Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Randomopolis

Is that always how it's been for individual health insurance?

I've only ever switched insurance once, which was off my parents' insurance, so maybe I just never realized. I talked to someone else who wasn't aware either, but maybe we're both just idiots.
 
Medicaid you can enroll at any time if you qualify, which will vary by state.

I'm not sure about individual health insurance historically. But with how things have been implemented forward in the exchanges, yes this was the case, by end of March/April you had to be enrolled to have insurance for the rest of the year, otherwise you have to wait until the next enrollment period, which will probably start in October for coverage to start Jan 1, 2015. With companies that offer health insurance, you have to sign up for the next year by the end of the year, so nothing new there.

I think most people aren't very well-versed in health insurance or their own health in general. In some ways, the definition of good health is not having to think about it at all, so it's not surprising to hear a lot of folks don't know. There are a lot of people who qualify for Medicaid and have no idea.
 
bdotling said:
I'm not sure about individual health insurance historically. But with how things have been implemented forward in the exchanges, yes this was the case, by end of March/April you had to be enrolled to have insurance for the rest of the year, otherwise you have to wait until the next enrollment period, which will probably start in October for coverage to start Jan 1, 2015.
Click to expand...

But why is this? This makes zero sense to me. What an absurd system.

I'm pretty sure that's not how it's historically been for most individual health insurance purchasing. The only reasoning I can think of for why it's going to be that way now is that since preexisting conditions can't be excluded anymore, you have to disincentive people from just waiting to buy insurance until they discover they need treatment.

But... if that's the case, why not just have the no-exclusion rule in effect only during the open-enrollment periods? Isn't it better for people without preexisting conditions to be able to buy insurance from April-on than for no one to be able to?
 
I had private health insurance when I moved back to the US from Germany and didn't have a job. I was able to sign up whenever.
 
Maternity was annual, other enrollments were open.
ACA spent 7 months telling everyone that there was a close to the enrollment period. Not sure how you avoided hearing about it.
 
rhfarmer said:
Maternity was annual, other enrollments were open.
ACA spent 7 months telling everyone that there was a close to the enrollment period. Not sure how you avoided hearing about it.
Click to expand...

I have health insurance, this is for a friend who moved here from Europe 3 months ago. She had catastrophic insurance that carried over, and has been so busy getting the rest of her life together, she is only now getting to purchasing more complete insurance... but apparently you have to do it within two months of arriving or you're SOL? It's not like she should have been expected to know that.

Also, ACA spent 7 months telling everyone that the enrollment period for the government EXCHANGE ended March 31st. I don't think it was advertised that the entire industry would be arbitrarily shutting down for the next nine months in addition to that.
 
Pantone287 said:
rhfarmer said:
Maternity was annual, other enrollments were open.
ACA spent 7 months telling everyone that there was a close to the enrollment period. Not sure how you avoided hearing about it.
Click to expand...

I have health insurance, this is for a friend who moved here from Europe 3 months ago. She had catastrophic insurance that carried over, and has been so busy getting the rest of her life together, she is only now getting to purchasing more complete insurance... but apparently you have to do it within two months of arriving or you're SOL? It's not like she should have been expected to know that.

Also, ACA spent 7 months telling everyone that the enrollment period for the government EXCHANGE ended March 31st. I don't think it was advertised that the entire industry would be arbitrarily shutting down for the next nine months in addition to that.
Click to expand...

Gotcha.
 
rhfarmer said:
physicsfactor said:
It's a giant clusterfuck
Click to expand...

This giant clusterfuck has saved me about 10k already this year.
Click to expand...
And cost me an extra 3k (if I have enough health expenses this year like I did last year) and three coworkers their jobs (admittedly, another factor played into this as well: continued reimbursement cuts by the same folks who gave us ACA). You give somewhere it has to be taken from somewhere else.
 
It cost me an extra $96 this year.

Thanks Obama...
 
I saved because maternity is included and my hospital bill went from about $12K to $1900. And I have a better policy than I had last year. Maternity alone would have cost me $3600 extra, kid or no kid.

I know that my situation is unique, but that's been my experience and I'm stoked.
 
Pantone287 said:
bdotling said:
I'm not sure about individual health insurance historically. But with how things have been implemented forward in the exchanges, yes this was the case, by end of March/April you had to be enrolled to have insurance for the rest of the year, otherwise you have to wait until the next enrollment period, which will probably start in October for coverage to start Jan 1, 2015.
Click to expand...

But why is this? This makes zero sense to me. What an absurd system.

I'm pretty sure that's not how it's historically been for most individual health insurance purchasing. The only reasoning I can think of for why it's going to be that way now is that since preexisting conditions can't be excluded anymore, you have to disincentive people from just waiting to buy insurance until they discover they need treatment.

But... if that's the case, why not just have the no-exclusion rule in effect only during the open-enrollment periods? Isn't it better for people without preexisting conditions to be able to buy insurance from April-on than for no one to be able to?
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with preexisting conditions, it has to do with preventing people from signing up just when they get sick. Why should an insurance company cover your medical cost when you haven't paid a single premium until you absolutely have to? That makes no sense. Their model is based on risk sharing, that's why they have cut off dates. Otherwise nobody would buy insurance until they need it and insurance companies would go out of business.

It actually makes a lot of sense...no offense, but people who missed it shouldnt blame them for their own lack of preparation.

ETA: I don't mean to be an asshole about it, but what you wrote shows why it's absolutely necessary to set it up that way. Otherwise people who sign up just when they need it are piggybacking off people who are paying premiums month to month in case something bad happens. That is far more absurd and unfair.
 
It has everything to do with pre-existing conditions. Getting sick would be a pre-existing condition. And yes, forcing insurance companies to cover everyone is why the enrollment had to be set up that way.

Also, just wanted to add "piggybacking" is already happening. People with more severe pre-existing conditions who wouldn't be covered before are now "piggybacking" off the rest of us. Those people are going to cost insurance providers money, and the providers passed on that cost to everyone else's premiums.
 
Since we're off-topic in this thread anyway, I will just leave this here.

R7bAk7V.jpg
 
physicsfactor said:
It has everything to do with pre-existing conditions. Getting sick would be a pre-existing condition. And yes, forcing insurance companies to cover everyone is why the enrollment had to be set up that way.

Also, just wanted to add "piggybacking" is already happening. People with more severe pre-existing conditions who wouldn't be covered before are now "piggybacking" off the rest of us. Those people are going to cost insurance providers money, and the providers passed on that cost to everyone else's premiums.
Click to expand...
Technically yes, I was thinking of preexisting conditions as something more terminal in nature is all, vs a 20-40 year old who is generally fine but has an out of the blue health emergency, but I agree with that.

Ultimately at the end of the day most people will have to pay a little more. I don't think that's a bad thing because we pay so little of the overall healthcare costs to begin with. This is one (of the many reasons) why healthcare costs/the entire system in general have become unsustainable. Whether or not we agree with Obamacare, something needed to change in the overall system or it would have collapsed on itself. Feeling more of the financial burden (and still a fraction relative to overall cost) will force folks to be more conscious of what healthcare they are seeking out, the quality of that care and ultimately taking care of their own health. Most people(self included) now just look for what doctor is most convenient to them both in time and location.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Chat users

  • No one is chatting at the moment.

Chat rooms

  • General chit-chat 0

Forum statistics

Threads
1,068
Messages
425,093
Members
624
Latest member
Bluegrass Blue Devil
Back
Top Bottom