Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Arguendo

The only point I agree with the Dems on is this: ban a limit on pre-existing conditions.

It is just patently not right that somebody can’t be covered just because they had a kidney stone in the past or something (happened to my wife when we had to temporarily get individual coverage in between jobs).


22 posted on 08/13/2009 11:30:27 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: rwfromkansas

I should say I would be okay with a small rate increase for those with some severe preexisting conditions, such as heart disease etc.

But, not outrageous and no outright denial of coverage or waivers limiting coverage for a specific condition.


25 posted on 08/13/2009 11:52:34 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: rwfromkansas

I’m late on this, but I was on vacation when the op-ed was written, and I’m now getting to it.

Anyway, I hate the whole pre-existing conditions clauses.

I get very worried for my daughter (who has always been on insurance). She has lots of medical problems (brain injury, seizures, and other stuff). What is going to happen to her when she goes off my husband’s insurance? We’ll probably help fund insurance for her, but we can’t cover all of her medical expenses.


45 posted on 08/27/2009 2:08:50 PM PDT by luckystarmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson