Active Users:330 Time:15/05/2024 11:18:25 PM
Yet another reason to get out of that relationship. Hmm. *NM* Mad Cow Bomber Send a noteboard - 16/09/2009 05:38:21 AM
Yay for Republican Family values!

With the White House zeroing in on the insurance-industry practice of discriminating against clients based on pre-existing conditions, administration allies are calling attention to how broadly insurers interpret the term to maximize profits.

It turns out that in eight states, plus the District of Columbia, getting beaten up by your spouse is a pre-existing condition.

Under the cold logic of the insurance industry, it makes perfect sense: If you are in a marriage with someone who has beaten you in the past, you're more likely to get beaten again than the average person and are therefore more expensive to insure.

In human terms, it's a second punishment for a victim of domestic violence.

In 2006, Democrats tried to end the practice. An amendment introduced by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), now a member of leadership, split the Health Education Labor & Pensions Committee 10-10. The tie meant that the measure failed.

All ten no votes were Republicans, including Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming), a member of the "Gang of Six" on the Finance Committee who are hashing out a bipartisan bill. A spokesman for Enzi didn't immediately return a call from Huffington Post.


At the time, Enzi defended his vote by saying that such regulations could increase the price of insurance and make it out of reach for more people. "If you have no insurance, it doesn't matter what services are mandated by the state," he said, according to a CQ Today item from March 15th, 2006.

Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for an insurance industry trade group, America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), said that the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) has proposed ending the discrimination. "The NAIC has a model on this that we strongly supported. That model bans the use of a person's status as a victim of domestic violence in making a decision on coverage," he said.

During the last health care reform push, in 1993 and 1994, the industry similarly promised to end discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions.

Murray pushed to include the domestic violence concern in this year's comprehensive health care bill. "Senator Murray continues to believe that victims of domestic violence should not be punished for the crimes of their abusers. That is why she worked to include language in the Senate HELP Committee's health insurance reform bill that would ban this discriminatory and harmful insurance company practice," said spokesman Eli Zupnick.

In 1994, then-Rep. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), now a member of Senate leadership, had his staff survey 16 insurance companies. He found that eight would not write health, life or disability policies for women who have been abused. In 1995, the Boston Globe found that Nationwide, Allstate, State Farm, Aetna, Metropolitan Life, The Equitable Companies, First Colony Life, The Prudential and the Principal Financial Group had all either canceled or denied coverage to women who'd been beaten.

The Service Employees International Union asked members to write letters to Congress regarding the exclusion and have quickly generated hundreds, says an SEIU spokeswoman.

The relevant provision:

SEC. 2706. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANTS AND BENEFICIARIES BASED ON HEALTH STATUS.

'(a) IN GENERAL.--A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage may not establish rules for eligibility (including continued eligibility) of any individual to enroll under the terms of the plan or coverage based on any of the following health status-related factors in relation to the individual or a dependent of the individual:

(1) Health status.

(2) Medical condition (including both physical and mental illnesses).

(3) Claims experience.

(4) Receipt of health care.

(5) Medical history.

(6) Genetic information.

(7) Evidence of insurability (including conditions arising out of acts of domestic violence).

(8) Disability.

(9) Any other health status-related factor determined appropriate by the Secretary.

UPDATE: The eight states that still allow it are Idaho, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming, according to a report by the National Women's Law Center.

"The rent we pay for the little space we occupy on earth is the service we render to others."
Reply to message
Getting Beaten Up by Your Husband is a Pre-existing Condition - 15/09/2009 11:23:49 PM 755 Views
If true, that's pretty messed up. *NM* - 15/09/2009 11:26:39 PM 102 Views
The Huffington Post? - 15/09/2009 11:29:28 PM 262 Views
Do you have this on auto-reply? *NM* - 16/09/2009 12:04:30 AM 106 Views
lol. *NM* - 16/09/2009 05:42:16 AM 99 Views
No but I should - 16/09/2009 02:32:00 PM 213 Views
there are plenty of other sources you could find if you like - 16/09/2009 12:52:51 AM 221 Views
If you want to link a real news source then it is worth looking into - 16/09/2009 02:33:32 PM 221 Views
Umm....if the person is still in that relationship, then it seems like a pretty smart practice to me - 15/09/2009 11:34:00 PM 249 Views
I had that thought at first too, - 16/09/2009 12:03:58 AM 255 Views
Indeed - 16/09/2009 03:13:04 AM 230 Views
wow if only all women were as smart and strong as you - 16/09/2009 12:48:26 AM 253 Views
And where exactly does this article, or my reply say anything about anything you just said? - 16/09/2009 01:09:54 AM 244 Views
It's a "women's issue." Don't go bringing rational thought into it. - 16/09/2009 01:33:21 AM 258 Views
I just don't get the whole Appeal to Emotion thing - 16/09/2009 04:34:08 AM 217 Views
I think we're understanding this article differently. - 16/09/2009 02:02:47 AM 247 Views
I think we probably are. - 16/09/2009 02:56:46 AM 215 Views
That logic is ridiculous. I could make that claim about anything. - 16/09/2009 05:45:08 AM 221 Views
Do you have any idea how insurance works? - 16/09/2009 06:12:10 AM 206 Views
If I understand it, they can make that claim about almost anything. - 16/09/2009 03:20:14 PM 229 Views
Exactly. *NM* - 16/09/2009 06:56:38 PM 92 Views
This is a perfect example - 16/09/2009 01:28:11 AM 232 Views
How completely stupid, ignorant or self-entitled are you? Do you even understand insurance at ALL? - 16/09/2009 01:58:46 AM 379 Views
Awww, your righteous indignation is so cute! - 16/09/2009 02:12:41 AM 242 Views
agreement - 16/09/2009 02:28:03 AM 248 Views
Well the issue seems to be whether it's a pre-existing condition. - 16/09/2009 04:51:33 AM 206 Views
perhaps in that instance - 16/09/2009 05:12:48 AM 218 Views
Ah! I was wondering when you would rear your ugly head on this board. - 16/09/2009 05:48:14 AM 302 Views
Yeah, no. - 16/09/2009 06:08:02 AM 242 Views
Which is exactly why we need a public option. *NM* - 16/09/2009 03:14:03 PM 82 Views
I could understand an increased rate or altered benefits - 16/09/2009 02:32:46 AM 236 Views
Re: I could understand an increased rate or altered benefits - 16/09/2009 03:25:58 AM 194 Views
just as a note, some companies do insure to a practically "unlimited" level - 16/09/2009 03:47:34 AM 223 Views
Re: just as a note, some companies do insure to a practically "unlimited" level - 16/09/2009 03:54:02 AM 220 Views
entirely seperate - 16/09/2009 04:06:01 AM 228 Views
Then I'd say it's a pretty decent plan - 16/09/2009 04:17:31 AM 206 Views
nonsense!! - 16/09/2009 04:40:15 AM 295 Views
*NM* - 16/09/2009 07:42:25 PM 106 Views
Yet another reason to get out of that relationship. Hmm. *NM* - 16/09/2009 05:38:21 AM 100 Views
This is horrible! - 16/09/2009 03:08:29 PM 225 Views
a man? getting up in arms over a woman's issue??? - 16/09/2009 03:22:49 PM 211 Views
The insurance industry is corrupt as hell - 16/09/2009 06:02:14 PM 232 Views
A friend of mine who worked for an insurance company once told me... - 17/09/2009 12:35:46 AM 226 Views

Reply to Message