Reply
Wed 21 Oct, 2009 09:15 am
I was just reading an article about a toddler who was turned down for health insurance because she was too small. She's healthy and normal but very petite. This story was a kind of follow up to a story about a baby who was denied health insurance for being too big.
A few years ago Mo was denied insurance when we changed companies. I wrote to the company pointing out that Mo was adopted, that the condition was diagnosed prior to the adoption, and that they could not deny him insurance based on that conditon. They never responded but they did insure him.
This all got me thinking -- practically every kid I know is diagnosed with something or suspected to have something -- ADHD, ADD, ASD, NVLD, Blah Disorder, Blahblah Disorder, Blahblahblah Disorder.
I understand that diagnostic tools are much better now than when I was a kid. I understand the need for early intervention. I understand that a diagnosis might be a relief to some parents that are struggling to raise their kids.
But I wonder what happens when these kids grow up and try to get insurance on their own. Does their childhood diagnosis prevent that from happening?
I don't really intend this to be a conversation about insurance reform -- there are plenty of threads on those topics -- but I'm curious about any real world experience with this.
Thanks!
@boomerang,
In my state, they cannot be denied insurance, but the insurance company can charge more for a pre-existing condition. They also can cap how much they will pay for a pre-existing condition over a certain period of time. If you are an independent business person with a child who has been diagnosed with (let's say) Asperger's syndrome you will pay about 20% for your child's coverage than a family without a child diagnosed with such a condition. I also know of situation where a person was not hired by a company because they had a child that required expensive medical treatments (I know the employer, not the candidate). The company did not want to risk their overall rates going up because this employee would need more family coverage than other employees. I don't think this exactly answers your questions, but it shows the aging child will probably either pay more for insurance over their entire life or be discriminated against if a possible employer knows of their history.
@Green Witch,
Interesting!
I hadn't considered it from the perspective of finding a job but since most health insurance is through an employer that makes a lot of sense.
Reading around I've learned that people born with Down's Syndrome are rarely able to insure themselves when they reach adulthood.
In the stories about the two kids --- one too fat, and one too thin -- the thing that really caught my eye is that they were not allowed insurance based on falling in the extremes of the growth chart. The chart defines the range of
normal growth. Anything outside those ranges is considered abnormal. So really they were denying normal children insurance.
And the BIGGeST pre-existing condition that will make your premiums sky high is . . . AGE.
Just try to get health insurance on your own after age 60.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace