Health Insurers to Women: Please, Don’t Apply
- Women generally pay more at every level for coverage than men, except at more advanced ages
- Women are ‘penalized’ for being the bearers of children
- Insurers defend these practices saying women use health services more frequently
This is not the first time we have addressed this topic. However, recent events have prompted us to revisit the topic. Discrimination against women is not new and has not ended. However, the most blatant area remaining for many is in the area of obtaining health insurance coverage. A recent request from a female family member prompted some additional updated research. Appalling, we continue to find demonstrable evidence of the following:
(1) Women generally pay more at every level for coverage than men, except at much more advanced ages. In some cases, in the prime child bearing years, this amount is as much as double what a man of comparable age would pay
(2) Women are ‘penalized’ for being the bearers of children. Almost without exception, maternity and newborn coverage is an ‘option’ that is included or excluded randomly based on policies. Additionally, it is almost cost prohibitive and many otherwise attractive health plans do not offer maternity and newborn coverage at all. This is true, even when the market is a young woman, age 20 – 40 who is working and in the midst of the prime child bearing years.
(3) The fact that health insurers publicly post this information on their websites indicates their sense of immunity from any negative feedback. They in fact defend these practices by saying that women use health services more frequently, especially preventive services, and therefore have higher overall health costs. No doubt, we should penalize anyone who would dare use health services, particularly preventive ones!
Wrong is wrong where we grew up. Discrimination against women in pricing, offering of maternity and newborn coverage, as well as exclusion of health issues that are particular to females should be illegal, plain and simple. Congress, while voicing concern and objection, is still unable to address even this most obvious issue. The issue here gets to the heart of health insurance pricing. Insurance by definition involves the spreading of risk over large numbers of persons, entities or events. Still, health insurers love to divide and re-divide their policy offerings based on ‘group’ definitions: single, family, employer groups, large groups, small groups, etc. All are treated separately and rated separately in most cases. This creates winners and losers across the board. Furthermore, the ritual of excluding individuals due to higher risk or pre-existing conditions forces many to hold on to jobs to obtain ‘group’ coverage or face loss of all health insurance access. All of this leads to artificial choices by citizens due to lack of choice, access and portability.
Seems like this should be an area where Congress can find agreement. In 2010 it is a disgrace that young, hard working women, cannot find comparatively priced policies, with maternity and new born coverage, that do not penalize them for being female . . . jomaxx and obi jo
Health Insurers to Women: Please, Don’t Apply – http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2663251/health_insurers_to_women_please_dont_pg2.html?cat=52
Benefits Summary Personal Choice® PPO – http://www.ibx.com/health_plans/individual/ppo.html?content=/health_plans/ppo/benefits_summary/individual.html&origURL=/health_plans/individual/ppo.html
Women’s Health Policy Facts – http://www.kff.org/womenshealth/upload/1613-09.pdf
Women pay more than men for identical individual insurance policies – http://realhealthreform.wordpress.com/2008/10/31/women-pay-more-than-men-for-identical-individual-insurance-policies/
www.blogsurfer.us www.bloglines.com www.blogburst.com www.blogcatalog.com www.clusty.com www.reddit.com www.digg.com www.wikio.com www.propeller.com www.mashable.com www.bing.com www.wellsphere.com www.huffingtonpost.com www.associatedcontent.com