Insurance and GardasilWhen I wrote last June about Gardasil, Merck's cervical cancer vaccine, I got some surprised reactions from people who thought that was a topic way, way outside my usual field. Surprise, it's back! It's an expensive vaccine — $360 for a course of three shots — and people who want it are running into trouble with insurance:
One of the underappreciated problems of traditional health insurance is what is usually touted as its primary feature: payment insulation. You don't pay for your health care except for some nominal co-pay or deductible — your insurance pays instead. But there's a catch. Your insurance might not pay enough to properly reimburse your health care providers. The insurance company decides how much something is "worth" and if their reimbursements are too low, you're in trouble. It's out of your hands — it's not your decision. As the example of Gardasil illustrates, doctors may refuse to give you the service or product you want or they may add a surcharge. Then you're paying a whopping insurance premium and the surcharge, if you can get the care at all! People with high-deductible insurance plans are in a better position to get Gardasil. Even if their insurance won't apply the entire cost of Gardasil against their insurance deductible, they can still pay for the vaccine from a Health Savings Account and get the tax benefit on the entire cost of treatment. (And since most people with high-deductible insurance plans won't exceed their deductibles anyway, the tax benefit is all that matters.) This example doesn't affect me personally because I'm not a teenage girl, but it still makes me glad I have a high-deductible insurance plan. I'm also glad that I'm not a teenage girl, 'cuz that would be like, so, totally, ohmigod!
© Kyle Markley
— Posted 2007-02-04 22:55:09 UTC —
permalink
| ||
Comments: 2
Kyle,
"This example doesn't affect me personally because I'm not a teenage girl, but it still makes me glad I have a high-deductible insurance plan..."
If coverage becomes mandatory for insurance companies, won't your insurance premiums go up, at least in theory?
I suspect that gender-specific discrimination is not allowed, even if diseases are gender-specific, and it would be a matter of overall balance of the individual gender-specific coverages.
Regards, Don
Yes, my premiums would theoretically go up for every thing that's made mandatory to cover.
Anecdotally, it seems that there are gender differences in insurance premiums. So I might be okay on this particular example.
The comment period has expired.