4 ms·

just minor nitpick - "lifetime cap of the health insurance" - i though with obama care this was eliminated, no?

by hippich 11y ago

jasode 11y ago
Yes, you may be right. I haven't kept up with the new laws. I just remember actor Christopher Reeves getting paralyzed from his horse accident and he blew right past the health insurance lifetime cap ($250k or $1million I can't remember). Afterwards, the actor and friend Robin Williams chipped in to help with some medical bills. If the lifetime cap is gone, some other issue will crop up such as an experimental (and very expensive) cancer drug is not covered by insurance but you want to pay out-of-pocket to try it.
- SlipperySlope 11y ago
  Regarding insurance, a tactic of the frugal is to forgo insurance if you can withstand the loss. For example, my household does not purchase collision insurance on our vehicles. Likewise we can withstand high deductibles and as a result obtain lower premiums on other sorts of insurance.
- jrjr 11y ago
  I learn more about that wonderful man every day.
tptacek 11y ago
Yes, the ACA prohibits lifetime limits on essential health services. There are things that are insurable that do have caps, but if your kid gets sick, the ACA says there's no limit to how much insurers have to cover.
yourapostasy 11y ago
This is a confusing area. Here is the official Health and Human Services page about the subject, but this page is not very comprehensive. http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/rights/limits/ http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/rights/limits/ Take the case of cancer. Look at the list of essential services. https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/what-marketplace-plans-cover/ https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/what-marketplace-plans-c... I'm not sure where cancer is on that list, so I gather that cancer is not covered by the bare minimum essential services plans. From this, I believe it is incorrect to say ACA (aka Obamacare) requires coverage of unlimited cancer treatment. Also, see this article: http://khn.org/news/obamacare-lightens-load-for-cancer-patients/ http://khn.org/news/obamacare-lightens-load-for-cancer-patie... It points out the key loophole in planning for unexpected catastrophic medical expenses is prescription medication, regardless of lifetime cap issues. Even if you can afford the annual copays and deductibles for the numerous office visits, the medication budget for treating cancer can easily blow out your budget planning by either not being covered at all, or only covered at a 50% level. What makes this aspect especially hard to plan for is you currently have no way to find out in advance what these medications cost under specific plans. So if for example, you have a family predisposition to a certain type of cancer, then you have no way to find out how to financially plan for the possibility you might also get it, and have to start the medication for it. In the US at least, I still firmly believe that prudently planning for severe medical conditions is simply not feasible, even with "catastrophic coverage", for families with less than $10M in liquid assets, and $40M in total assets.

just minor nitpick - "lifetime cap of the health insurance" - i though with obama care this was eliminated, no?

by hippich 11y ago

just minor nitpick - "lifetime cap of the health insurance" - i though with obama care this was eliminated, no?

Yes, you may be right. I haven't kept up with the new laws. I just remember actor Christopher Reeves getting paralyzed from his horse accident and he blew right past the health insurance lifetime cap ($250k or $1million I can't remember). Afterwards, the actor and friend Robin Williams chipped in to help with some medical bills. If the lifetime cap is gone, some other issue will crop up such as an experimental (and very expensive) cancer drug is not covered by insurance but you want to pay out-of-pocket to try it.

SlipperySlope 11y ago
Regarding insurance, a tactic of the frugal is to forgo insurance if you can withstand the loss. For example, my household does not purchase collision insurance on our vehicles. Likewise we can withstand high deductibles and as a result obtain lower premiums on other sorts of insurance.
jrjr 11y ago
I learn more about that wonderful man every day.

tptacek 11y ago

Yes, the ACA prohibits lifetime limits on essential health services. There are things that are insurable that do have caps, but if your kid gets sick, the ACA says there's no limit to how much insurers have to cover.

yourapostasy 11y ago

This is a confusing area. Here is the official Health and Human Services page about the subject, but this page is not very comprehensive. http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/rights/limits/ http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/rights/limits/ Take the case of cancer. Look at the list of essential services. https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/what-marketplace-plans-cover/ https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/what-marketplace-plans-c... I'm not sure where cancer is on that list, so I gather that cancer is not covered by the bare minimum essential services plans. From this, I believe it is incorrect to say ACA (aka Obamacare) requires coverage of unlimited cancer treatment. Also, see this article: http://khn.org/news/obamacare-lightens-load-for-cancer-patients/ http://khn.org/news/obamacare-lightens-load-for-cancer-patie... It points out the key loophole in planning for unexpected catastrophic medical expenses is prescription medication, regardless of lifetime cap issues. Even if you can afford the annual copays and deductibles for the numerous office visits, the medication budget for treating cancer can easily blow out your budget planning by either not being covered at all, or only covered at a 50% level. What makes this aspect especially hard to plan for is you currently have no way to find out in advance what these medications cost under specific plans. So if for example, you have a family predisposition to a certain type of cancer, then you have no way to find out how to financially plan for the possibility you might also get it, and have to start the medication for it. In the US at least, I still firmly believe that prudently planning for severe medical conditions is simply not feasible, even with "catastrophic coverage", for families with less than $10M in liquid assets, and $40M in total assets.