Sunday, September 20, 2009

Do You Think Insurers Should Get Away with Denying Maternity Coverage by Calling a Prior C-Section a "Pre-Existing Condition"?

by L.A.S.

Another horror story seems too ridiculous to be true, but unfortunately it is. It seems that due to the lack of explicit regulation by some states, insurers can refuse to cover maternity care. This is not just a matter of a few cases of women being denied payment by the insurance company for their maternity stays in the hospital. This is built-in sexism.

Even though the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 requires employers with more than 15 workers to include maternity benefits in their insurance packages -- only 14 states require comprehensive maternity care to be included in coverage in policies sold on the individual market. Most individual insurers don't cover maternity care, and the number of plans without maternity coverage continues to rise.

See the article from SIEU at http://www.seiu.org/2009/09/insurance-companies-consider-c-section-birth-pre-existing-condition.php

Even those women who thought they had good insurance, and maternity coverage, have found themselves stuck with as much as $25,000 in health care bills that they were expected to pay out-of-pocket.

Funny, somehow it seems to me that if MEN had the babies, the insurance companies would not even try to pull stuff like this. What do you think?

No comments: