Why is Obama’s health insurance plan for people with a pre-existing condition so damn expensive?
I thought Obama was a socialist!?!!?!?!
Oh, wait.
He isn’t.
And we don’t have socialized medicine.
fml
I sigh in solidarity.
What am I supposed to do?
When I turn 21 and I no longer have Children’s Medical Service to take care of my diabetes?
Medicaid already found way to deny me, so I can’t get back on that.
Health insurance companies deny me because I have a preexisting condition.
Am I just supposed to ration out the remainder of my insulin that I have stocked up?
What about the other insulin that I take that I don’t have any stocked up on?
Am I just supposed to die?
It sucks being in this country.
I used to think it was great.
This is why we need a public option. I’m lucky that I qualify for MediCal because I would have died in 2009 if I didn’t have it. I’m a quadriplegic and therefore can’t find insurance due to a pre existing condition. I’ve been off of my parent’s Insurance for years. The stabilization plate from my first neck surgery started cutting into my esophagus in 2008. I got it removed because I had medical but even then I almost died because the surgery ruptured my esophagus. I hope you can get health care GR! You seem like a great person judging from your blog. That kind of stress shouldn’t be placed on you. It shouldn’t be placed on anyone.
Will Forcing Insurance Companies To Cover Birth Control Actually Save Money?
Amanda Marcotte thinks so:
Republican-driven political discourse of late has been about nothing but the importance of cutting spending and saving money, and so the GOP should be delighted with this simple and clear-cut promise of long-term savings by making contraception free. The IOM report indicated that the direct medical cost of unintended pregnancy in 2002 was $5 billion, with a savings from contraception that year estimated at $19.3 billion. With nearly half of U.S. pregnancies unintended, there’s quite a bit of room to save money with free contraception…
These new contraception regulations will pay for themselves easily in the short term by reducing the insurance payouts that come along with unintended pregnancies, but insurance companies should expect long-term savings. When children are planned, children are cheaper. As the Guttmacher noted (PDF) in its testimony on these proposed regulations, improved contraception use means women space out their pregnancies more, and putting some time in between pregnancies leads to better birth outcomes with lower medical costs. In addition, women who plan their pregnancies tend to get better prenatal care and are more likely to breast-feed, two behaviors that improve children’s health outcomes and reduce overall long-term health-care costs.
Marcotte adds that rising abortion rates during the recession indicate an increase in unplanned pregnancies, which she links to the fact that women are skimping on birth control for financial reasons. Forcing insurance companies to cover this expense means they pay less in the long run for babies that don’t exist.
Sullivan has more.
