The entire idea of insurance is that you can assess the risk of an event in a pool of people who are paying premiums.
As soon as you say that somebody gets to wait until AFTER they have an event to join the pool, you are no longer talking about something rational.
(Irrationality is the sole province of government.)
“Pre-existing conditions” is a straw-man argument any way because current law forbids insurance companies from denying coverage after one year of the condition treatment...see Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)
http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/family/hipaa1.htm
***As soon as you say that somebody gets to wait until AFTER they have an event to join the pool, you are no longer talking about something rational.***
And you are no longer talking about INSURANCE.
People understand auto insurance, home owners’ insurance and life insurance. You don’t wait for an auto accident, a house fire or death before paying premiums. Why is that so hard to apply to ‘medical care insurance’?
Because people gamble with their health and don’t prepare for catastrophes - they expect the nanny state to kiss their boo-boos.
But the idea was that you could wait until you were sick and then demand coverage and the insurance co’s would have to provide it. This would be especially true if young people forwent [is that a word?]coverage and ended up pregnant or breaking a bone.
Another way to handle it is that if you have been covered for a condition, that coverage should not be subject to refusal or waiting periods with a new insurer, such as if you change jobs.
Well, what you say is true, IF, you're able to obtain health insurance in the first place. So if you take a job, and health insurance is offered, and you have a pre-existing condition, after one year, they have to cover the pre-existing condition.
However, if you're seeking private insurance, no one will sell you a policy in the first place if you have a pre-existing condition. I have MS and if we did not have group, there would be no way I would be able to purchase private insurance...I would be denied a policy for health insurance, if it were not for the fact that I get it through an employer. The same holds true for life insurance.
If there was a job change, as long as I kept continuous coverage through COBRA, when I or my husband change to the new job, the new policy would not list my MS as pre-existing...because of the continuous coverage.
But if there was a job loss, and COBRA limitations were exhausted, there is no way (except for the high risk pools, PCIP...Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan) that I could purchase a private policy.
And as to affording the disease without insurance...not possible. I don't take a disease modifying med at this point because of disease progression but I did for many years, and most MS patients do hoping to slow down exacerbations...and the cost, well anywhere from $3000 to $6000 per month. So the average Joe could not afford the meds that the doctors suggest.
You can go on SS disability, which after 2 years allows you to be on Medicare. I'm still able to work, albeit from home, so as long as I can work, I will.
It's a thorny issue and there are no easy answers.
EXACTLY!
You can purchase insurance, get treatment for whatever ails you (except your pre-existing condition) and then after one year, they are REQUIRED to treat that condition as well!
You will pay more, but hey, why should a 24 year old man be required to pay the same amount for his insurance as an 84 year old man? From the insurance point of view, their cost to treat is going to be MORE for the older customer, so their RATES will be higher for that patient - DUH!!
The Dems don’t want this! They want the 24 year old to pay the same amount as the 84 and they suggest that it all evens out in the long run - BS! There are many, MANY more 84 year old receiving medical treatment than 24 year olds - PERIOD!