Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Question: Mandatory Blood test by the Insurance Company
Vanity | March 03, 2011 | The Working Man

Posted on 03/03/2011 4:25:44 AM PST by The Working Man

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last
To: Pecos

“If your spouse has HIV, don’t you think your health insurance company has the right to use that info in deciding the amount of your premium?”

I didn’t say it was either a good policy or a bad policy. I(1) said I’d never heard of it before, and (2) implied that Big Brother is intrusive.

When a government negotiates insurance premiums for a group, each individual employee is not reviewed on a case-by-case basis. At least, that was the case when I was involved in negotiations.


21 posted on 03/03/2011 7:49:01 AM PST by MayflowerMadam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The Working Man
My personal first thought was that they were going to to do DNA checking for genetic diseases and use that as a reason to put the Employees on a ‘first to layoff’ list.

I'm going through roughly the same thing (although no blood tests, not yet) with my employer. Currently, there's a "wellness program" that we get some hard armtwisting to participate in. Next year, we've been told that we'll have mandatory screening, and a 'life coach' (read: company-approved nanny) will "help" us with areas in which we're found lacking.

I'm looking for another job.

But, to the point, although we've been assured that all results are completely confidential (then, how would the company know that we need a 'life coach', or even if we're seeing one? I asked, and was told that I asked too many questions), I had exactly the same thoughts as you. Not healthy enough? That'll get you on the short list when layoffs come. Particularly if there's someone in the dept who has the same qualifications, but ISN'T on statins, or blood pressure meds, or something.

22 posted on 03/03/2011 8:12:10 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: catroina54

“Concent is a fuzzy word. Do you want the insurance? Do they require a blood test to get the insurance?


23 posted on 03/03/2011 10:19:44 AM PST by Pecos (Liberty and Honor will not die on my watch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MayflowerMadam

It’s all about the actuarial tables, or should be. The question should come down to “Who is assuming what level of risk, and for what premium?” Well......pre-ObamaCare anyway.


24 posted on 03/03/2011 10:22:35 AM PST by Pecos (Liberty and Honor will not die on my watch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: The Working Man

If you’re marking “no” to things like HIV and cancer, or not listing those types of things, the blood test is to verify that you’re telling the truth or not withholding information.

It would be very tempting for someone who is in the beginning stages of cancer to sign up for insurance and then afterward say “Oops - what are the chances of that?”


25 posted on 03/03/2011 12:06:29 PM PST by scott7278 ("...I have not changed Congress and how it operates the way I would have liked..." - BHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson