Health Insurers Consider A Caesarean-Section Pregnancy A Pre-Existing Condition

[Wetzelbill]

Health Insurers Consider A Caesarean-Section Pregnancy A Pre-Existing Condition

Earlier this week, the Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim reported on the fact that in seven states plus the District of Columbia, “getting beaten up by your spouse is a pre-existing condition.” The insurance industry figures that if “you are in a marriage with someone who has beaten you in the past, you’re more likely to get beaten again than the average person and are therefore more expensive to insure,” but what it really does is punish these victims for something that wasn’t their fault.

But that isn’t the only policy that health insurers have that primarily discriminate against women. First of all, most individual health insurance markets don’t cover maternity care. In fact, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, only 14 states have a requirement for such coverage, and the number of plans without maternity coverage continues to rise dramatically. Why? Anthem Blue Cross — which has been actively fighting health care reform — considers pregnancy optional and therefore not necessary to insure:

“The point of insurance is to insure against catastrophic care costs. That’s what you’re trying to aggregate and pool for such things as heart attacks and cancer,” said an Anthem Blue Cross spokesman. “Having a child is a matter of choice. Dealing with an adult onset illness, such as diabetes, heart disease breast or prostate cancer, is not a matter of choice.”

Even Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) spoke an unintentional truth when he said of his parents: “When they arrived in Baton Rouge, my mother was already four-and-a-half-months pregnant. I was what folks in the insurance industry now call a pre-existing condition.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/17/csection-preexisting/

[Ilsa]

1. They'd rather not pay for prenatal care, but they are going to get stuck

with paying for a potentially sick baby after birth because the mom couldn't afford decent prenatal care. Terribly short-sighted planning, IMO. And morally wrong, not that it has ever bothered an insurance co.

Where I live, there are no more VBACs (vaginal birth after cesarean). The doctors here won't do them.

[Wetzelbill]

2. I always knew it was bad

meaning the insurance co behavior and situation, but it seems almost every day now I learn something worse and worse. Morally, I can't see how people can do these things and live with themselves? It's rough.

[Ilsa]

3. I wonder, how does a hospital cut corners on something as

serious as a C-section? Sure, there are private pay scenarios because someone doesn't have any maternity insurance, but what happens? Moms usually get discharged earlier, which can be a problem after surgery.

If our society is going to claim to love babies, there shouldn't be any issues of coverage under a private or public plan for surgical birth.

Kicking for greater impact.

[PA Democrat]

4. No federally-funded payments to the health insurance industry because of preexisting conditions:

CORRUPTION and GREED. Let's scour THEIR records and if we can find a single case where they wrongfully denied coverage or rescinded a policy, that company should be forever banned from getting any type federal funding. They should not be allowed to sell any products such as Medicare Advantage or Medicare Part D plans for example, that are funded through tax dollars.

I'm sick of these pigs.

[seabeyond]

5. i paid extra fro preg ins. when all said and done i paid out more cash insured for 2nd son then

paying cash for my 1st son.

i didnt have preg first time around. so i paid doctor and hospital before with a discount in cash. two year later having second son under ins i paid more cash out with deductibles and bullshit reasoning than paying cash with first son. it became 500 deductable for both baby and i at every turn