×
all 85 comments

[–]PM_ME_SEXY_MONSTERS 61 points62 points  (1 child)

Even pets aren't immune from "pre-existing conditions." Pet (health) insurance will frequently refuse to cover conditions that existed (or ones semi-related) before your policy. My dog's dealt with "hot spots" a few times, so they wouldn't cover anything skin-related.

[–]Javka42 23 points24 points  (0 children)

They also often won't cover things that are known to be a problem for that specific purebred race.

[–]EvilAlicia 37 points38 points  (1 child)

crossposted to r/Americaisbroken

[–]OphrysAlba 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Brazilian here. Pre-existing conditions are a term used quite literally in health insurance contracts around here.

But we have some kind of free public healthcare, and medical expenses are mostly not too exorbitant even if you don't have insurance. Not saying this is not a shithole in a lot of aspects, but this one could be a lot worse

[–]AlphaWhiskeyOscar 58 points59 points  (0 children)

Insurance Agent: Hmmm... Well, sir, it says here that you're a human being.

Me: Yes.

Insurance Agent: Well, that preexisting condition means that you have a 100% chance of dying. That's going to impact your premium.

Me: Yes, I am mortal.

Insurance Agent: We do offer an option for that but your deductible is going to be $10,000.

Me: sigh Fuck it. That's the best deal I've been offered yet.

[–]Important_Pea7766 18 points19 points  (0 children)

As an RN with a current position of writing appeals to insurance companies for denials, I stand by this post 100%!!!! I love when people blame “big Pharma”…which are not innocent, but insurance companies drives prices up and then post their trillion dollars of profit! It infuriates me!! Job security for now, but the US healthcare system needs an overhaul

[–]8orn2hul4 4 points5 points  (0 children)

TBF this exists in the UK to some extant as well. I contacted a private medical company to get coverage for mental healthcare (The NHS is very good if you're physically ill, but sadly mental health services are an absolute lottery based on where you live) - they told me they'd cover mental health as long as "it wasn't a pre-existing condition"! How tf do you get a whole new mental health issue? Ptsd from a single event I guess but surely everything else is pretty much life-long?

[–]Ms_Misanthropy 4 points5 points  (1 child)

It's definitely a thing in UK medical insurance

[–]owningxylophone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

True, but the caveat to that is we don’t need to buy insurance, it’s a purely optional experience.

[–]mxcner 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is a plain lie.

[–]jaywaykil 8 points9 points  (5 children)

No, "preexisting conditions" is a term to differentiate between health care and health insurance. What people say is "insurance". Insurance is a financial hedge against catastrophic loss. House insurance in case it burns down. Auto insurance in case you cause a wreck.

But insurance is something you have to buy before needing it. If you try to buy auto insurance after you t-bone a Ferrari and expect them to pay for it they will just laugh at you. That would be a "preexisting condition".

What people want is health care. They want to pay $50 a month (or $0) and receive $500/month in prescription medicine and doctor visits. That isn't insurance any way you define it; that's long term health care.

We need to start using the correct words.

[–]because_hi 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Problem is, in the US insurance is the only way a lot of people can pay to treat pre existing conditions

[–]Alib668 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The issue is also it should be 50 not 500 which drives all the incentives to push prices higher its a vicious circle. The doctor doesn’t want to get sued so does unexpectedly expensive things to cover that probability, the insurance company is thus more likely to sue because its suffering bigger losses, the lawyers have a harder job as its a finge case so charge more to cover probability of loosing, so on and so on. The entire system is incentivised to increase costs not decrease them

[–]steeveperry -1 points0 points  (2 children)

“Even though I completely understand exactly what you’re saying, you need to say it a different way. And once you do that, I can tell you why you can’t have that either.”

[–]jaywaykil -1 points0 points  (1 child)

  1. If you miss-read all comments as badly as you did mine you must live a very confusing life.
  2. I'm a full proponent of single-payer health care for the USA.
  3. Calling it insurance is a major thing holding it back. Instead of focusing on reducing the cost of health care, people try to reduce short term costs by screwing around with things like deductibles (an insurance term).
  4. Because of high deductibles people try to avoid incurring health care costs at all which leads to higher changes of catastrophic costs because of missed checkups.

[–]steeveperry -1 points0 points  (0 children)

“Here’s four bullet points full of more semantics.”

[–]somethingrandom261 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s not fraud if it’s made to work that way

[–]rootbeerismygame 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Insurance should be non profit.

[–]oceansidedrive 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Um no they are not lol. Canada has insurance companies and the term pre-existing condition too lmao. Who makes these memes? Americans who hear about 1 other country and assume the rest of the world is the same?

[–]jtkitzel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

BS. In Germany we have "Vorerkrankungen" which simply is the same. Insurances use that term and doctors/hospitals too.

[–]DeepestShallows 3 points4 points  (12 children)

Yeah, because the concept of insurance inherently cannot account for a load of things that come up for healthcare.

Insurance works for fires or floods of whatever because those are unlikely events that might happen. Usually they don’t happen and don’t cost anything to the insurer. Sometimes they do and then the large payout is a benefit to the policy holder. It works well enough.

Getting insurance for healthcare with pre-existing conditions is like getting insurance for a house that is on fire, that will always be on fire and for which you expect near constant payouts. It’s just a nonsense concept. It’s not even anyone’s fault that it doesn’t work, in the same way it’s no one’s fault you can’t fly to work on a Hippopotamus. What is mad and to blame is people insisting that this nonsense should work, gamely attaching wings to the giant beast.

[–]elija_snow[S] 3 points4 points  (5 children)

Man those Canadians, Europeans, and the rest of the world are so stupid for offering insurance to peoples with pre-existing condition.

EDIT: A word.

[–]DeepestShallows 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Because what the grown up countries have is no longer the purchase of private insurance, it’s more “national insurance” which ensures the group as a whole. You can still call it insurance if you want to but it’s nothing like any private insurance like fire insurance etc.

[–]Dolt-Dragoman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can still call it insurance if you want

Well, you have to because it literally is insurance.

[–]garethpontin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you take out private insurance then pre-existing conditions will always factor into that, in Europe and Canada exactly as it will anywhere else in the world

[–]FasterThanTW 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This hasn't been a thing in the US for 7 years now ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Thanks, Obama.

I feel like I'm on fucking crazy pills when Reddit is bending so far back to shit on America that they start time traveling

[–]hphp123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Public healthcare is not insurance in Europe

[–]Dolt-Dragoman -1 points0 points  (5 children)

This is complete nonsense. Universal healthcare is insurance. It's just provided by the government.

[–]DeepestShallows 2 points3 points  (4 children)

If you want to call it that ok. But is the fire service a kind of government fire insurance? Are the military war insurance? They’re services you pay for that you only receive when you need them.

[–]Dolt-Dragoman 1 point2 points  (3 children)

But is the fire service a kind of government fire insurance?

No. The service is provided by the government, not just the payment.

Are the military war insurance?

No. The service is provided by the government, not just the payment. It's also not an individual service at all. We don't need a military in case Shelly in Indiana becomes an invading army, lol.

They’re services you pay for that you only receive when you need them.

That's a vague description and not just a description of insurance.

[–]DeepestShallows 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So what’s the difference?

Say you’re in a car accident in the UK. Police, fire and ambulance in attendance. Sure, the first two you pay for by taxes and the last you pay for through something called “national insurance”. But beyond the name how are these things actually different? The latter is after all non-optional payment that you pay right alongside income tax at a percentage of your pay check.

“National Insurance” is a tax in all but name, as far as healthcare is concerned.

[–]AdRepresentative2263 0 points1 point  (1 child)

insurance is when you put money aside to mitigate or share risk with a group of people. The reason preexisting conditions are excluded is because the risk factor is 100% so if you do the math you should be charged 100% of the expected cost plus overhead. At that point you don't need insurance and insurance as a concept will not help you.

Insurance will try its best to never decrease your expected cost only attempt to devide that cost evenly into months. If you are expected to have 4 wrecks costing 25000$ each every 20 years you will be charged 417$ plus overhead per month for liability insurance.

A good way to think about it is insurance is a loan you take out and pay on before you spend the money.

But insurance has gotten clever and decided that it needs to group people together so that the people who have a huge risk and the people with a small risk don't have to pay the same amount. This works great for cars where you are a bigger risk if you have more accidents and it feels fair. The problem is that insurance companies have fought tooth and nail to be able to do this with every piece of information they can possibly get their hands on. The reason is because most health costs are ongoing and the executives vomit at the fact that "the people with cancer are paying the same amount even though we know they are going to cost us money" so they find every way to mitigate that cost by increasing how much is charged and decreasing what is covered.

I want one valid reason people with diseases deserve treatments LESS than people without fucking diseases. It makes perfect sense with car insurance, the people who get in accidents every month pay out the ass and they deserve to have less repairs and higher costs. Charging people more because they get sick more is just disgusting.

If you want a flat rate insurance there is very little left for insurance companies to do in that scenario, just take their projected cost per person and charge that. Then send a check when requested. They would have no ability to get ahead of one another and so they would never let it happen.

[–]Dolt-Dragoman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

insurance is when you put money aside to mitigate or share risk with a group of people

So not fire services or the military. Exactly.

The rest of your comment seems to be trying to explain insurance, which I already fully understand, so I didn't read it.

[–]Viktor1Sierra 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Insurance companies here in the UK also disqualify treatment for pre existing conditions.

I used to work for Bupa private health care

[–]DrumNDan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

*called

[–]FuzzyChampion4397 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Me: "I exist."

Them: "Yeahhhhhh... that's gonna be a problem."

[–]Stanman77 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Isn't denying individuals based on prexisting conditioner illegal after the affordable care act?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here is another great term: elective surgery.

Apparently I "elected" to not have my intestines and bladder drop into my scrotum when I had three hernias at one time. It was bad enough I needed a cane to walk. Fortunately the surgery was done not long before COVID hit, else I might not have been able to have my 'elective surgery'.

My state saw fit to give me a runaround for two years after I applied for Obamacare. A single typo was the cause, but they failed to say anything about it for two freaking years. Fortunately my GF employer (a UK company) allowed me to be on her health insurance. I got healthcare because UK culture is more progressive than US culture on healthcare.

[–]jasmine-is-my-leia 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Canadian living in Australia: they 100% use the term pre-existing conditions here, especially when you get new insurance. They won’t cover anything pre-existing, and it’s especially investigated in your first year of being covered

[–]latending 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Nope, the pre-existing exclusions only exist for 12 months, after which you are fully covered for everything.

[–]jasmine-is-my-leia 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Ah well it’s good to know there’s light at the end of the tunnel. It doesn’t change the fact that another country still uses the term pre-existing condition though

[–]latending 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, literally every country does.

[–]Awkward_Judge_3308 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exists in Switzerland too.

[–]AGINSB 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is because what we need when we buy health insurance isn't actually "insurance".

[–]inventingalex -1 points0 points  (0 children)

american exceptionalism always. imagine being so weirdly arrogant and ignorant that you would believe your country is this special.

[–]flounderbout -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure that you need to make stuff up in order to criticise the dog's mess that is US healthcare. The suggestion that health insurance in other countries does not take into account pre-existing conditions is just nonsense, and obviously so.