It was so fitting to find this article on health reform with the discussions we have had in class the past few weeks. The article tells the story of Phillip and Diann Green who took in their granddaughter and raised her as their own. Now that the Greens have reached retirement age and are beginning to be able to draw from Medicare, they went to seek an insurance plan to cover the health of their granddaughter. Unfortunately, with health reform, the task was a bit more difficult than they had expected.
Because insurance companies are not allowed to refuse health insurance to children because pre-existing conditions, many health insurances are now ceasing to offer plans strictly for children, to avoid this stipulation all together. Now, the Green family is at a loss for finding health insurance for their young granddaughter.
Insurance companies are arguing that children who are applying for health insurance alone are generally those with pre-existing conditions, leaving insurance companies at a huge loss if they offer plans only to children.
As far as my own opinion, I find that this sort of manipulation of the law should not be allowed. I do not believe that a business should get to ‘opt-out’ of things that are passed simply because they are not beneficial to the company. Companies should be held responsible both for the benefits of the market they chose to engage in and the negative aspects, and that includes legislation that may be less than favorable. As far as if this practice is going to continue, only time can tell. If other insurance companies across the nation continue to follow suit, it is possible that the government will need to intervene yet again, or a class of children with too much money for CHIP, will be left uninsured, and an unhealthy and uncovered youth will foster a poor future for all of us. What is your opinion on the matter? Do you think such practices are just?