Would being born with an illness/defect be "pre-existing condition"?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by PracticalMac, May 4, 2017.

Tags:
  1. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #1
    Would being born with an illness/defect be "pre-existing condition"?

    One could think being born with a defect would exclude the neophyte from the clause, but if coverage begins after birth, then it would be indeed preexisting.

    What is the legal and insurance definition of pre-existing?

    This was discussed by a Fox News contributor Mrd. Marshall

    (and the ramifications if indeed it is a PEC)
     
  2. poloponies macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    #3
    Did you pull that out of your own ass or someone else's?
     
  3. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #4
    Insurance companies try to claim about anything is a pre existing condition. they tried to claim my 15 year old daughter who had been on insurance for 5 years had a pre existing condition. what was that condition you say? stress. she had a checkup cause she had been feeling tired the doctor did nothing they denied he first checkup.
     
  4. mac_in_tosh macrumors regular

    mac_in_tosh

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Location:
    Earth
    #5
    To the GOP, just being born is a pre-existing condition disqualifying someone from the safety net.
     
  5. Zenithal Suspended

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #6
    Yes and no. Prior to ACA, a person could be denied coverage if insurance found reason that the person knew of their condition prior to applying. Often going by doctors reports from checkups. Aside from that, children could be denied on born or later developed illnesses if they were to be added after a certain timeframe.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-existing_condition#Former_regulation
    --- Post Merged, May 4, 2017 ---
    She was 15 then? I'd think being a teenager is stressful enough. The funny thing about insurance companies is the underwriters always meet with doctors on staff. Actual physicians. Funny how that works.
     
  6. Foggydog macrumors 6502

    Foggydog

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Location:
    Left Coast
    #7
    This should include Trump then.
     
  7. mudslag macrumors regular

    mudslag

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #8

    He was born with his head up his ass, guess that's a pre-existing condition.
     
  8. Rhonindk macrumors 68020

    Rhonindk

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2014
    Location:
    Bloom County: Meadow Party
    #9
    According to my current medical insurance, signing up for insurance with a known medical issue would likely be defined as a pre-existing condition. Failure to disclose can result in policy cancellation.

    So if you are born with a known condition ...
    --- Post Merged, May 4, 2017 ---
    Wasn't he born a Democrat?
     
  9. Zenithal Suspended

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #10
    No one is born with a political affiliation. Just as they're not born racists, sexists, murderers, rapists, etc.
     
  10. rjohnstone macrumors 68040

    rjohnstone

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Location:
    PHX, AZ.
    #11
    Good insurance, like what I have (lucky I have a great employer) will cover a child regardless of what they are born with.
    In my policy, the condition doesn't exist until first diagnosis. But my children were covered the instant they were born.
    So they have coverage prior to diagnosis. Hence, no pre-existing condition exists.
    Now there is a loophole in that if a condition is discovered during pregnancy, they "could" place conditions on coverage as it relates to that discovery.

    My youngest was diagnosed with Apraxia of speech at age 2. Technically it's been there since before she was born as it's a neurological disorder, but it wasn't diagnosed prior to coverage, so they covered her.
    Not cheap either... $75 per hour for the speech therapist and those pesky MRI costs.
    Fortunately for her, she has one of the best therapists in the state. They swore she would require and augcomm device to communicate for the rest of her life.
    After 4+ years of intensive therapy she can talk on her own... she still has difficulties when under stress, but she doesn't need her "talker" anymore.
    We would have NEVER been able to afford her therapy if it weren't for our insurance plan.
    If this new bill ****s it up, there will be hell to pay at the ballot box.

    Sorry for the rambling, but this is why I don't agree with this new bill... hell the ACA almost cost us our "good" insurance.
    My employer toyed with the idea of sending us all to the exchanges to save money. They chose wisely as they would have lost a lot of great engineers if they did it.
     
  11. kobalap, May 4, 2017
    Last edited: May 4, 2017

    kobalap macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    #12
    If you look in Webster's dictionary, this is the very definition of Trumpvoteritis.

    In all seriousness - this concept of covering pre-existing conditions - poll after poll show that we (Republicans like me and Democrats) agree. We all want it covered.

    We elected a Republican congress to do a job - to get rid this mess called Obamacare. Little did we know that they would replace it with something worse. And all this is being done just so Trump can claim that he is fulfilling one of his campaign promises.

    I am beginning to wonder - are Trump supporters really this blind or are they enemies of Americans?
     
  12. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #13
    [QUOTE="Zenithal, post: 24551990, member: 360029"

    She was 15 then? I'd think being a teenager is stressful enough. The funny thing about insurance companies is the underwriters always meet with doctors on staff. Actual physicians. Funny how that works.[/QUOTE]
    for sure. but they were saying she was suffering from stress for 5 years??? and the doc did not even do any treatments.
     
  13. bradl, May 4, 2017
    Last edited: May 4, 2017

    bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #14
    You would be mistaken.. Horribly mistaken.

    BL.
     
  14. HEK Suspended

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #15
    Can't get much more pre-existing than being born with problem. Plus not being on any other health insurance before, the new born would be starting out and need 6 to 12 months before benefits would kick in.

    Plenty of nice loop holes for insurance companies if the final bill doesn't address such issues.

    Interesting part of house bill that just passed is that if state opt out of pre-existing clause even employer provided health care would drop pre-existing members or charge employer more. Nicely buried in the bill we got a few hours to review.

    Good thing republicans kept word about transparency and not shoving legislation through without discussion and review, like they promised.

    Oh wait.....they lied about that.
     
  15. TonyC28 macrumors 65816

    TonyC28

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #16
    Pre-existing conditions should be covered, but it is illogical to say that the price shouldn't reflect it.
     
  16. dannyyankou macrumors 604

    dannyyankou

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    #17
    They could still be insured under their family's insurance plan and can transfer the coverage to another plan when they're an adult.

    Of course, not every family can afford insurance and that would put the kid in an unfortunate situation. If you have a pre-existing condition before you become an adult, you should definitely be allowed to buy insurance.
     
  17. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #18
    My understanding is that a pre-existing condition is a condition you have regardless of when it was acquired, when you appear on the insurance companies doorstep asking for coverage, no? Or depends?
     
  18. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #19
    I think a preexisting condition is a condition that was diagnosed prior to switching to a new health care provider. When you are born you are already covered by the parents insurance. So it isn't preexisting because you had insurance before the diagnosis.
     
  19. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #20
    I don't think that is how it works. When you switch companies, pre-existing is pre-existing as far as the new company is concerned, and they could say we decline to cover you because you have such and such ailment or disease.
     
  20. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #21
    The question is about being born with an illness. It's not preexisting until you leave your parents insurance at 26.
     
  21. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #22
    Is'nt that when you are impacted, when you try to get insurance? Pre-existing conditions is the controversy being discussed I think. It's covered under the ACA, but in jeopardy now.
     
  22. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #23
    Trying to make a system that works for all will only generate a ****** system for all.
     
  23. Rhonindk macrumors 68020

    Rhonindk

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2014
    Location:
    Bloom County: Meadow Party
    #24
    Here is a situation - thankfully there was no "pre-existing condition".
    My daughter is on my health plan. She is a college student. She works. She is on my plan based on age, not on income.
    She became a single mom - pills aren't 100%. Everything about the pregnancy was covered under my insurance.
    However ... once the child was born (perfect 10 fingers and toes), the child was not covered under my insurance.
    There in started the insurance dance. Children are covered for a period of time under the mothers insurance. Since it was mine, and not the mothers; not covered. Loophole.

    In this case it wasn't a condition, it was being born.
     
  24. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #25
    It just strikes me as not having a pre-existing condition, does not make you the best person to judge this. ;) Note, I have no prexisting condition, yet I think insurance is a means to mitigate costs that average people can't afford. That is the goal right, not being one illness from bankruptcy is the ideal? Trump praised the Australian health care, a UHC system. Come on GOP, get with the program! ;)
     

Share This Page