I am so happy you wrote about this! I am very angry, as I've encountered the exact same discrimination.
I have been trying to find health insurance for myself and my family as individuals; we do not have an employer-paid insurance option. I also need maternity coverage, as we are hoping to have more children in the future.
Golden Rule did exactly as the above article mentioned: they denied coverage of not only my previous pre-term labor (which is VERY common, and I had no other complications from this!), but also would not cover any future pre-term labor...AND...they freakin' threw in EVERY OTHER POSSIBLE CONDITION AND PREGNANCY COMPLICATION AS WELL! NONE of which I had before, so they are not "pre-existing" conditions. They just did not feel like offering coverage. These "other" conditions that they threw in included: pre-eclampsia, c-section, hypertension...even miscarriage! How awful is that!?! I do not have any of these risk factors, and to imagine an insurance company that I'm paying big bucks for would drop me if I had a miscarriage...I can't imagine...
Another Texas-only insurance company, Scott & White, which is supposed to be more progressive, flat-out denied all three of us because they did not want to provide maternity coverage. At least they didn't pretend to offer maternity coverage like Golden Rule, but they ended up being worse because our family was not able to obtain any type of insurance through Scott & White. Shame on them.
So, we're left with health insurance that does not offer any-type of maternity coverage, unless it is an emergency for me or the baby.
I am beyond angry about this. We were open to paying the extra $300-$500 per month for maternity coverage, for "only" $2,500 coverage. That is absurd in and of itself. This is the unbelievable part: we were denied this minuscule amount of coverage, and would have ended up giving them much more in premiums that what the benefits were...they just did not want to actually provide insurance for something that we might need. It is pure discrimination for women of childbearing years.
My only options now are to stick with our current insurance, and hope that nothing goes wrong. If everything is "perfect" (is there such a thing?), then we'll end up paying out-of-pocket. If there is a problem, then perhaps the insurance will cover it, depending on if it is considered an "emergency" or not.
To advocate for myself, I will be talking, in advance, with the hospital and doctors, to see what type of discount they can negotiate with me since I'll be paying cash (they negotiate rates with insurance companies, and can reduce their rates for individuals paying cash and/or paying in advance).
I also went to insurance sites that have feedback options (www.ehealthinsurance.com), and provided information about these two companies (the less emotional and more facts on these sites, the more credible the feedback sounds. I'm glad on this site I can get the emotional part out!). Please spread the word about health insurance discrimination, and write to your local, state and national politicians. Respond to the NY Times article online, so others can see as well!
Comment Reply
I am so happy you wrote about this! I am very angry, as I've encountered the exact same discrimination.
I have been trying to find health insurance for myself and my family as individuals; we do not have an employer-paid insurance option. I also need maternity coverage, as we are hoping to have more children in the future.
Golden Rule did exactly as the above article mentioned: they denied coverage of not only my previous pre-term labor (which is VERY common, and I had no other complications from this!), but also would not cover any future pre-term labor...AND...they freakin' threw in EVERY OTHER POSSIBLE CONDITION AND PREGNANCY COMPLICATION AS WELL! NONE of which I had before, so they are not "pre-existing" conditions. They just did not feel like offering coverage. These "other" conditions that they threw in included: pre-eclampsia, c-section, hypertension...even miscarriage! How awful is that!?! I do not have any of these risk factors, and to imagine an insurance company that I'm paying big bucks for would drop me if I had a miscarriage...I can't imagine...
Another Texas-only insurance company, Scott & White, which is supposed to be more progressive, flat-out denied all three of us because they did not want to provide maternity coverage. At least they didn't pretend to offer maternity coverage like Golden Rule, but they ended up being worse because our family was not able to obtain any type of insurance through Scott & White. Shame on them.
So, we're left with health insurance that does not offer any-type of maternity coverage, unless it is an emergency for me or the baby.
I am beyond angry about this. We were open to paying the extra $300-$500 per month for maternity coverage, for "only" $2,500 coverage. That is absurd in and of itself. This is the unbelievable part: we were denied this minuscule amount of coverage, and would have ended up giving them much more in premiums that what the benefits were...they just did not want to actually provide insurance for something that we might need. It is pure discrimination for women of childbearing years.
My only options now are to stick with our current insurance, and hope that nothing goes wrong. If everything is "perfect" (is there such a thing?), then we'll end up paying out-of-pocket. If there is a problem, then perhaps the insurance will cover it, depending on if it is considered an "emergency" or not.
To advocate for myself, I will be talking, in advance, with the hospital and doctors, to see what type of discount they can negotiate with me since I'll be paying cash (they negotiate rates with insurance companies, and can reduce their rates for individuals paying cash and/or paying in advance).
I also went to insurance sites that have feedback options (www.ehealthinsurance.com), and provided information about these two companies (the less emotional and more facts on these sites, the more credible the feedback sounds. I'm glad on this site I can get the emotional part out!). Please spread the word about health insurance discrimination, and write to your local, state and national politicians. Respond to the NY Times article online, so others can see as well!
February 8, 2009 - 7:30pmThis Comment
Reply