This message was self-deleted by its author

[PeaceWave]

This message was self-deleted by its author (PeaceWave) on Thu Oct 16, 2025, 07:09 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[Fiendish Thingy]

1. This is nothing new. Nt

[TommyT139]

3. It is when peaceful civilians are being rousted

...from their beds in the night, dragged into the rain, clubbed, and hit with pepper balls, rubber bullets, knees to the neck, tear gas....

Speaking of the last, more info is coming out about exposure to tear gas and pregnancy complications.

[Fiendish Thingy]

4. I'm talking about insurance clauses about riots, etc

That’s a common boilerplate clause, nothing new.

[GregariousGroundhog]

2. I would have no issue with this as long as it was limited to "participating" in a riot or insurrection

I'd be a little concerned about the phrase "civil commotion" though. That sounds like it could include a group of kids throwing rocks from an overpass.

[Jacson6]

5. All my insurance coverage clauses already voided those act as being covered.

It has been in my policies for the last 40+ years.

[biophile]

6. Definitions are key here

Peaceful protests are not riots, but who will decide? Also one criteria was “civil commotion” - WTF?
That covers anything they want it to mean. That seems like an extremely broad term. If I’m standing in a peaceful protest and some asshole drives his car into a crowd, is that a civil commotion?

[AZJonnie]

7. Some context from Claude AI. Note also that 2024 policies would've been written in 2023, if not earlier.

ME:

I just read this in an article, can you check whether this is true, and if so, in which states has this change actually been approved by ins. commissioners? "The 2024 Cigna Health Care insurance policy excludes "treatments of an injury or sickness which is due to war, declared or undeclared, riot, or insurrection.” Aetna also excludes losses "caused directly or indirectly by invasion, insurrection, riot, civil strife, or civil commotion.""

The claims about war and insurrection exclusions in health insurance policies are partially true, but the context requires clarification. These exclusions are not entirely new to 2024, though there have been some recent modifications.​

Cigna War/Riot Exclusions
The quoted language about Cigna excluding "treatments of an injury or sickness which is due to war, declared or undeclared, riot, or insurrection" is accurate based on their 2024 policy documents. Cigna's Mississippi and Utah exclusions specifically state coverage is denied for conditions caused by "an Insured Person participating in an insurrection, rebellion, or riot". Their supplemental hospital plans also exclude "injury due to participation in a riot or insurrection".​

Aetna War/Civil Commotion Exclusions
The statement about Aetna excluding losses "caused directly or indirectly by invasion, insurrection, riot, civil strife, or civil commotion" appears to reference older policy language. According to fact-checking reports, Aetna has actually removed most war-related exclusions from their commercial health plans. A company spokesperson told USA TODAY that "most Aetna commercial plans no longer exclude war-related injuries" and that "Aetna generally removed such exclusions".​

State Insurance Commissioner Approvals
The search results do not provide specific information about which state insurance commissioners have approved these particular exclusion clauses for 2024. However, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) maintains comprehensive charts showing that most states do allow various forms of war and insurrection exclusions in health insurance policies. States like Florida, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Missouri and others explicitly permit policies to "limit or exclude illness, treatment or medical condition arising out of war or act of war (whether declared or undeclared)".​

Historical Context
War exclusions in health insurance are not new to 2024. These types of exclusions have existed in various forms for decades, but some insurers have been updating or reinforcing them recently. The timing has raised questions given current political tensions, but the exclusions themselves follow longstanding insurance industry practices.​