|
||||||
![]() ![]() ![]()
![]()
|
|
It's hard to not hear about how common caesarean sections have become in the U.S.--30 percent of babies are now air-lifted out of the womb. C-sections are more expensive, and come with higher complication rates. But the price we pay for more frequent c-sections may becoming literal. Turns out some insurance companies are considering a history of caesarean delivery a "pre-existing condition," and an excuse to jack up a woman's premium...or deny her insurance altogether. There are multiple reasons for c-sections: babies are bigger; moms are older with more complicated pregnancies. And despite stories of scads of women choosing to deliver via c-section, most of these deliveries are not planned--and many are not wanted that way. Plus, women don't always have a choice after their first c-section--many doctors won't let them try a natural delivery the next time around. So the idea of charging women more--or worse, not insuring them--for something that is not under their control has me crazed. That's the whole idea of insurance, right? To protect you, financially, when the unexpected happens to your health? Since when does childbirth fall into a special category? I think this is another way that insurance companies discriminate against women, under the guise of belt-tightening...what do you think? 2 CommentsLeave a comment |
|
![]()
Check out Daily Bedpost on MySpace.com.
|
||
I'd love to know which insurance company is doing it and whether or not this was on a group or individual policy. From my perspective, I really wonder how often ppl stop to think about what pays for your insurance claims. The money comes out of your pocket directly in the premiums you pay and with more and more mandated coverage’s being pressed into every health plan by state governments, most insurance companies are back pedaling to a. keep rates down, b. have the reserves to pay the claims, c. avoid lop sided reporting from ppl who are all too willing to blame the insurance carrier rather than look at the amazing amount of waste in the medical community and the transient nature of employment by a large number of americans.
I'd very much like to know the name of the company and the state and whether it was group or individual insurance and then lets look at what services that state required be added to all insurance plans as covered benefits this year.
I'll go you one further, find one single health insurance carrier that didn't post losses 3 out of 4 quarters in the past 3 years -- then look at the record number of mandates issued by the federal and state governments -- and ask yourself are you ready to pay 2x's higher premiums because the new members on your plan joined at the 6th month of pregnancy, paid in exactly $900 to the plan, had the child for a whopping $20k bill for a C-section dr/facility/anes/pediatrician and then quit her job and is no longer paying into the same fund you are. She just took $19100 of your premiums to pay her claims -- and she's gone. That means you and all the others on your plan are going to split paying for her child. That's insurance reality.
Whether or not I agree with imposing pre-existing clauses on pregnant women is not the point, blaming a sinking industry for not being limitless in wealth by members that don't want to pay the increased cost of medical care starts to wear on a person. Ask yourself Dr Kate, how many procedures you order during a regular pregnancy that you didn't order 20 yrs ago. Then ask youself how much more a pregnancy costs and finally tell me where the money is going to come from?
Drs have routinely demanded increased rates and fees of private insurance companies in direct relation to medicare decreases. Now drs are walking away from medicare entirely and will not treat medicare patients unless they pay 100% upfront.
For every slam against the insurance industry that bears a generic 'they did this! isn't that outrageous!' we can name specific hospitals, drs and other medical professionals that are over charging patients and ordering unecessary procedures.
Present a balanced and educated view so ppl can effect real changes in the systems and name names -- accountability is important for all of us.
Bad Rap, you inspired me. I went to Hoovers.com and looked at the financial state of a bunch of health insurance companies, including Aetna, WellPoint, Cigna and UnitedHealth Group. Know what? All of them are profitable--very profitable. So don't cry poverty on behalf of the insurance companies. They're doing wonderfully.
On the other hand, about half of all hospitals nationwide are in the red. In New York City at least three hospitals have closed during the last two years. I know for a fact that nonpayments by insurance companies is a significant contributor to the decline of hospitals.
That said, some doctors do practice defense medicine, because if they don't it exposes them to huge legal liabilities. If you want to get on the road to reducing medical costs, close the door on abusive lawsuits by taking medical court cases out of the hands of jurists who don't know anything about medicine.