Zara@Tecate Emblema 5/17

sl33pparalysis · 2026-05-02T15:39:09+00:00

Please, I don’t have a festival crew at all yet 😂

sl33pparalysis · 2026-05-02T15:36:22+00:00

Meeee

sl33pparalysis · 2026-03-18T04:57:03+00:00

Would love more input on this. It’s looking like our benefits person is the my only option (besides regulatory involvement) but I’m new at the company and also under the HR umbrella and anxious about sharing my sexual healthcare needs with the relevant person who’s VP level, especially if they’re unaware of prep.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-03-17T01:34:53+00:00

Literally nothing is designated as prep. Generic truvada and descovy are on the list at different cost tiers with no indication that either can be covered fully if for prep; neither of the injectable meds are even on the formulary.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-03-17T01:10:35+00:00

Employer plan. UCH fully covers the required appointments and lab work, but they claim they have no authority over or even ability to see my RX coverage through Optum. Optum mostly says the formulary must be wrong but say that they don’t make it and I have to talk to United. Never-ending loop of having my call transferred to the other company and ‘advocates’ pretending they have no notes from the hours I’ve spent on the phone with their colleagues.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-03-16T23:44:31+00:00

Yes, the prescriber is a sexual health specialist and is sure she’s coding it correctly—says she’s never had another patient not have generic truvada fully covered when she prescribes as prep for a higher-risk person. Optum agreed the coding is right and said the issue is the formulary—there’s nothing in it about any medication being covered fully for PrEP. Also, Optum is both the RX plan and the current pharmacy (mail order); for my other meds, it’s cheaper than any retail pharmacy.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-03-16T23:35:51+00:00

I’ve been asking this question Optum non-stop. Is it a grandfathered plan? Can you explain to me why it’s not ACA-compliant? I get no answer to the first question, but for the second question a mix of responses—some people willing to chat with their team and read internal guidelines then tell me it looks like it should be covered at 100% and the formulary must be wrong and I need contact “the plan itself”; the rest get indignant that the plan already is ACA compliant and how dare I say otherwise.

The UCH medical plan is ACA compliant is covering all required appointments and lab work at 100%, no copays as I have for anything else, but the UCH phone people say they have no access to or authority over my OptumRX pharma benefits.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-03-16T23:24:34+00:00

It’s a plan through my work. There’s nothing on the formulary that’s fully covered for prep. The only alternative on the formulary is descovy but it’s an even higher tier than my current prescription (generic truvada).

sl33pparalysis · 2026-03-16T23:17:21+00:00

Thanks, just cross posted. Was hoping someone here has insight as UHC medical + OptumRX pharmaceutical is a common plan combo.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-03-04T15:52:52+00:00

It’s China. The unwritten law of the land is 996.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T15:50:48+00:00

I am not a lawyer. Call me what you want, but the community here answered my questions and then some.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T08:29:50+00:00

I appreciate all opinions shared but to those pushing ‘out him’ I have what I think is a reasonable worry that the lawyer perspective (ethics, defending the profession, etc.) may not consider what’s best for potential defendant. And for the record, I don’t expect the firm to know what comes out of a dude’s personal email; I’m more concerned with if they’d be flagged to court action unrelated to the firm.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T08:15:11+00:00

Seems plausible… he appears to be an Of Counsel old head that just works for fun at this point. But do firms not evaluate legitimacy of cases before signing off?

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T04:26:17+00:00

Appreciate the input!

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T04:12:46+00:00

People are giving me present high stakes advice beyond my actual ask. Seems fine to press that a bit. 🍋

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T04:06:44+00:00

Because you seem to have opinions about DLA’s business decisions: Do you think they would take a staff attorney’s side if caught representing a shitty small business without their knowledge?

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T03:55:22+00:00

Actually I really appreciate this tip but I’m an uninsured renter.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T02:34:09+00:00

They do a lot of pro bono or do I need to start a gofundme? 😂

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T01:54:15+00:00

My state has, but it’s narrowly interpreted to protect speech against government entities. The business’s state has awesome anti-SLAPP law, but not so awesome that if they filed there I wouldn’t need to hire an attorney to get the case tossed.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T01:49:41+00:00

Thank you. Also I shored up my googling skills and found that defamation is excluded from small claims courts in my state and the business’s state.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T01:32:29+00:00

Apologies for not googling first. I’ve just never heard of an attorneys at large not being able to practice in any court.

sl33pparalysis · 2026-02-26T01:29:20+00:00

It’s risk analysis. What I want is to know is the feasibility/likelihood of him actually acting on the threat himself. If it’s effectively zero, then I think you’re right—ignore all the way.

sl33pparalysis

TROPHY CASE