Posted on 05/29/2009 8:33:20 AM PDT by reaganaut1
Is your medical insurance bad for your health? If you have a high-deductible plan, the answer may be yes.
The investment firm Fidelity recently surveyed employees at various companies who had opted for a high-deductible health plan linked to a health savings account. About half of those workers said they or a family member had chosen not to seek medical care for minor ailments as many as four times in the last year to avoid paying the out-of-pocket expenses.
As any doctor will tell you, small health problems left untreated can become big problems, warns Kathleen Stoll, director of health policy at the health care advocacy group Families USA. “This is just one of the many high-deductible pitfalls consumers need to watch out for,” Ms. Stoll said.
High-deductible health plans are essentially insurance policies that charge lower monthly premiums than traditional plans because the consumer is responsible for paying the first $1,000 to $5,000 or more in medical bills before the insurance kicks in. The plans, sometimes called catastrophic insurance, are often used in conjunction with a health savings account.
With these accounts, earnings on savings are allowed to accumulate tax free and roll over year to year, as long as the money is ultimately used to pay for medical expenses. To qualify for one of these tax-sheltered savings accounts, an insurance plan must have a deductible of at least $2,300 for families and $1,150 for individuals.
A person can put up to $3,000 annually in these accounts, or $5,950 for a family.
People who can best take advantage of this tax break are those who can afford to contribute the maximum but do not spend it all on health care.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
A big problem with health care is that much of it is paid by 3rd parties, either insurance companies or the government. Since providers will err on doing more when the customer is not paying, the government and insurance companies try to oversee how doctors practice. Doctors don't like the second-guessing and paperwork, which costs them a lot of time and money.
We need a system where people pay for more of their health care and where health insurance covers big, unexpected costs, the way insurance should. Your car insurance doesn't pay for a flat tire or routine maintenance.
Democrats don't trust people to make health care decisions with their own money. Instead, government will decide what is necessary and provide it "free" (at taxpayer expense).
I am "rich" according to Obama, and my investment portfolio routinely rises or falls by $10K or more in a week. My family could afford a $10K deductible policy, especially if we could save on health premiums. Maybe other families could afford only a $2K deductible, but the principle is the same.
The problem with government run nationalized universla health care is that there are always the hidden costs that always crop up out of nowehere which only adds to the total bill that is not taken into any account when these things are proposed. Huge government run programs always have unintended consequences and many times those consequences are ven worse than the disease they set out to cure.
Universal Rationed Health Care (URHC) bump
Very good points. I am for health savings plans (that roll over and don’t have to be used each calendar year) and catastrophic care. Most people can afford regular doctor’s visits (which would be cheaper if people actually had to pay for the visit themselves—I don’t even KNOW what my doctor charges for a visit, I just pay my copay).
And many things don’t really require a doctor’s visit. I have found that most stuff goes away if I don’t bother to go to the doctor. And I’m smart enough to know when something really does require a doc visit (or if I have a great deal of concern about something).
But, you’re right, the govt assumes we are all helpless idiots.
I’d say this nevertheless beats waiting months for much more important care like we’ve heard the horror stories out of Canada and Europe.
Anyone who’s ever had the latest technologies, Rx, procedures, research benefits, etc. needs to ask: Where might you (or a loved one) be without that, and are you willing to sacrifice the innovations now and in the future if the profit motive is reduced or taken away?
I’d bet hardly anyone would answer in the affirmative. The latest and greatest starts here, and it starts here for a reason.
Adding a third party to a typical "buyer/seller" arrangement will always throw the classic supply/demand economic realities completely out of whack.
This article is flawed. You have a Medical Savings Account where you submit your bills to be paid. I know because my daughter has high deductible and a MSA. The MSA paid for her visit to an Urgent Care Clinic because of her high deductible. The company puts money in each month and she matches so the fund is now higher then her deductible.
I think it is a terrific plan and it works. Cost the employer much less and saves the employee money. Win, win situation.
“We need a system where people pay for more of their health care and where health insurance covers big, unexpected costs, the way insurance should. Your car insurance doesn’t pay for a flat tire or routine maintenance.”
This is precisely right. The premise that ‘taking care of the little things will prevent the big things’ is only partially true in medicine. Further, if people skimp on their own care it is no one’s fault but their own. Why should the rest of us be saddled with socialized medicine because some people don’t want to invest in their own health?
Another thing to keep in mind is that it is likely that insurance companies will link the premiums on high-deductable health insurance policies to whether or not people have regular check-ups etc. They don’t want to have to pay for high-ticket items because you didn’t pay for the smaller things. Let the market sort this out.
“We need a system where people pay for more of their health care and where health insurance covers big, unexpected costs, the way insurance should. Your car insurance doesn’t pay for a flat tire or routine maintenance.”
BINGO!!
“had chosen not to seek medical care for minor ailments”
EARTH TO NEW YORK TIMES “Gay Mafia”...
THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT, YOU MORONS!!!
Inner-city Emergency Rooms are FULL of people who go in for simple sniffles, every single day.
I provide Catastrophic Care Insurance for my Employees, and myself, with a high deductible, and a prescription discount program. I had this at the last company I worked for, and got to see, firsthand, how it BENEFITS the employee.
And it allows me to provide coverage for my 3 employees that I would NEVER be able to provide, otherwise.
The FIRST thing that changes is the way your employees buy prescriptions. THEY push the doctor for Generic versions, and the “$4 versions”, instead of you forcing it on them. When they begin to realize the TRUE cost of what they are prescribed, or paying for a test, they begin to comprehend.
They begin to take advantage of Medical Savings Accounts, and don’t go to the doctor, just because it’s “time” to go to the doctor. And they KNOW that if it’s serious, they are covered to a GREATER extent, with a lower co-pay portion, and a higher lifetime payout, than traditional low-deductible plans do now!
You are so right about car insurance or even home owner’s insurance. We don’t think twice about having higher deductibles to save money so why not on health insurance.
I couldn’t believe this article — those high deductibles are perfect to keep people from rushing to the emergency room with a hangnail or whatever. Then you have the MSA to help if you actually need it. I also like the idea of a $15-20 deductible when you see a doctor.
The UAW used to pay $1 for prescriptions and $1 for an office visit and then they wonder today what happened. They didn’t want union members to have to pay anything more then $1 for their visits. My aunt and uncle used to go to the doctor all the time for the smallest of issues because it was so cheap. Used to irritate my Dad a lot.
I have a high deductible health insurance policy and an MSA. I only submit medical bills for reimbursement at the end of the year and ususally don’t bother unless I have major expense. I’ve found that if I pay my physicians in full at the time I receive their services, they will give me a discount of up to 20%.
I want medical and health decisions made by a doctor and his patient not by some nameless faceless government toadie bureaucrat.
There was an article in the WSJ, yesterday, about the little known fact that group health insurance is now available for businesses with as little as one employee, even as a self incorporated business. It is a good way for people with pre-existing conditions to obtain insurance at a lower rate.
People are too stupid to be able to tell the difference between a virus and a broken leg, don’t you know.
I would love to be able to get into one of these plans.
The FIRST thing that changes is the way your employees buy prescriptions. THEY push the doctor for Generic versions, and the “$4 versions”, instead of you forcing it on them. When they begin to realize the TRUE cost of what they are prescribed, or paying for a test, they begin to comprehend.
The UAW used to pay $1 for prescriptions and $1 for an office visit and then they wonder today what happened. They didn’t want union members to have to pay anything more then $1 for their visits. My aunt and uncle used to go to the doctor all the time for the smallest of issues because it was so cheap. Used to irritate my Dad a lot.
My father is on Medicare, and has been fitted with hearing aids twice, and he really needs them. Unfortunately he finds it inconvenient to actually wear them. When you don't spend your own money on medical care, you don't have the incentive to actually try to make the treatments work. What does it matter to recipients that hearing aids cost thousands of dollars to buy and to have fitted. It's the government that is paying.
YES! That's how you reduce health care spending, genius author.
As any doctor will tell you, small health problems left untreated can become big problems, warns Kathleen Stoll, director of health policy at the health care advocacy group Families USA. “This is just one of the many high-deductible pitfalls consumers need to watch out for,” Ms. Stoll said.
FUD. Pure FUD. (Fear. Uncertainty. Doubt. Emotion-based sludge)
This is exactly the same as the sales pitch at the cashier of an electronics store: "You need this extended coverage warranty to protect you when your new TV gets dropped in the toilet! What will you do if you don't have the coverage?"
“As any doctor will tell you, small health problems left untreated can become big problems.”
Geez. No self interest there or anything, huh?
The more likely outcome is that you’ll be over diagnosed and then end up with other problems from the treatment.
The medical industry in the US should be ashamed of itself.
My company is switching to high-deductible only health insurance this year and the whining over it is deafening. Mainly, it’s the walking pill bottles who hit the doctor’s office for every little sniffle they or little Johnny gets, and yet wonder why health insurance is so high.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.