Parents: Health Care Insurance Reform WILL NOT apply to the Class of 2010. Help!

Parent Cafe
1

<p>Hi, Parents</p>

<p>My son will complete his college career when who walks across the stage to receive his diploma on May. 21. Happy Day, right? Not so much -- because the next day, May 22, his coverage on our family's health insurance plan will end. </p>

<p>Why? Because most private insurance plans currently drop non-dependent adult children when they turn 19 and are not enrolled in a full-time some sort of accredited post-secondary education program. High school grads who enroll full-time in community colleges, four-year colleges or technical/vocation schools are generally allowed to remain on their parents' plans until they graduate -- as long as they provide proof of continued full-time enrollment every year.</p>

<p>Unless your college grad is continuing on to a full-time post-graduate program, most of us will see our kids become uninsured for the first time in their lives.</p>

<p>There is a provision in the Health Care Reform Bill (HR 4872) that will allow Non-Dependent Adult Children to remain on a parent's plan until Age 26. Sounds good, right? Not really, because an Article in the House Articles of Reconciliation for the Bill (this is the final, final draft that is being voted on tomorrow) has a provision (Sec. 2031) that implements a mandatory six-month waiting period on Non-Dependent Adult Children when the bill becomes law.</p>

<p>This leave the Class of 2010 effectively unprotected, as they graduate in May -- within the mandatory six-month waiting period.</p>

<p>As parents, we need to Act NOW to make sure this oversight in implementation is corrected, either in the Senate once they get the final House Bill, or via emergency legislation after the President signs the bill.</p>

<p>Most parents have no idea about his waiting period. I didn't until yesterday, when I read the Final Acts of Reconciliation, here:</p>

<p>COMMITTEE</a> ON RULES -</p>

<p>And here's the applicable clause:</p>

<p>"Sec. 2301. Insurance Reforms. Extends the prohibition of lifetime limits, prohibition on rescissions, limitations on excessive waiting periods, and a requirement to provide coverage for non-dependent children up to age 26 to all existing health insurance plans starting six months after enactment. For group health plans, prohibits pre-existing condition exclusions in 2014, restricts annual limits beginning six months after enactment, and prohibits them starting in 2014. For coverage of non-dependent children prior to 2014, the requirement on group health plans is limited to those adult children without an employer offer of coverage."</p>

<p>As far as I have been able to determine, there is nothing in the provision that grandfathers in the Class of 2010.</p>

<p>What can we do? I've started a Facebook group to help raise awareness. Please take a look at it. Join, if you would like. And invite college students -- including your own, if they have friended you (-: And then call, call, call your Congressional Represenatives. Ask them if they now about his oversight, and if they can fix it.</p>

<p>Here's a link to the Facebook group: Take</a> action NOW to make sure Health Care Reform Covers the Class of 2010!! | Facebook</p>

<p>It's really going to take parents to get this fixed!</p>

2

<p>A special note to parents with kids with pre-existing conditions. Relatively affordable individual health care plans are out there and in our state if a person is being kicked off a health care plan after having continuous group coverage for a period of time, the individual providers are required to accept them without a waiting period for pre-existing conditions. This may be different from state to state. But, it is crucial that the student dot every i and cross every t, because if the coverage lapses it can be almost impossible or very expensive to obtain coverage. </p>

<p>As a parent of a child with a pre-existing condition I am acutely aware of the difficulties of getting and maintaining health care. In fact, in our situation, I would consider paying her premiums myself, just to make sure that the 22 year old didn’t get the invoice buried in a pile of mail and get kicked off her insurance for late payment.</p>

<p>Many of the benefits of this health care bill will take several years to phase in so it will be especially important for us to stay vigilant in order to make sure our kids are covered.</p>

3

<p>There’s not much anyone can do about this anymore. There’s always this latency stage with respect to an act’s implementation.</p>

<p>Just be thankful that the class of 2010 will be the last graduating class to deal with the “No good job, no health insurance” deal.</p>

4

<p>Not sure about that, Purple. I spoke with an aide in Sen. Mark Warner’s office yesterday. He told me the bill could come back for some more tinkering after the House votes tomorrow. That’s when we can get this fixed.</p>

<p>Regardless of you stand on health care reform, one of the very few proposals that Republican and Democrats agreed upon at President Obama’s Health Care Summit last month was the very provision I sited: That would allow Non-Dependent Adult Children to remain on a parent’s policy until age 26. So it seems to me there wouldn’t be much push back if we try and get this fixed.</p>

5

<p>I hear you and am glad my son, who graduates undergrad next year will continue on to med school - simply becasue he can continue his medical coverage. My DD graduated last Memorial Day and was kicked off our family plan within the week. She paid COBRA to stay on our plan but it is VERY expensive. Even for those graduates who have jobs lined up, usually there is a 3 month waiting period to get offered coverage - then there may be an additional waiting period before pre-existing conditions are covered. She, like my other kids, has a pre-existing condition so she faces the concerns you have.</p>

<p>I had been told that NJ already was required to allow young adults to stay on their parents plans through COBRA until age 25 or possibly even 30. We expected our DD would still be part of our family plan and pay an additional (reasonable) premium to cover her part (where in the past she was included in the fee).</p>

<p>But when I contacted my DH’s company, I was told not all companies have to follow these (NJ) rules. My DH’s company is self-insured or something, and she was offered (under COBRA) to keep the same level of medical/dental coverage we have, but she doesn’t get the company discounted premium; she has to pay the full price single adult premium. Our DD was quoted $400/mo for coverage in June (kicked off the end of May), then when the policy year started new in July, it was upped to $500/mo. ALthough there was a nice deal for unemployed people where they only had to pay maybe 35% or something of their COBRA, that program didn’t apply to recent grads because even if they were unemployed, they hadn’t been working full-time prior to being unemployed. Ugggh. Like someone else noted, we were willing to help her pay the premiums because we know the importance of her staying insured.</p>

<p>Insurance companies just keep hiking the premiums and saying they have no choice. Didn’t they just ask for 39% hikes in CA? Without change in policy, this trend will continue. When I see stuff like this, I can’t understand how people don’t want health care reform. Fight over what type of reform - I get that. Lots of opinions. NO easy solutions. But those who say, leave it alone as if the system works must be only thinking of themselves and their “federal gov’t style” benefits. These kids coming out of school, with their inflated students loans, now have to deal with having no health benefits. </p>

<p>As the system is currently set up, health care varies tremendously from state to state, so if anyone knows of reasonable plans available in NJ, please let me know. The plans my DD has found, or has been offered through companies, are less expensive but really don’t offer that million dollar+ coverage for catastrophies that we’d like. We’ve been there, done that and have seen how hospitalizations and standard procedures can go wrong. Fifteen years ago, just one of my son’s many hospitalizations produced bills for $175,000 (hospital and surgeons, didn’t include all the followup therapy). I can’t even imagine the equivalent cost that would be billed today. Many of the programs that my recently graduated nieces and friends have offer only a maximum of $10,000-$20,000 coverage. They assume that’s all they need since they are young and healthy. That just doesn’t seem adequate to me.</p>

6

<p>jerzgirlmom…My son is in the same boat as your daughter. We’ve been told he can’t get through underwriting if he applies for private insurance. They are likely to offer him only high-deductible catastrophic (ie., junk) insurance, with a lot of exclusions for coverage of pre-existing conditions. We’ll have to do COBRA, and his individual premium will be more than $500/month. </p>

<p>If you haven’t already, please join our Facebook group (the link is in my original post), and call your Congressional Reps!</p>

7

<p>Our coverage is Federal Employee Health Benefits and our daughter who graduates in May loses coverage 30 days after her 22nd birthday which will be in mid-Sept. In today’s NYTIMES, it is reporting that in the reconciliation bill, it will be mandated for all insurance companies to provide coverage to age 26, not just new policies as in the current Senate version. The catch is that they must be able to obtain coverage from their employer and it does not go into effect until six months after the bill goes into effect. Our older daughter went on to grad school and has coverage through her school, partially subsidized, partially we paid for. We will have to go through COBRA to cover her, as she is in performing arts. I just came across something called SAMBA which is for adult children aged 22-27 but it may be limited to federal employees and federal retirees.</p>

8

<p>We will be purchasing an individual health insurance plan for our daughter when she graduates in June. Her graduation date is June 12. Coverage ends June 30…last day of the month. </p>

<p>Luckily she is healthy and we live in a state that offers TONIK plans.</p>

9

<p>I’m self employed and always had my d. on an individual policy, so the whole parent’s policy thing doesn’t apply to me anyway. (Without going into details, for a single parent with only 1 or 2 kids, the cost of insuring each person separately is generally less than a “family” policy.)</p>

<p>So I have been looking for insurance – my d won’t be able to continue on her current policy simply because she doesn’t plan to return to our home state. So she will need insurance in the state or district where she ends up – though fortunately I learned through a call to our insurer that there’s a little bit of a grace period on this. </p>

<p>Along the way of insurance-hunting, it dawned on me to check the alumni association offerings. And yes, the alumni association for her school DOES offer some group insurance options, including short-term health insurance, though apparently not available in the state where the school itself is located (NY). (go figure – probably has to do with in-state regulations.)</p>

<p>But then I kept on looking and discovered that there is something called “Healthy New York” which is a basic medical plan available at reduced rates for individuals with incomes of under $2300/month. So I figure when my d. graduates, if she stays in NY, she will probably join the ranks of the under-$2300 earners – and if and when she moves out of that category, she will hopefully have employer-provided insurance. </p>

<p>So the point is: keep looking, there may be some good options available – at least if your kid is healthy and doesn’t have the dreaded “pre-existing condition”.</p>

10

<p>I can’t tell from the bill summary, but isn’t the bill requiring group insurance plans to provide coverage – which isn’t necessarily the same thing as requiring them to provide coverage at the same RATE that applied when students were in college? That could really be a problem. (And on the other hand, I understand that employers, who actually pay for a big chunk of insurance costs, don’t particularly see why they should have to fund a twenty-four year old’s insurance even though the twenty-four year old is working as a waitress.)</p>

<p>With respect to the six month gap – that is actually really, really short, and I think that the Department of Health & Human Services will be hard pressed to issue rules by then given the rules development process.</p>

11

<p>

</p>

<p>bookmama, I’m a federal employee, too, and I switched from Blue Cross to SAMBA in 2009 precisely because they offered the Dependent Children Health Benefit Plan for children up to age 27. Not only are my SAMBA premiums lots cheaper than the Blue Cross premiums for nearly identical benefits, but the premium for the DCHBP for my son was quite affordable ($99 per pay period) for the same benefits are we are getting. They went up this year to $120 per pay period, though - quite a big increase, but still cheaper than anything else we could find with the same excellent coverage. The catch is that the adult child must be wholly dependent on the parent for support and maintenance.</p>

12

<p>Has anyone had any luck contacting their congressional reps about the problem w/ the language in Sec. 2301? I was finally able to get through to my Congressman’s Office (Gerry Connolly, VA 11). Told a staffer about the specific problem w/ the language in Sec. 2301, and asked that he make Connolly aware of the necessary fix so that he can have the proper language inserted in the final, final draft. A legislative aide is going to follow up and see what can be done at this point in the game. Seems like just about every Congressional Rep is tacking things on left and right until the vote actually starts later today. If Connolly can get this added, it will have to be voted on separately but it will like pass.</p>

<p>Please, if you haven’t already, call your representative! When they are made aware of the problem, they are willing to try and fix it – if Connolly’s reaction is any indication.</p>

13

<p>Bill about to be passed.Is is too late?</p>

14

<p>Help!</p>

<p>Our student is due to graduate on May 16, 2010. Currently on our family plan; premium will be paid in full for the month of May (cost of premium remains the same for family, whether it is one dep or more). Student will return home during the week after graduation as student has Dr. appt, Dentist appt, and eye appts all scheduled for either May 19 or May 20. Cannot get home for these appts before graduation date w/o incurring cost of unnecessary air fare. We had hoped to get student in for one last round of checks before beginning new job with new insurance on June 18 in another city out of state–as student will then have insurance, but will have to begin the process of finding a physician, eye doctor and dentist. Plus, we figured by having the appts right before job start date, would buy some time to find these new doctors.</p>

<p>The dilemma is that insurance tells us that student will no longer be covered the day student graduates, but we can pay nearly $600 premium for Cobra for the month student will not be covered>in between school and start of job with new insurance. However, the insurance company will have no idea the exact date of graduation as forms we have had to complete each year only ask about continuing coverage and name of school. In fact, the available info on-line indicates that “renewal” comes up again in September. Do we go on ahead with the appointments in May right after grad date and given the fact that premium was paid for the month of May? Or do we notify the insurance company of exact date of graduation and have to pay the Cobra premium?</p>

<p>The whole insurance issue is a mess, imo. While I am thankful that we have the coverage, these college kids seem to almost get the shaft!</p>

<p>Any suggestions???</p>

15

<p>I want to know if the provision for having kids remain on their parents’ plans until age 25 applies to self insured employers. I sure hope this LOOPHOLE was closed.</p>

16

<p>Does anyone know if parents be able to get the young adult children back on the family policy six months after passage of the bill? In our case, we plan to purchase temporary insurance effective April 1 for our 23 year old for up to 6 months. We hope she will be covered by an employer group plan by September, but, if not, can we add her on again?</p>

17

<p>Look around at individual policies for your student, you will find that they are relatively inexpensive compared to what our (older age) policies cost. The single mom above has it right. Shopping around gives you the best prices. We got an insurance broker involved. We asked a financial adviser what guy he used and he was really good. We had used one before that worked with the company that my hubby used to work for and he wasn’t very good.</p>

<p>My husband (40’s) was able to get insurance for just around $100/month. This of course only applies to no pre-existing conditions. (Sorry) Side note for those counting on being able to find insurance, with pre-existing conditions, under the new regulations that were passed… In CA, they have had a similar system on the books for awhile. Under this system, insurance companies do not deny you coverage, they just quote such an enormous monthly premium that it isn’t worth it. So beware.</p>

18

<p>Atomic Girl–I wonder if the pre-existing conditions situation is going to happen to everyone, not just those college students looking to find coverage. In other words, are insurance companies going to skirt around this issue of pre-exisitng conditions that the gov’t has just passed by allowing the conditions and offering an enormous quote to boot?!? If what I am reading in your post indicating that it happened in CA, then how do we know that this is the way insurance companies are going to handle this new part of the law? Thanks gov’t for messing around with this one!</p>

19

<p>As with most complex legislation, people who strongly backed it are going to be surprised when it doesn’t accomplish all (or perhaps even most) of what they wanted, and people who strongly opposed it are likely to be pleasantly surprised with some of it.</p>

20

<p>I think the law prohibits the insurance company from charging more based on the pre-existing condition. But its confusing, as the new rules for pre-existing conditions don’t come into effect until 2014, when the insurance exchanges come online. So it might just be that companies participating in the exchanges will be precluded from charging more – the idea being that the exchanges will create a large enough pool of healthy customers that the companies will be able to afford to take on those with the pre-existing conditions. </p>

<p>In the meantime, there is going to be a short-term, government run high-risk pool that people who can’t get insurance because of pre-existing conditions can sign on for right away. The rates for that might be pretty high… but that also sounds a lot like the “public option” that was discarded from the bill – so it might be that there is short-term “public-option” for the hard-to-insure. </p>

<p>I do think it all means that people who currently pay lower rates based on their good health might see rate increases, as the risk is spread around somewhat — but there are a variety of provisions in the bills that I think will come into play as disincentives for rates going too high. </p>

<p>I also haven’t read the bill, but I don’t think the mandatory coverage for pre-existing conditions would require an insurance company to retroactively pay for medical expenses for someone who only buys insurance after getting injured or diagnosed. There might be some sort of exclusion period. (I’ve got that with my dog, who has better insurance than I do – the pet insurance will pay for pre-existing conditions, but there is a 60 day exclusion period so you’ve got to hope that Fido doesn’t get diagnosed with anything serious for the first 60 days of coverage.)</p>

<p>I’d add that the more I read the details, the more I think that the government did not make the mistake of “messing around” with stuff without thinking of all the contingencies. Keep in mind I have a legal background – so I’ve got a trained eye for this sort of thing. There seem to be a lot of provisions that are based on “what if” scenarios – it’s all those details that are why the bill is so damn messy and complicated. And I know that despite the grandstanding, Republicans did have a LOT of opportunity to offer amendments back when the bills were in committee – I watched some of that on CSpan and I saw the amendments offered, put to a vote, and often adopted. When it came to the details, they were not rebuffed if they had a genuine concern. </p>

<p>So messy as it is, what you have is the result of a lot of input from a lot of different people from different parts of the country. </p>

<p>Of course there are still going to be all sorts of issues and problems that weren’t anticipated, as with major legislative initiative – but they will probably be the kind of things that can be ironed out with minor legislation later on.</p>