<p>If you open your mouth wider, awcntdb, you can fit both feet in. There are several parents of disabled adult children in this thread. I’d be embarrassed if I insulted them by suggesting that having a disabled child who was unable to support himself or herself was something to be ashamed of.</p>
<p>We are talking about insurance costs not medical costs. I have also been declined, btw. I am now insured and I doubt very much if I’m the only one in this situation. </p>
<p>Why was it ok to post, what, maybe a dozen abbreviated media reports hyping someone’s ACA issues, as proof this is all doomed- but it’s not ok for some parents here to report their own challenges or frustrations prior to ACA? </p>
<p>Um, insurance costs are a reflection of anticipated medical costs. </p>
<p>And apparently you’re one of those who believes that if it didn’t happen to you, it couldn’t have happened to anyone. </p>
<p>LF - My question was about her projected costs which seem to be made up out of air to some random figure over her total family income because insurance companies are just mean like that. We can call it vetting. But, it’s all okay.</p>
<p>Edit to add - Apparently it didn’t happen to you either, right? This is a what might have happened. At least the news stories happened. Also, I’m not so sure about your understanding of insurance costs. If they want you to pay what you will cost why would anyone buy insurance? Hmmm.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Stupid argument and a non-intellectual argument at that.</p>
<p>The ACA is not about disability. No one would argue if it was limited to that. It is simple to supply people with disability with extended coverage. </p>
<p>In a nutshell, just because people have kids with disabilities does not mean a new system is needed to dictate what others can buy and destroy their rights to purchase what they want.</p>
<p>You’re right, I don’t know what they would have charged. Their max was 4 times the base rate, and they felt that that wasn’t enough. They didn’t even do underwriting. Once they heard about her condition, I was told “don’t bother, that’s an automatic decline.” They could literally have charged whatever they wanted, but since they didn’t want to touch her with a 10 foot pole, we can safely assume that if they were forced to take her, it would have been more than we could possibly have paid. </p>
<p>No, you can’t assume any such thing and go around saying she would have cost more than your family income to insure. What you can say is that she was declined do to a pre-existing condition and that stinks. Then everyone would agree.</p>
<p>I’m waiting for your apology, awcntdb, for your insulting me.</p>
<p>While you’re at it, you can apologize to dstark too.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. It is definitely OK to post challenges or frustrations prior to ACA. </p>
<p>However, that still does not mean that eliminating health plans for 93 million+ people and dictating what they can get is part of the solution. </p>
<p>ACA is nothing but a grand welfare system for healthcare, and it is getting treated exactly as what it is.</p>
<p>Maybe you should have been the subject of a news article, LM. That seems to do the trick for some.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not going to discuss my income with you, but we knew what 4 times the base rate was, and we knew they wouldn’t even think about covering her for that price.</p>
<p>CF, no apology coming. </p>
<p>There are many family with kids with disabilities, and I know a few, that are not expecting other people should pick up their tab.</p>
<p>Again, it is a dumb argument that to help people with disabilities that others need to be dictated to re ACA.</p>
<p>“Now consider those poor Canadians and people in the UK. They wait 6 months to have a cholecystectomy. 6 months of enduring that kind of pain. 6 months of worrying whether the gall bladder will rupture.”</p>
<p>“There is no way I would ever, ever want to live under such a system.”</p>
<p>Get use to it because in the not to distant future many Americans are going to be stunned when timely care for illnesses like this are an ancient relic of a system that no longer exists. </p>
<p>Wow. </p>
<p>LF #15211 – No need any more. D has affordable coverage. :-)</p>
<p>That’s so strange… I waited a year here in America to get my gallbladder out because I couldn’t afford it. 6 months less of it seems like a dream. </p>
<p>(Btw, you don’t actually wait 6 months in the UK but… you know…) </p>
<p>Yikes. Thought I’d go over the last couple of pages to catch up, and this is way too hostile for me. Back to the lighter stuff.</p>
<p>^ Unfortunately, some seem to feel you should wait- or get a second job. Which is joke because, as I recall, didn’t you have 3, at one point? </p>