Quote:

Quote:

Also, it appears you are advocating felony insurance fraud in your response Gia by suggesting you would just manufacture a dating situation to obtain coverage if it became an issue. Insurance investigators are not dimwits.



No, I was stating such examples in opposition of being protected by the state in case of stds contracted in the industry. I clearly asked in my post how can the law differentiate between what is occupational and what is personal/off hours time when a performer contracts an std?




I believe the language of the insurance policy binder documents most likely contains contractual language that limits the insurer's liability in certain situations. If the insurer limited coverage to non-occupational hazards, and they asserted one's injury was work related, I imagine the burden of proof would be on them to establish this fact. The burden is not beyond a reasonable doubt like in a criminal case, it would be much less. If the insurer put on evidence that starlet X worked with male talent Y and it became known that male talent Y had HIV for example, that would be fairly persuasive to me without other evidence to rebut this allegation. If Starlet X could show her BF or other some other guy she was with also had HIV, then I imagine it is less clear. But, realistically how many times would that happen?

Also, we are not just talking about STDs, starlets are at risk for other kinds of injuries as well that might be relatively uncommon in the general public, such as anal tears.

_________________________
-- Snowman http://www.raincoatreviews.com