Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

September 15, 2009

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHOULDN'T BE A 'PRE-EXISTING CONDITION'.... Just when it seemed private health insurers couldn't appear any less sympathetic, we learn a little more about their coverage practices. Ryan Grim reported this jaw-dropper late yesterday.

With the White House zeroing in on the insurance-industry practice of discriminating against clients based on pre-existing conditions, administration allies are calling attention to how broadly insurers interpret the term to maximize profits.

It turns out that in eight states, plus the District of Columbia, getting beaten up by your spouse is a pre-existing condition.

Under the cold logic of the insurance industry, it makes perfect sense: If you are in a marriage with someone who has beaten you in the past, you're more likely to get beaten again than the average person and are therefore more expensive to insure.

In human terms, it's a second punishment for a victim of domestic violence.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) launched an effort in 2006 to prohibit the practice, but it failed in committee on a 10-10 vote. All 10 "no" votes came from Republicans.

The Service Employees International Union is lobbying on this issue, and noted yesterday, "Words cannot describe the sheer inhumanity of this claim. It serves as yet further proof that our insurance system is broken, destroyed by the profit-mongering of the very companies whose sole purpose should be to provide Americans with access to care when they need it most."

Steve Benen 11:20 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (31)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Sounds like a private insurance death panel to me.

Posted by: Ron Byers on September 15, 2009 at 11:25 AM | PERMALINK

All health care should be non-profit. End of story.

Posted by: Cap'n Phealy on September 15, 2009 at 11:27 AM | PERMALINK

I would be nice if someone got this where it belongs, front page w/ the 10 names that voted against it.

Posted by: ScottW on September 15, 2009 at 11:31 AM | PERMALINK

By virtue of the same logic, a gunshot wound incurred in a high crime neighborhood would also be a pre-existing condition.

Posted by: Duncan Kinder on September 15, 2009 at 11:36 AM | PERMALINK

This would make a perfect 30 second ad. I don't have the skills but someone who does should make a youtube ad based on this. If it is good enough it will get hits and maybe earned media. Dems need only pick the low-hanging fruit to get a good bill.

Posted by: rk on September 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK

I keep saying - these stories need to be pushed and pushed to put an "average 'mericun" face on health care problems . I provide this link....as to those who are most affected...seem to be Red States. Who Knew?
http://www.silentwitness.net/states/us_map.htm

Posted by: John R on September 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK

We are a mean and cruel country.

Posted by: Breezeblock on September 15, 2009 at 11:38 AM | PERMALINK

I injured myself trying to get my head around that concept.

Posted by: Kevin on September 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM | PERMALINK

big surprise? shit, no.

misogyny is as american as apple pie.

big profits in the abuse of women...and why should the insurance companies be any dif from the beer makers?

Posted by: neill on September 15, 2009 at 11:41 AM | PERMALINK

Wow, this is horrible.

It became bad enough when women were forced to file a report even if they didn't want to after revealing they had been abused.

As adults, this should be their choice.

Now they are being discriminated against for asking for help to remain safe?

Posted by: insanity on September 15, 2009 at 11:41 AM | PERMALINK

correction:

"big profits in the abuse of women...and why should the insurance companies be any dif from the beer makers?"

should be

"big profits in the abuse of women...and why should the insurance companies be any dif from the mormons and other patriarchal assholes?"

there, all better...

Posted by: neill on September 15, 2009 at 11:44 AM | PERMALINK

This boggels my mind. The insurance industry truly has no soul. And to the birthers, deathers, tenthers and all town hallers who want status quo I say "Have you no sense of decency"
To you, I say just remember what goes around comes around. Some day it may be you who are denied health coverage because of some flimsy excuse made up by the insurance company.

Posted by: nodaK on September 15, 2009 at 11:47 AM | PERMALINK

Waoh!! You gotta be kidding me. That is truly shocking. This should be used as a bludgeon against the insurance industry and republicans. I hope Keith Olbermann gets ahold of this one and runs with it. The worst person in the world tonight should be a 10fer. Publish those names and make them famous. Let them explain that vote.

Posted by: Patrick on September 15, 2009 at 11:52 AM | PERMALINK

The political party that could figure out how to mobilize the public against the Predatory Corporate State would win landslides. But are politicians smarter than yeast? Are they able to stop taking bribes from their corporate masters? No.

Posted by: Speed on September 15, 2009 at 11:55 AM | PERMALINK

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) launched an effort in 2006 to prohibit the practice, but it failed in committee on a 10-10 vote. All 10 "no" votes came from Republicans.

Why this isn't blasted to the media day and night by Democrats is, as always, a mystery to me....

Posted by: Stefan on September 15, 2009 at 11:57 AM | PERMALINK

It became bad enough when women were forced to file a report even if they didn't want to after revealing they had been abused.

As adults, this should be their choice.

Um, please tell me you're kidding, right?

If cops show up to a house for a domestic dispute and find one of the people beaten up there isn't a "choice" about whether or not a report should be filed. What you're asserting here is that a cop that has witnessed a crime turn their back based solely on the victim being scared enough of the perpetrator to ask that the police do nothing. Unless you believe that it takes two to tango and that an abused person somehow asks for it, therefore should be able to ask that their abuser not face any criminal consequences for their actions.

Posted by: zoe kentucky on September 15, 2009 at 11:58 AM | PERMALINK

"But are politicians smarter than yeast? Are they able to stop taking bribes from their corporate masters? No."

Bingo.

Posted by: Buford on September 15, 2009 at 12:08 PM | PERMALINK

Why this isn't blasted to the media day and night by Democrats is, as always, a mystery to me....
Because in reality there is only one snake: it just has two heads.

Posted by: Dennis-SGMM on September 15, 2009 at 12:12 PM | PERMALINK

Of course the GOP voted against it. After all, they have to vote to protect the sanctity of marriage so these abused women shouldn't divorce and leave these guys. Rather, they should just stay and take the abuse like women did in the good old days before the liberals screwed up this country.

Posted by: Jason on September 15, 2009 at 12:13 PM | PERMALINK

Like others, this item exposed how myopic my view of health insurance coverage can be. I'm suddenly persuaded single payer is the ONLY way to go. You need help - you get it. Even Medicare doesn't approach that level of coverage.

Posted by: Chopin on September 15, 2009 at 12:15 PM | PERMALINK

The private health insurance companies are rationing compassion.

Posted by: pj in jesusland on September 15, 2009 at 12:18 PM | PERMALINK

I am shocked...shocked! (here are your winnings, sir).

I'm sure we will hear nothing of this from our cowardly representatives in Congress. They have the perfect opportunity to take the moral high ground. But as usual, they will do nothing.

With the Dems, I feel like my favorite football team has a QB that falls down everytime there is a pass rush....

Posted by: Homer on September 15, 2009 at 12:32 PM | PERMALINK

Never ever expect a republican to not hate women and children so much that they can not find a way to totally screw them over for money. LOL!

I'm still trying to figure out why it is automatically assumed that republicans actually give a shit about families or human beings for that matter. Their actions paint a very clear picture of where they stand on any issue that deals with humanity.

Posted by: Silver Owl on September 15, 2009 at 12:37 PM | PERMALINK

Could somebody please publish the names of those 10 Republicans? It would be lovely to hear them explain themselves.

Posted by: Peggy on September 15, 2009 at 1:01 PM | PERMALINK

The SEIU us very wrong with what they say. Insurance companies sole purpose IS NOT to provide Americans with access to care. Insurance companies sole purpose is to maximize shareholder value. Only when we all start to frame the conversation accurately will the problems be understood.

Posted by: LIza on September 15, 2009 at 1:37 PM | PERMALINK

I forwarded the the SEIU thing to a list-serv of big time Social Insurance policy people yesterday, I don't think this will get buried.

As I pointed out to them the next logical progression is to deny family coverage to any family where there was even a hint of child abuse. Or potential child abuse.

Posted by: Bruce Webb on September 15, 2009 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK

FYI: Got a flash from MoveOn that highlighted the "pre-existing condition" of domestic violence known to certain insurers; it urged me to call Feinstein, one of my senators -- who is, uh, ambivalent on the public option, in part because it might be too stressful right now to work on. Or something. Calling her is tough: her DC office really doesn't want to hear and you get put on hold for two minutes, no way to leave a message, then disconnected. But I called. Busy first time, then the hold msg. I called the SF office: busy. Got through to another one. But boy she makes it hard. Voters to her are, well, like flies or bugs, pesty.

Posted by: SF on September 15, 2009 at 2:56 PM | PERMALINK

Heck, why don't insurance companies just deny coverage to any one with a brain, eyes, a liver, a heart, lungs, breasts, ovaries, a prostate, arms and legs, etc. In fact, they should deny coverage to people who are alive. Talk about Ponzi schemes...

Posted by: athena on September 15, 2009 at 6:58 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, I am surprised that no insurance company has realized that any illness or disease that can be shown to have a genetic component is, by definition, a 'pre-existing condition.'

Posted by: Prup (aka Jim Benton) on September 15, 2009 at 8:17 PM | PERMALINK

Don't the Insurance companies realize that Life is a 100% terminal disease, therefore automatically a pre-existing condition?

They are really missing out on denials...

Posted by: Scott on September 15, 2009 at 10:39 PM | PERMALINK

This is why we must fight genetic testing tooth and nail.

Posted by: Always Hopeful on September 16, 2009 at 12:07 AM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?










 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly


Place Your Link Here

--- Links ---

Boarding Schools

Addiction Treatment Centers

Alcohol Treatment Center

Bad Credit Loan

Long Distance Moving Companies

FREE Phone Card

Flowers

Personal Loan

Addiction Treatment

Phone Cards

Less Debt = Financial Freedom

Addiction Treatment Programs