Mom denied health insurance for having a C-section

This is actually what happened to me. I had to have an emergency c-section when I went into labor at 28 weeks and every insurance carrier denied me after my husband switched jobs and we had to get individual coverage because of the c-section. They also denied my son who at the time was 6 month old. They said he didn't weigh enough even then the docter wrote a letter explaining that he was a premie so they do not follow the same growth chart as normal kids until around 2 to 3 years of age. Also my son had no other medical issues at all. Right now we are trying to apply for health insurance due to the who Health Reform things and insurance are saying it won't take effect until September 23 which is 6 months but I thought that children will not be denied immediatley not in 6 months.

if they wanna be that way then they should pay for the birth control twist, where you cant get preggers for 5 years

This whole argument is testament to the need for health care reform. Try asking if you'd want to haggle over whether you should have a one year exclusion for a "police department insurance" or "fire department" insurance. Health insurance is no more a commodity than these other basic essentials of modern civilization, and having for-profit companies determine when its in their interest to cover people doesn't make sense, and never will.

Boo-hoo, Find another insurance carrier.

It is a free country...well somewhat fee. If one insurance company wants to do this, so what...find somoene else. The thing that is great about living in a free market is that you get to pick and choose and so do they. She probably wouldn't be able to afford the pregnancies on her own without health insurance, so she should be greatful that they are even there.

Since when did Americans become diluted into thinking that health insurance was for the policy holder's benefit?! It is a billion dollar industry for a reason. By giving insurance to those who rarely need it and only need it for small instances, the company makes a TON of $$$. This system that has been created can't and won't last. Its gotta give at some point. And by that point, healthcare will be so expensive none of us will be able to afford it.

That is ridiculous! Insurance in this country is nothing more than a joke.

Absurd! The "free market" in health care is at work!

Joy, who do you think is trying to get anything "for free" by getting a painful, horrible surgery? C-sections most often come at the recommendation of the physician, not the mother. VBAC's (vaginal birth after Caesarean) are often not condoned by physicians because they can be risky. That leaves a woman who wants to have more than one kid post C-section with very few options.

I'm sick of everyone wanting to get everything for free. Cesarean birth is EXPENSIVE! Much more expensive than vaginal birth. The insurance company is looking at a woman whose had multiple cesarean births in only a few years and is at high risk for having multiple more if they insure her. As well, the rest of their clients will likely see an increase in premiums if the company has to pay out increased medical costs.

It's really sad that we've made cesarean birth common. It should be used for emergency situations to save the lives of mother & child. Instead, it's become a pain free, easy - but EXPENSIVE - way to have children.

Joy, Cesarean sections are NOT pain free. It is major adominal surgery, I went through hours of labor and ended up needing a C-section to save the life of my son. The surgery was worse by a long shot.

The freedom in this country is the freedom of choice, not that everything is paid for by the government.

Golden Rule Insurance has issues. I just watched a segment on the Today show (aired Today) for denying insurance to a family because their toddler was considered underweight (in their opinion). I think a week ago, another Colorado company (I think it was them again) denied coverage to another family b/c their child was considered overweight. In both cases, their doctors had evaluated the children and found them to be growing normally in accordance to their growth curves, and both to be perfectly healthy.

I think its this company in specific thats nuts.

Then there was the four month old breastfed baby who had a preexisting condition of obesity because he was above the 95th percentile for his age...

I agree with Brandy. People complain too much.

and foriegners want to come here to be "free"? what a crock! this isn't a free country anymore. we are now under the rule of a dictator worse that castro! the insurance dictators!! when do we revolt?

Why not put an amount of time on it before your ins will cover pregnancies. My ins has a 1 year waiting period before it will cover for any preexsisting conditions. I also has disability coverage to cover if i had to be out of work for an extended period of time, it wouldn't cover maternity leave for 1 year

Insurance is supposed to protect you against unexpected expenses. It is not a prepayment plan. It also shouldn't be used for procedures that are elective (and carrying a baby to full term is elective no matter how you look at it). Why is it that those of us who choose not to be responsible and not get pregnant should pay for those who choose to be?

I feel sorry for the guys who will be paying more for coverage because insurance companies cannot "discriminate" against women simply because they can get pregnant. Yet, guys pay more for life insurance and car insurance than we do. If they have a defined benefit pension, they get the same as we do even though women, on average, live longer. Is that fair? Isn't that discriminatory? Just another reason to get government out of the health care business and stop their incessant regulations that do nothing but drive up costs.

Joy in Seattle, you make a great point, but are you aware that if you had one c-section (for any reason, emergency or not) that many hospitals will not allow you to have a VBAC? So now you can't have your baby vaginally in a hospital and your insurance won't cover you for a c-section. And before anyone suggests having your baby at home, understand that there are many, many women who aren’t comfortable with that option. Yet, you're still expected to pay the doctor their co-pays and the insurance companies their premiums (and you pay the insurance company regardless of if you go the doctor or not). This is a no win for many families that want to have children after a woman’s had a c-section . It's sad.

The insurance companies know beforehand statistically how many C-sections will be performed and their associated costs. All this is already factored into the cost of insurance BEFORE the lady in question applied for it. The insurance company, by denying her application, saves on the expense of her 'possible' proceedure AND is still charging everybody else premiums based on having covered her. So who is wanting something for free?

Ya gotta love the free market.