How will IF coverage change if we get reform?

[Anonymous]

I had great (100%) coverage for IVF as a teacher. I quit to stay at home, and have thought about going back part time in a few years to get coverage for another IVF. However, I doubt it will be available if reform goes through. I hate to be selfish, but this will very negatively impact my life.

How do you see reform changing IF coverage in the future?

[Anonymous]

OP here. Here's something I found online. http://www.cleveland.com/medical/index.ssf/2009/08/health_care_fact_check_coverag.html

[Anonymous]

... well, I think the vast majority of people in the US as of now have either NO coverage or very minor coverage of fertility related charges, whether teachers or any other profession.
100% coverage??? What's the name of your insurance carrier?

[Anonymous]

I had BlueCross Bluesheild. Under AACO schools plan (and most teacher plans in MD--a mandated IVF coverage state) I got 3 IVF attempts at 100%. I thought the MD mandate was common knowledge?

[Anonymous]

The health reform proposals being discussed would not impact the coverage you are getting through your employer - so basically would be the same is today: if you are lucky enough to have an employer plan that provides IF coverage you would still get it. Now if you don't have health coverage through employer you would need to buy a policy through a health insurance exchange. The exchange will consist of private plans and possibly a public option. All plans would have to provide minimum coverage which would have not been defined yet but I seriously doubt would cover IF due to costs. But insurers could offer other benefits beyond minimum. So again would work the same does today - whether it is covered depends on the plan and what you are willing to pay.

I think the issue you will need to consider is that most insurance plans do not cover IF. So you had an excellent plan as a teacher, mostly because the union negotiated for it. But if you are going back to work for another employer you wouldn't necessarily get that. Also working part-time usually means employer will only pay portion of premium.

The only caveat to above is the one proposal being considered would tax insurance companies for "cadillac" plans they provide (those costing $21,000 for family coverage). These are health plans that the vast majority of us do not get. For example, my Blue Cross Blue Shield family plan through my employer is $8,000. There is concern that some of the union negotiated plans would fit into this category and it is unclear what impact will be, i.e., will insurance companies pass tax on to enrollees in these plans?

Hope this helps.

[Anonymous]

Am PP, see now that you work in Maryland so under the mandate. I am not 100% sure the mandate rules but you should be okay for employer coverage. I believe, but will need to double check, that state mandates would still be in effect. There has not been any discussion of mandating IF under health reform. Could still happen when gets to implementation stage but again will all depend on cost, and I would lay any bets on.

[Anonymous]

Depends on the nature of the reform. If it included a "public option"? Then almost certainly no. It definitely wouldn't be available in the public option plan itself and by virtue of having to "compete" against uncompetitive terms you could expect it to disappear from the few plans where it IS offered.

[Anonymous]

If you currently have health insurance, then your coverage with reform WILL NOT CHANGE. It's been said a million times.
Whether or not a public option goes through, it would be a CHOICE for a person to opt for public insurance. Generally, the public option is to give people who currently have NO health coverage the OPTION of coverage at a lower cost than is currently available.

[Anonymous]

"It's been said a million times."

It's not that simplistic. You can say that as many times as you want but that doesn't mean that our own plans won't be forced to accommodate growing costs and start slashing. If you can choose an out of state plan the mandates are also going out the window.

[Anonymous]

Even Obama is backing off the "you can keep your coverage" mantra. Bottom line is with the tax burdens about to go up, many employers will change their plans. I do think though that as a teacher you should be good because most contracts are negotiated for several years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"It's been said a million times."

It's not that simplistic. You can say that as many times as you want but that doesn't mean that our own plans won't be forced to accommodate growing costs and start slashing. If you can choose an out of state plan the mandates are also going out the window.

And what makes you think employer plans won't be forced to accommodate growing costs and start slashing if nothing passes? The status quo isn't sustainable, one way or the other something will have to change, so I think the question is whether the insurance company and employers (who only want to insure healthy people) should be the ones left to decide how things change.

[Anonymous]

Regardless of where you stand on reform, the truth of the matter is that if government reforms our health care system as planned, IF coverage as meager as it is, will most certainly be abolished. Call me selfish, but I don't want it to.

[Anonymous]

Coverage for IVF won't be abolished under the current health reform proposals. But you know what will be abolished -- being able to reject a woman applying for health coverage because she's pregant or has had a c-section. That is something all women should be able to support (especially those hoping to become pregnant someday!!!).

Also, if there is no health reform and costs continue to rise, your employer will likely raise your deductible and may cut benefits (such as IVF) so there is no guarantee that your coverage won't change without health care reform. And if your coverage isn't cut, those health insurance costs will come at the expense of wage increases (wage increases you may need to pay for things like daycare).

[Anonymous]

I expect to get flamed for this, but as has been said before, insurers are going be making choices for what to cover. IVF, I am sorry to say is a luxury. Treatment for head trauma, cancer and heart disease, not a luxury. Did I look for insurance to cover IVF? Yes. Did I expect an insurer to cover it? No. I really wanted to make sure they covered me for that head trauma, cancer or heart disease.

Flame away.

[Anonymous]

IVF may not be abolished because of the the current proposals, I'm saying it will be abolished in light of the current proposals and rising costs--much more quickly than it would if we stuck to what we have right now. There actually is a guarantee that my insurance will continue to cover IVF--it's called the Maryland mandate. It's the law. That mandate will change if we get reform. I don't need daycare and I don't care about wage increases. Like I said, I'm being selfish. My plan is awesome, and I'm sorry I don't want it forced to be watered down so that everyone else can get mediocre coverage that doesn't have it currently.