Thanks Democrats...daughter will have to quit job to stay on insurance.

[iamwhatiseem]

Thanks to the GREAT Health Care Reform...there is now a loophole in which insurance companies can drop coverage on college students IF THERE IS AVAILABLE COVERAGE (NO MATTER HOW BAD) through an employer, even if it is a part-time job that has horrendously bad insurance.

So...even though my daughter is a full time student, as long as she is working to help pay for college and that part-time job carries some minimal crap insurance - her solid coverage she has through us is gone.
So her choice is to either quit the job or stay insured.

The reason companies are dropping the coverage is due to the higher expense of coverage due to the reform. (the only stipulation before the health care plan was that the child must be a full time student)

Thanks

 

[uscitizen]

you mean she cannot decline the insurance coverage by an employer?
I have declined employer insurance before.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

you mean she cannot decline the insurance coverage by an employer?
I have declined employer insurance before.

nope.
They have hired a company to audit each dependent, we have to contact her employer and give it to this company who will then verify if there is any available insurance - if there is, they will drop coverage in 30 days whether she has signed up for the insurance or not.

 

[uscitizen]

Ahh so the insurance company is cutting costs?

 

[uscitizen]

not really related but similar. I recall when Reagan cut SS survivor benefits for children going to school.

 

[Revere]

Welcome to serfdom, baby. Government tells you what health care you can have.

 

[jillian]

Thanks to the GREAT Health Care Reform...there is now a loophole in which insurance companies can drop coverage on college students IF THERE IS AVAILABLE COVERAGE (NO MATTER HOW BAD) through an employer, even if it is a part-time job that has horrendously bad insurance.

So...even though my daughter is a full time student, as long as she is working to help pay for college and that part-time job carries some minimal crap insurance - her solid coverage she has through us is gone.
So her choice is to either quit the job or stay insured.

The reason companies are dropping the coverage is due to the higher expense of coverage due to the reform. (the only stipulation before the health care plan was that the child must be a full time student)

Thanks

what a bunch of bull...

you didn't want health care reform... don't bitch. she wouldn't have ANYTHING but the garbage insurance her job gives her if it were up to you.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Ahh so the insurance company is cutting costs?

The only stipulation in the 22 years I have had coverage is that the child had to be a student.
In the 3 page letter, they state the reason for this change is due to higher cost in the coming years due to the HCR act. That in order to keep employee contribution from dramaticc increases is to cut coverage.

 

[uptownlivin90]

Well...

...It looked good on paper.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Thanks to the GREAT Health Care Reform...there is now a loophole in which insurance companies can drop coverage on college students IF THERE IS AVAILABLE COVERAGE (NO MATTER HOW BAD) through an employer, even if it is a part-time job that has horrendously bad insurance.

So...even though my daughter is a full time student, as long as she is working to help pay for college and that part-time job carries some minimal crap insurance - her solid coverage she has through us is gone.
So her choice is to either quit the job or stay insured.

The reason companies are dropping the coverage is due to the higher expense of coverage due to the reform. (the only stipulation before the health care plan was that the child must be a full time student)

Thanks

what a bunch of bull...

you didn't want health care reform... don't bitch. she wouldn't have ANYTHING but the garbage insurance her job gives her if it were up to you.

What part of englis language do you not understand dolt.
I clearly stated the only stipulation before was that the child must be enrolled full time in an accredited college.

 

[Scaybeez]

The only stipulation in the 22 years I have had coverage is that the child had to be a student.
In the 3 page letter, they state the reason for this change is due to higher cost in the coming years due to the HCR act. That in order to keep employee contribution from dramaticc increases is to cut coverage.

Hold the phone. Intially you stated that the HCR act changed the rules, allowing the insurance company to drop your daughter because her employer also offers insurance. As far as I'm aware, that's not accurate. My insurance has had those sorts of rules in place for years. Long before the HCR bill was even on the table.

 

[Revere]

The only stipulation in the 22 years I have had coverage is that the child had to be a student.
In the 3 page letter, they state the reason for this change is due to higher cost in the coming years due to the HCR act. That in order to keep employee contribution from dramaticc increases is to cut coverage.

Hold the phone. Intially you stated that the HCR act changed the rules, allowing the insurance company to drop your daughter because her employer also offers insurance. As far as I'm aware, that's not accurate. My insurance has had those sorts of rules in place for years. Long before the HCR bill was even on the table.

But your plan sponsor wasn't forced to cover 26 year old "dependents," pre-existing conditions, mandated lifetime caps, and mandated preventive care.

 

[MarcATL]

What kinda job does she have? Or did rather.

Isn't the RepubliCON$ meme to buck up, man up and pull yourself up by your bootstraps?

I gues the TeaBaggers in Congress will save the day huh?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The only stipulation in the 22 years I have had coverage is that the child had to be a student.
In the 3 page letter, they state the reason for this change is due to higher cost in the coming years due to the HCR act. That in order to keep employee contribution from dramaticc increases is to cut coverage.

Hold the phone. Intially you stated that the HCR act changed the rules, allowing the insurance company to drop your daughter because her employer also offers insurance. As far as I'm aware, that's not accurate. My insurance has had those sorts of rules in place for years. Long before the HCR bill was even on the table.

But your plan sponsor wasn't forced to cover 26 year old "dependents," pre-existing conditions, mandated lifetime caps, and mandated preventive care.

Bingo.
For the last 22 years our plan had ONE STIPULATION..that a child past 19 years old to remain covered he/she must be a full time student...they could have 5 jobs if they wanted - didn't matter.
THIS YEAR...they added the stipulation that "there is no available coverage through his/her own employment"

 

[Revere]

Hold the phone. Intially you stated that the HCR act changed the rules, allowing the insurance company to drop your daughter because her employer also offers insurance. As far as I'm aware, that's not accurate. My insurance has had those sorts of rules in place for years. Long before the HCR bill was even on the table.

But your plan sponsor wasn't forced to cover 26 year old "dependents," pre-existing conditions, mandated lifetime caps, and mandated preventive care.

Bingo.
For the last 22 years our plan had ONE STIPULATION..that a child past 19 years old to remain covered he/she must be a full time student...they could have 5 jobs if they wanted - didn't matter.
THIS YEAR...they added the stipulation that "there is no available coverage through his/her own employment"

The government is pushing plan sponsors to shove their members off on someone else. It's like a big cakewalk, where the music stops and there aren't enough seats for everyone.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

But your plan sponsor wasn't forced to cover 26 year old "dependents," pre-existing conditions, mandated lifetime caps, and mandated preventive care.

Bingo.
For the last 22 years our plan had ONE STIPULATION..that a child past 19 years old to remain covered he/she must be a full time student...they could have 5 jobs if they wanted - didn't matter.
THIS YEAR...they added the stipulation that "there is no available coverage through his/her own employment"

The government is pushing plan sponsors to shove their members off on someone else. It's like a big cakewalk, where the music stops and there aren't enough seats for everyone.

Looks like it...I guarentee this is a part of the claims they made where the HRC woul "lower costs"...well no shit...removing millions of students off of good plans to worthless plans where there is no real coverage at all unless you have a major medical need...indeed lowers costs and enable "coverage" for more.

 

[Revere]

Bingo.
For the last 22 years our plan had ONE STIPULATION..that a child past 19 years old to remain covered he/she must be a full time student...they could have 5 jobs if they wanted - didn't matter.
THIS YEAR...they added the stipulation that "there is no available coverage through his/her own employment"

The government is pushing plan sponsors to shove their members off on someone else. It's like a big cakewalk, where the music stops and there aren't enough seats for everyone.

Looks like it...I guarentee this is a part of the claims they made where the HRC woul "lower costs"...well no shit...removing millions of students off of good plans to worthless plans where there is no real coverage at all unless you have a major medical need...indeed lowers costs and enable "coverage" for more.

You can't keep the plan you like.

Obamacare lie #1.

 

[uscitizen]

Many family insurance plans did not cover students past 18 or so whether in college or not.

In any case I predicted this type of thing even before the healthcare debates started.
I knew once the lobbyists and such goth thru with it that it would mostly benefit the insurance and health care industry.

We needed the single payer plan.

 

[Dr Grump]

Blame the greedy insurance companies....

 

[Revere]

And again, I ask, would you trust your life with a slimeball like Greendick in charge of your healthcare?