# I did not know this about health insurance companies **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [September 14, 2009, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989 "2009-09-14T01:45:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2009, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/1 "2009-09-14T01:45:50Z")
Whoa. Apparently being a victim of domestic violence is a pre-existing condition to health insurance companies. > **[404](http://www.seiu.org/error-page/404/)** > > We are the Service Employees International Union, an organization of 2-million members united by the belief in the dignity and worth of workers and the services they provide and dedicated to improving the lives of workers and their families and... > [@](#): > > Domestic violence victims have a “pre-existing condition”? > By Maria Tchijov > > Insurance companies have used the excuse of “pre-existing conditions” to deny coverage to countless Americans. From cancer patients to the elderly suffering from arthritis, these organizations have padded their profit margins by limiting coverage to patients deemed “high risk” because of their medical condition. > > But, in DC and nine other states, including Arkansas, Idaho, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wyoming, insurance companies have gone too far, claiming that “domestic violence victim” is also a pre-existing condition. Wow. Obama and the dems have no idea how strong the backlash from the left is going to be if the pass a health care bill that forces us to buy coverage from these companies under threat of being fined. ---
**Author:** ![Alice\_The\_Goon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Alice\_The\_Goon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alice_The_Goon)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2009, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/2 "2009-09-14T01:49:05Z")
Oh yeah, this happens all the time. The other day at work I ran across some paperwork that indicated that they were considering denying someone insurance because they had a past history of heavy periods. Heavy periods is a pre-existing condition! ---
**Author:** ![AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2009, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/3 "2009-09-14T05:23:47Z")
You know what really pisses me off? They act like ANYTHING that’s a preexisting condition translates into someone who’s like the stereotypical profoundly MR VERY medically fragile type. I have a genetic disorder. While the manifesations of it translate into me being pretty medically complex, overall I am INCREDIBLY healthy to the point where one time when I had to go to the ER due to a medication reaction post surgery, I ran into my pediatrican (this was when I was a teen) and at first I didn’t know who he was. ---
**Author:** ![Mama\_Zappa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/71e660/32.png) [@Mama\_Zappa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mama_Zappa)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2009, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/4 "2009-09-14T14:32:08Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > Whoa. Apparently being a victim of domestic violence is a pre-existing condition to health insurance companies. > [404 - Service Employees International Union (SEIU)](http://www.seiu.org/2009/09/domestic-violence-victims-have-a-pre-existing-condition.php) > > Wow. Obama and the dems have no idea how strong the backlash from the left is going to be if the pass a health care bill that forces us to buy coverage from these companies under threat of being fined. Well, my understanding is that as proposed, companies will no longer be allowed to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions… but Domestic Violence? WTF??? Of all the pre-existing conditions, that is at least completely CURABLE. ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/5 "2009-09-16T02:41:57Z")
While I wouln’t put anything past insurance companies, read the article link That link is quoting 15 year old surveys. Does anyone know of a more updated source? Are they still able to deny insurance, and more importantly has anyone been denied insurance because of it? We have lots of laws on the books that are never enforced, and just because you can do something, doesn’t mean insurance companies DO do it. I’m not saying they are not denying it, it’s just I can’t find anything but blogs and social sites. The closest I found was > [@](#): > > Grim reports that “In 1995, the Boston Globe found that Nationwide, Allstate, State Farm, Aetna, Metropolitan Life, The Equitable Companies, First Colony Life, The Prudential and the Principal Financial Group had all either _canceled or denied_ coverage to women who’d been beaten.” of course that again is old and it goes on and one cannot determain if the health insurance was cancelled for too many claims, such as auto insurers will cancel you if you claim too much. And it doesn’t make a difference between denial and cancellation, which could be a huge deal. It also doesn’t say how many claims were reinstated upon appeal. As I said, I’m not saying this statement isn’t true, necessarily but it’s too vaguely worded to be take face value ---
**Author:** ![CT\_Damsel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dfb087/32.png) [@CT\_Damsel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CT_Damsel)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/6 "2009-09-16T03:15:17Z")
CT has a law protecting it’s citizens from the insurance companies “pre-existing condition” BS. Your post made me curious so I goog’d and found this about CT. [http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0317.htm](http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0317.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Cardinal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cardinal/32/4000_2.png) [@Cardinal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cardinal)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/7 "2009-09-16T04:35:15Z")
> [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](#): > > You know what really pisses me off? They act like ANYTHING that’s a preexisting condition translates into someone who’s like the stereotypical profoundly MR VERY medically fragile type. > I have a genetic disorder. While the manifesations of it translate into me being pretty medically complex, overall I am INCREDIBLY healthy to the point where one time when I had to go to the ER due to a medication reaction post surgery, I ran into my pediatrican (this was when I was a teen) and at first I didn’t know who he was. There was just very recently a podcast I had which pointed out that genetic screening may well ruin the medical insurance industry, because even if the companies don’t know your information, for a little money you can. If you’re not predisposed, you tend not to pay much for medical coverage, meaning that the companies will be insuring only the people most likely to have large expenses, driving the coverage costs out of reach of most people, crashing the system. ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/8 "2009-09-16T05:30:39Z")
> [@CT\_Damsel](#): > > CT has a law protecting it’s citizens from the insurance companies “pre-existing condition” BS. Your post made me curious so I goog’d and found this about CT. [http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0317.htm](http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0317.htm) I would need more information, but that policy as written doesn’t necessarily exclude companies from denying a policy based on a pre-existing condition. It only allows them to exclude coverage for pre-existing conditions for a maximum of 12 months after a policy is written. For example, Company A says 'You have asthma so we won’t write you a policy." That statement from CT doesn’t bar that. Company B says “You have asthma but we’ll write you a policy anyway. However we won’t cover any treatment for asthma for 18 months.” The CT guidelines would bar that because it goes beyond the 12 month rule. ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/9 "2009-09-16T05:36:01Z")
The only example I saw in the linked report from that article was this, “After remarrying, she applied for health insurance and was told that should would not be covered for treatment relating to the abuse-related pre-existing conditions of depression and neck injury.” The cause of the injury and history of depression aren’t really as relevant as the fact that she was applying for coverage with existing problems. ---
**Author:** ![legalsnugs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/45deac/32.png) [@legalsnugs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/legalsnugs)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 11:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/10 "2009-09-16T11:08:11Z")
In 2006, Democrats tried to end the practice, but it died in committee when the vote to put it forward ended in a tie (10-10) [Cite](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/14/when-getting-beaten-by-yo_n_286029.html). > [@](#): > > All ten no votes were Republicans, including Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming), a member of the “Gang of Six” on the Finance Committee who are hashing out a bipartisan bill. Anyone surprised? ---
**Author:** ![Serenata67](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/serenata67/32/10646_2.png) [@Serenata67](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Serenata67)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/11 "2009-09-16T12:42:44Z")
> [@Antinor01](#): > > I would need more information, but that policy as written doesn’t necessarily exclude companies from denying a policy based on a pre-existing condition. It only allows them to exclude coverage for pre-existing conditions for a maximum of 12 months after a policy is written. > > For example, Company A says 'You have asthma so we won’t write you a policy." That statement from CT doesn’t bar that. > > Company B says “You have asthma but we’ll write you a policy anyway. However we won’t cover any treatment for asthma for 18 months.” The CT guidelines would bar that because it goes beyond the 12 month rule. I had a 12 month policy hold out when I started working for my employer. I had a couple pre existing conditions, so I had to pay out of pocket for that treatment for a year… really sucked. But now it’s getting covered! ---
**Author:** ![Mama\_Zappa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/71e660/32.png) [@Mama\_Zappa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mama_Zappa)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/12 "2009-09-16T12:58:24Z")
> [@CT\_Damsel](#): > > CT has a law protecting it’s citizens from the insurance companies “pre-existing condition” BS. Your post made me curious so I goog’d and found this about CT. [http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0317.htm](http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0317.htm) Doesn’t look like a whole lotta protection there: per that table, they _can_ exclude coverage for the condition itself, for 12 months. > [@linked site](#): > > May not impose preexisting condition exclusion beyond 12 months after effective date of coverage, and exclusion may only relate to conditions for which medical advice, diagnosis, care, or treatment was recommended or received six months before the policy’s effective date. So if you’ve got something expensive. you’re still stuck for 6 months to 2 years (depending on the type of policy). This isn’t anything revolutionary - when I started a new job 20ish years ago, there was the same deal. That table also doesn’t say they have to let you buy a policy, just that if they do, they have to cover the condition after a while. Nor does it prevent them from charging someone a huge hefty surcharge for having the condition (well, a group policy might not, so much, but an individual one could). (on preview, Antinor01 said pretty much the same). ---
**Author:** ![Fugazi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f08c70/32.png) [@Fugazi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fugazi)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/13 "2009-09-16T13:54:06Z")
Hmmm I don’t understand. I’ve changed jobs twice since being diagnosed with MS and didn’t have any trouble getting covered. Is it because I had no break in coverage? Did I get lucky moving to a job with great insurance? They seem pretty standard to me. Treating MS is pretty darn expensive too. ---
**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/14 "2009-09-16T13:58:00Z")
In addition to domestic violence, pregnancy is also often considered a pre-existing condition. Insurance companies have long been discriminatory towards women. ---
**Author:** ![Mama\_Zappa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/71e660/32.png) [@Mama\_Zappa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mama_Zappa)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/15 "2009-09-16T14:04:42Z")
> [@Fugazi](#): > > Hmmm I don’t understand. I’ve changed jobs twice since being diagnosed with MS and didn’t have any trouble getting covered. Is it because I had no break in coverage? Did I get lucky moving to a job with great insurance? They seem pretty standard to me. Treating MS is pretty darn expensive too. It’s the “no break in coverage” that protects you. HIPAA requires this for companies that meet certain criteria (size, not-self-insured, etc.): [Challenge Validation](http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/health-plans/portability.htm) [Challenge Validation](http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_consumer_hipaa.html) HIPAA was passed in 1996, Before that, a change in jobs could mean loss of coverage for pre-existing conditions. ---
**Author:** ![Mama\_Zappa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/71e660/32.png) [@Mama\_Zappa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mama_Zappa)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/16 "2009-09-16T14:06:35Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > In addition to domestic violence, pregnancy is also often considered a pre-existing condition. Insurance companies have long been discriminatory towards women. Supposedly, pregnancy can no longer be excluded: [Challenge Validation](http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_consumer_hipaa.html) (search for pregnancy). Though a colleague of mine, 10 or so years ago, was forced to enroll in the most expensive coverage available (she’d been covered at her husband’s job; when he lost his job she had to enroll with our employer; though HIPAA forced the insurers to cover her, there was something funny with our contract). ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/17 "2009-09-16T14:06:58Z")
> [@CT\_Damsel](#): > > CT has a law protecting it’s citizens from the insurance companies “pre-existing condition” BS. Your post made me curious so I goog’d and found this about CT. [http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0317.htm](http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0317.htm) Go CT! I moved to CA early in my second pregnancy. My first one was very high risk, so I didn’t want to wait to seek medical before I moved, but my new ins in CA would see this as a pre-existing condition, if I had visited a ob/gyn and documented the pregnancy. I did go to my doctor and when I moved I argued that the insurance would just be paying to medically treat a sick baby if they didn’t want to treat me while pregnant. The finally relented, but talk about horrible policies! ETA: This was 12 years ago. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/18 "2009-09-16T14:19:29Z")
> [@Fugazi](#): > > Hmmm I don’t understand. I’ve changed jobs twice since being diagnosed with MS and didn’t have any trouble getting covered. Is it because I had no break in coverage? Did I get lucky moving to a job with great insurance? They seem pretty standard to me. Treating MS is pretty darn expensive too. Did you change insurance companies? If you stick with the same insurance company, it’s not necessarily a new policy. A lot also depends on the type of insurance. The original models for health insurance were nonprofits like Blue Cross/Blue Shield.\* In the late 70s, profit making businesses became common. That was an obviously bad idea: the easiest way to increase profits is to deny claims. And that’s what we’re seeing. The preexisting conditions issue is bad enough, but there’s also rescission. This is when insurance companies cancel policies over trivial errors on the original application. This leads to [cases](http://www.slate.com/id/2223680/) where a person was denied insurance to treat cancer because she neglected to mention that, years before, she had been treated for acne. Insurance companies rate their workers about how much money they save from this. The law should require that rescission is only allowed where the customer has fraudulently claimed he didn’t have the condition that he is now asking treatment for. \*They were originally two different organization. Blue Cross paid for hospital stays (and was founded not to help patients, but to provide a steady income stream to hospitals). Blue Shield paid for doctor’s visits. Eventually, they ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/19 "2009-09-16T14:25:28Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > In addition to domestic violence, pregnancy is also often considered a pre-existing condition. Insurance companies have long been discriminatory towards women. It is and should be. Insurance, of any kind, is not intended to cover already planned expenses. Pregnancy is a self correcting pre existing condition though and stops being an issue after birth or termination. It has nothing to do with discrimination. ---
**Author:** ![legalsnugs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/45deac/32.png) [@legalsnugs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/legalsnugs)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2009, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989/20 "2009-09-16T14:46:45Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > (snip) The preexisting conditions issue is bad enough, but there’s also rescission. This is when insurance companies cancel policies over trivial errors on the original application. This leads to [cases](http://www.slate.com/id/2223680/) where a person was denied insurance to treat cancer because she neglected to mention that, years before, she had been treated for acne. Insurance companies rate their workers about how much money they save from this. The law should require that rescission is only allowed where the customer has fraudulently claimed he didn’t have the condition that he is now asking treatment for… Re: rescission. Apparently insurance companies can get quite creative: > [@](#): > > In a pending case, Blue Shield searched in vain for an inconsistency in the health records of the wife of a dairy farmer after she filed a claim for emergency gallbladder surgery, according to attorneys for the family. Turning to her husband’s questionnaire, the company discovered he had not mentioned his high cholesterol and dropped them both. Blue Shield officials said they would not comment on a pending case. [Cite](http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_09/019818.php). Health Net even admitted it offered bonuses to employees for finding reasons to cancel policies. [Cite](http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-insure9nov09,0,3065397,full.story), e.g. Why do people keep defending these creeps? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-did-not-know-this-about-health-insurance-companies/509989.md?page=2)