might impose liability where none was expected or intended. If Sharon wants to lend or give Jean money, a lot or a little, to help with medical expenses, that’s very nice of her and I would encourage it, but she shouldn’t lie. Honesty really is the best policy, even if it costs you (or a beloved cousin) more.
Anarion, does your ethical calculus change if Sharon’s situation is different? Suppose rather than a well-to-do pharma rep who buys a new car every other year, she is a retail drone who just got her hours cut, and rather than giving Jean a ride in her BMW, Sharon skipped lunch hte previous day so she’d have the cash to pay their bus fares to and from the clinic? Suppose that she doesn’t have $80 or even $60 to spare?
