In 2009, it is legal in eight states and D.C. for health insurance companies to reject applicants who are survivors of domestic violence. Read more at Corpus Callosum, The Jackson Free Press, The Huffington Post, and The Primate Diaries.
Get outraged. Speak out. End the silence.
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
Copyright © 2012, Kalmbach Publishing Co.
Privacy - Terms - Reader Services - Subscribe Today - Advertise - About Us
September 17th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
you are unclear .
is it legal to reject them because they are victims or even if they are victims .
do both scenarios cause you outrage ?
September 17th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Whoever came up with such an idea should be domestically beaten. It is morally incorrect to make domestic violence a pre-existing condition.
September 17th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Dear Dr. Kirshenbaum,
It’s legal in DC and all fifty states for insurance companies regulated by the federal government to refuse healthcare to people with autism. It is legal in 40 states for insurance companies regulated by the states to refuse healthcare to people with autism.
Unless you are very wealthy, pray your child doesn’t develop autism.
Sincerely,
John Gilmore
September 17th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
I am not sure what either Dr. Kishenbaum’s or Mr. Gilmore’s comments mean. I thought insurance was generally regulated at the State level, not the Federal level. So how does the Federal Government get involved? Is there a reference to relevant Federal statutes or Federal Register entries that can help us understand this better? I will go to the referenced sites for more information, but both of these comments are quite disturbing.
September 17th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Most insurance policies, covering about half the US population, are regulated by the federal ERISA laws, about a quarter of the population have insurance policies regulated by state law. If an insurer decides they don’t want to cover autism care, and apparently victims of domestic violence, there is nothing in federal law to prevent them from doing so, and only a few state laws prohibit this type of discrimination.
September 17th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
That’s pretty awful. And it’s “Ms. Kirshenbaum”.
September 17th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
What about the person denied coverage due to an undeclared pre-existing condition? The “pre-existing condition” was acne.
When one is looking for an excuse, really anything will do.