After Caesareans, Some Women See Higher Insurance Cost

[RamboLiberal]

Source: NY Times

When the Golden Rule Insurance Company rejected her application for health coverage last year, Peggy Robertson was mystified.

“It made no sense,” said Ms. Robertson, 39, who lives in Centennial, Colo. “I’m in perfect health.”

She was turned down because she had given birth by Caesarean section. Having the operation once increases the odds that it will be performed again, and if she became pregnant and needed another Caesarean, Golden Rule did not want to pay for it. A letter from the company explained that if she had been sterilized after the Caesarean, or if she were over 40 and had given birth two or more years before applying, she might have qualified.

Ms. Robertson had been shopping around for individual health insurance, the kind that people buy on their own. She already had insurance but was looking for a better rate. After being rejected by Golden Rule, she kept her existing coverage.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/health/01insure.html?hp

[Missy Vixen]

1. This is particularly insidious when one stops to consider

that more Caesareans are being performed now for a variety of reasons, and not necessarily due to medical necessity.

I attempted to opt out of the maternity coverage on our policy a few years back, and was told "no", even though I offered to sign a hold harmless, etcetera.

I hate insurance companies.
Julie

[deadmessengers]

4. That's the law in a lot of places

You can't exclude maternity coverage from an insurance policy in Georgia - I remember hearing that a few years ago and was VERY surprised. Don't know the logic behind that, although I'm sure having it that way benefits insurance companies greatly.

[midnight]

10. Me too. I hate that not medical necessary phrase they use to

block health care treatment for years.

[LeftyMom]

2. Meanwhile more BS c-sections are mandated by malpractice insurers.

For profit health care. Gotta love it. :eyes:

[uppityperson]

3. So ins co's want c-sect to CYA, then deny ins due to having that c-sect?"Golden Rule" co?

Wild. I hate legalized gambling/insurance game. The "Golden Rule" Ins co? The irony is staggering.

[AtLiberty]

5. Call me crazy, but...

Doesn't excluding pregnancy/delivery from an insurance policy encourage a-b-o-r-t-i-o-n?!?!?

[zeos3]

9. maybe, but some might pay out of pocket or

might qualify for the state's program. Either way it shifts the risk from the insurer to the individual. Some of these companies think they're in the premium collection business instead of the insurance business.

[JeanGrey]

6. Also a lot of women that are getting induced early for no medical

reason but convenience might find themselves holding the bag. I understand insurance companies will refuse to pay if you are induced before your due date without a valid medical reason.

[dysfunctional press]

7. After Caesareans, Some Women See Higher Waistlines on 2-piece swimsuits...

nt

[Manifestor_of_Light]

8. Lovely.

:sarcasm:

The choice is death in childbirth or a C-section (it was for me, anyway).
So having a narrow ass (cephalopelvic disproportion) is a pre-existing condition.