Posts Tagged ‘preexisting conditions’


Recalling the Why of Health Care Reform

March 4, 2015

By Jacob Molyneux, AJN senior editor ACA ruling imageIn a brief analysis of the gradual rollout and effects so far of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) at the start of this year (“The ACA Continues to Run the Gauntlet”), I reviewed a few of the issues the law was intended to address when it was passed in 2010:

* the highest per capita expenditures of any health care system in the world

* consistently worse outcomes on measures such as infant mortality rate than most other developed nations

* increasing numbers of uninsured Americans each year, to over 50 million in 2009, the year before passage of the ACA

* unsustainable annual increases in health insurance premiums and drugs costs, leading to astonishing rates of medical bankruptcy

* a Medicare reimbursement process that rewarded the volume of care provided rather than the effectiveness of that care

These worsening issues had become impossible to ignore. No one believes the ACA is a perfect law; there were too many cooks in the kitchen for that. But it’s at least a good faith attempt to address real problems, to get a framework on the table that can potentially be improved upon. Read the rest of this entry ?


They’re Not Taking Away Our Puppies (And God Help Them If They Do)

September 30, 2013

By Jacob Molyneux, AJN senior editor/blog editor

I am amazed at the amount of time being wasted on the relatively mundane matter of health care exchanges. It seems we are now facing a government shutdown; there are creepy and misleading advertisements funded by conservative billionaires like the Koch brothers in order to scare people from signing up for insurance; some red states have actually enacted laws forbidding the health care navigators from helping people understand the new system and sign up for it, and many of these states have refused to create their own exchanges to help their citizens comply with the new law.

The ACA is a law. You can’t just ignore it if it doesn’t meet your personal preferences or political ideas. Given the heated rhetoric the Republicans are trotting out about it, you’d think the government was trying to take away our puppies, instead of implementing ideas originally floated by Republicans themselves to make life a bit easier for millions of Americans whose life decisions are unduly ruled by crazy health care billing practices, byzantine insurance regulations, discrimination against those who have chronic conditions, insanely varying pricing for simple tests, and the like. Read the rest of this entry ?


The Affordable Care Act Survives, At Least for Now

July 9, 2012

Shawn Kennedy, AJN editor-in-chief

Senate roll call, Affordable Care Act/by Kurykh, via Wikimedia Commons

It’s been a couple of weeks now since the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and there have been too many articles and analyses to count. The bottom line is that its fate won’t be settled until after the November elections. If the Republicans win the election, the ACA will become the first battleground, as its repeal has been promised by candidate Mitt Romney.

What is concerning is that a great many people pay attention to the rhetoric rather than finding out the facts (remember “death panels”?). This point was well made by political cartoonist Stuart Carlson in this cartoon. It’s hard not to be in favor of many of the provisions—like extending coverage under a parent’s plan for children up to 26 years of age, or barring insurance companies from denying coverage for preexisting conditions.

As nurses, we need to know the facts and go beyond the political rhetoric. We need to be informed for ourselves (anything that has an impact on health care delivery and funding will affect nursing) and for our patients, who will have questions. Get the facts—read the law at the link above, a summary of the law, or the articles we published summarizing how it will affect nursing (our original article, and a 2011 update, both open access until August 9th).

Bookmark and Share


Will Anyone Miss Accidents As ‘Preexisting Conditions’ and Other Insurance Doubletalk?

March 22, 2010

By Shawn Kennedy, MA, RN, AJN interim editor-in-chief

It’s interesting to have a firsthand encounter pertinent to the HCR story that is consuming the headlines. Recently, my son had a fall and dislocated his shoulder. He knew what had happened because he did it as a freshman in high school, some 10 years ago while playing sports. So he went to an ER and had the shoulder popped back in, saw an orthopedist as recommended, and went for physical therapy—all covered by his insurance plan. But all his claims for reimbursement were denied. The reason the company gave: his dislocated shoulder was considered a ‘preexisting condition.’

After my husband peeled me off the ceiling, we approached this methodically—we gathered forms, wrote letters, requested letters from the hospital, the orthopedist, the physical therapists—and appealed the ruling. After a bit, we received a response saying that they’d reconsidered and would cover the injury according to policy.

This is not a terribly compelling or poignant case, but it’s an example of the “first deny all claims” approach of some companies. Yes, it was resolved on appeal fairly easily, but why did it need appealing in the first place? I can’t imagine what patients and families with chronic illness must go through in trying to get treatment covered.

If the only thing health reform does is to eliminate the unjust use of preexisting conditions to deny coverage, it will get rid of one of the most critical obstacles to access to care.

Bookmark and Share


Are Domestic Violence and Pregnancy Preexisting Conditions?

November 6, 2009

By Peggy McDaniel, BSN, RN

Kaiser Health News recently ran a story about an attorney who was denied private insurance coverage based on a “preexisting condition”—that is, treatment she’d received following a domestic abuse incident. A majority of states have passed laws prohibiting insurers from denying coverage based on treatment for domestic violence, but  eight states as well as the District of Columbia have no such legislation. It is a challenge to track the occurrence of such denials. Insurers often use alternative ways to find out about a history of domestic abuse. They have been known to search for protective orders at local courthouses, which is public information, and search through medical records for documentation of treatment related to such incidents. 

A bitter irony is that nurses are expected to be aware of and directly question patients about suspected abuse, yet in doing so we could be setting up patients for future loss or denial of coverage. 

Pregnancy, likewise defined as a preexisting condition, can also be used to deny coverage. Health reform bills under consideration would disallow the practice of basing insurance rates on gender, a practice which has in effect discriminated against women, particularly those of child-bearing age. 

The practice of denying private health insurance coverage based on these and other preexisting conditions must stop. As a nurse and a consumer, I believe that everyone should be able to buy health care at a reasonable price. A rate such as $1,000 per month for a family is not affordable. In the end we all pay if people do not have some kind of coverage, since the uninsured do eventually receive care—from ERs, which are mandated to provide this care. 


By moggs oceanlane, via Flickr

The very idea that a person can be denied health insurance coverage for a history of domestic violence should encourage us to look closely at reform efforts under discussion and actively join in the conversation. As nurses we are asked to support our patients and promote physical and mental health.  If the very support we give, such as a referral to a domestic violence support group, causes a patient to lose her insurance, we all fail.

Bookmark and Share


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,932 other followers

%d bloggers like this: