Now I'm not much for boycotting things out of spite but I came across this story today and being in the health care field I know how much of a struggle these people must be having. This just disgusts me. Read on if you will...
JACKSON, Missouri (CNN) -- Debbie Shank breaks down in tears every time she's told that her 18-year-old son, Jeremy, was killed in Iraq.
 Debbie Shank, 52, has severe brain damage after a traffic accident in May 2000.
var CNN_ArticleChanger = new CNN_imageChanger('cnnImgChngr','/2008/US/03/25/walmart.insurance.battle/imgChng/p1-0.init.exclude.html',2,1);
//CNN.imageChanger.load('cnnImgChngr','imgChng/p1-0.exclude.html');
Even though
the 52-year-old mother of three attended her son's funeral -- she
continues to ask how he's doing. When her family reminds her that he's
dead -- she weeps as if hearing the news for the first time.
Shank suffered severe brain damage after a traffic accident nearly
eight years ago that robbed her of much of her short-term memory and
left her in a wheelchair and living in a nursing home. It was
the beginning of a series of battles -- both personal and legal -- that
loomed for Shank and her family. One of their biggest was with
Wal-Mart's health plan.
Eight years ago, Shank was stocking shelves for the retail giant and signed up for Wal-Mart's health and benefits plan.
Two years after the accident, Shank and her husband, Jim, were awarded
about $1 million in a lawsuit against the trucking company involved in
the crash. After legal fees were paid, $417,000 was placed in a trust
to pay for Debbie Shank's long-term care. Wal-Mart had paid out about $470,000 for Shank's medical expenses, but in 2005, Wal-Mart's health plan sued the Shanks for the same amount.
The Shanks didn't notice in the fine print of Wal-Mart's health plan
policy that the company has the right to recoup medical expenses if an
employee collects damages in a lawsuit.
The family's attorney, Maurice Graham, said he informed Wal-Mart about
the settlement and believed the Shanks would be allowed to keep the
money.
"We assumed after three years, they [Wal-Mart] had made a decision to
let Debbie Shank use this money for what it was intended to," Graham
said.
The Shanks lost their suit to Wal-Mart. Last summer, the
couple appealed the ruling -- but also lost it. One week later, their
son was killed in Iraq.
"They are quite within their rights. But I just wonder if they need it that bad," Jim Shank said. In 2007, the retail giant reported net sales in the third quarter of $90 billion. Legal or not, CNN asked Wal-Mart why the company pursued the money.
Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley, who called Debbie Shank's case
"unbelievably sad," replied in a statement: "Wal-Mart's plan is bound
by very specific rules. ... We wish it could be more flexible in Mrs.
Shank's case since her circumstances are clearly extraordinary, but
this is done out of fairness to all associates who contribute to, and
benefit from, the plan." Jim Shank said he believes Wal-Mart should make an exception.
"My idea of a win-win is -- you keep the paperwork that says you won
and let us keep the money so I can take care of my wife," he said. The family's situation is so dire that last year Jim Shank divorced Debbie, so she could receive more money from Medicaid.
Jim Shank, 54, is recovering from prostate cancer, works two jobs and
struggles to pay the bills. He's afraid he won't be able to send their
youngest son to college and pay for his and Debbie's care. "Who
needs the money more? A disabled lady in a wheelchair with no future,
whatsoever, or does Wal-Mart need $90 billion, plus $200,000?" he asked. The family's attorney agrees. "The recovery that Debbie Shank made was recovery for future lost earnings, for her pain and suffering," Graham said.
"She'll never be able to work again. Never have a relationship with her
husband or children again. The damage she recovered was for much more
than just medical expenses." Graham said he believes Wal-Mart
should be entitled to only about $100,000. Right now, about $277,000
remains in the trust -- far short of the $470,000 Wal-Mart wants back.
Refusing to give up the fight, the Shanks appealed to the U.S. Supreme
Court. But just last week, the high court said it would not hear the
case. Graham said the Shanks have exhausted all their resources and there's nothing more they can do but go on with their lives. Jim Shank said he's disappointed
with the Supreme Court's decision not to hear the case -- not for the
sake of his family -- but for those who might face similar
circumstances. For now, he said the family will figure out a way to get by and "do the best we can for Debbie."
"Luckily, she's oblivious to everything," he said. "We don't tell her
what's going on because it will just upset her."
| 
