Reply #3: This does not make sense. Under The Affordable Care Act

[jbnow]

there is a cap on the maximum amount a policyholder would have to pay in a year in terms of deductible and copay. Even if a person had a very serious illness or accident and was in hospital for extended periods the MOST they would pay in a year would be 5,000 (10K max for family) and that is for people who do not get any subsidy, people above that 400% of poverty or whatever.
There is a descending max paid in a year (in $1,000 increments) as income goes down
I realize if you are lower middle class having to pay 2K could be a burden but that is a payment plan, it is not bankruptcy and financial ruin

The insurance policy can't have an annual or lifetime max they pay on a person or condition like most have now
In my state there is one insurer required to take people with pre-existing conditions. It sucks. Someone with diabetes has it. It will pay a max of 5K in a year. Now that invites big trouble in one hospital stay...
Many policies have a cap on certain illnesses and so if cancer recurs with expensive treatment you can just be cut off
And right now if someone gets seriously ill they find some old illness and cut you off. They won't be able too
and so on.

It will not eliminate bankruptcies for sure but most medical bankruptcies are due to the factors that this plan changes.

However I am concerned for older people just over the subsidy level. Age is one of the factors that can still affect rates, up to 2.5 times lowest rate (or maybe 2 times, I forget now.) If they still are paying off a house etc they may ask for and get a waiver and still be uninsured... or really be burdened by the payments

Would be interesting to compare the laws but this "new coverage is so skimpy that serious illness leaves families with crushing medical bills" seems to be one of those differences. But I wonder if Mass thought they had it covered too