California Ends Health Insurance Gender Bias

[Norwayguy]

California ends health insurance gender bias - The Reporter

When Cherise Khaund went shopping for health insurance for herself and her two daughters, she had no clue that being a woman would cost her.



But as the Walnut Creek resident scanned the premiums for her new Blue Shield of California plan in early 2009, she saw that prices varied by two factors: age and gender. In one year's time, she would pay $408 more than a man for the same plan.


"I was so shocked. I thought only other countries were able to discriminate like that based on gender," said Khaund, 37.

Still, she signed up.

I'm sure she has never complained about the Discrimination Men receive when they purchase car insurance. What no tobacco questions?

The basic idea of insurance is that the risk is supposed to be spread across the entire pool," she said.
"Once you start identifying certain populations and saying they have to pay more for various reasons, then that defeats the purpose of insurance

No it accounts for statistical costs associated with that subset of the pool...Forget Car insurance analogies for a minute and think Fire Insurance policies you pay more because your home is further from a Fire Station because of the additional property damage that will result from the increased response time.

When gender no longer can be used as a factor, the costs associated with it will be spread across the entire risk pool, he said.


In general, younger men's premiums will increase and younger women's would decrease as a result of the law, Epstein said. At the same time, "older women might get an increase and older men might get a decrease."

Insurers accept the law and will work to implement it, Johnston said. "It is important that people understand the costs don't disappear," he said.

So one could say that this law once again legitamizes Age Discrimination because that is the only factor left standing according to the first sentence of this article.

 

[VolAgent]

So one could say that this law once again legitamizes Age Discrimination because that is the only factor left standing according to the first sentence of this article.

Don't worry, they'll fix that too. Pretty soon, you won't be able to give away health insurance to young men. And only young women planning to have a child will get health insurance.

 

[Norwayguy]

Don't worry, they'll fix that too. Pretty soon, you won't be able to give away health insurance to young men. And only young women planning to have a child will get health insurance.

And with Obamacares No Pre-existing condition policy they will purchase that policy at the hospital after the water has been broken and the baby is on the way....after 1 months premium the young woman will then drop the coverage....I was looking over the bills we, my wife and I, received after the birth of both of our children. The bill for the physicians services was 1 bill and encompassed the months of pre-natal care but at least what I recieved did not break out any dates for service, our policy covered pre-natal care subject to a one time $20 co-pay.

Which sounds better than reality since the way the bill came out pre-natal is lumped into the bill with everything else and is subject to the deductible and co-insurance but it was nice the first time we had a child to not worry about the pre-natal costs while my wife and I went to a myriad of Drs visits etc...The second time was different because I realized I was paying for it on the back end

 

[Frank Stastny]

The only thing that has accomplished is to insure that premiums and premium increases are higher than before.

Ignorance abounds.

 

[GreenSky]

I can't wait for my life insurance premiums to reduce down to the level paid by women. It's only fair.

When CA eliminated gender rating from Med Supps, the Plan F rate for a 70 year woman on United World (then the lowest priced plan) in Los Angeles went from $154 to about $200.

But at least it was fair to the men who received about a 3% decrease in premium.

Rick

 

[djs]

No it accounts for statistical costs associated with that subset of the pool...Forget Car insurance analogies for a minute and think Fire Insurance policies you pay more because your home is further from a Fire Station because of the additional property damage that will result from the increased response time.

Truly a bad analogy in California. Distance from a fire station is basically binary, you are either within 5 miles or you are not. You are also either within 1000 ft of a major water source (i.e., a fire hydrant) or you are not.

Now, the responding fire department is rated and that rating can affect your premium.

Car analogy would be much better

Or even the home if you talk about roofs. Wood shake? Pay more. Old roof? Pay more. Bad roof? Uninsurable except for a major rate increase.


Dan

 

[TXINSURANCE]

Unfortunately no one wins here. This is simply a PR move.

The rates in theory will get averaged between men and women. This is hardly ending a discriminatory practice, it is simply averaging the rates.

Men subsidizing female rates in short.

 

[somarco]

Similar rate action will occur once carriers digest the problems of child only GI. I would expect rates for all children to increase dramatically once the open enrollment period ends and they can assess the damage of picking up every child with autism, cerebral palsy, leukemia or cystic fibrosis.

 

[VolAgent]

Similar rate action will occur once carriers digest the problems of child only GI. I would expect rates for all children to increase dramatically once the open enrollment period ends and they can assess the damage of picking up every child with autism, cerebral palsy, leukemia or cystic fibrosis.

Seen the movie "Extraordinary Measures" with Harrison Ford and Brandon Fraiser? I don't even know of most plans would cover it, but she mentions their plan covers something like $40,000 a month in skilled nursing care for the two children. Can you imagine what that would do to some carriers loss ratio if they are only getting maybe $200 a month in premium?

 

[somarco]

Have not seen the movie, but have some "up close and personal" knowledge of kids with serious medical conditions.

Google Gaucher's disease for example.

A good friend from high school has 2 daughters with this illness. No cure. Just to stabilize them requires a medication that is $20k per dose.

They are supposed to get a monthly injection, but issues in obtaining the drug means some years they may only get 4 or 5 doses.

That's $80k per year minimum x 2 for both daughters.