| Posted By |
Message |
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 |
neenie
Member since 5/05 22351 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by nrthshgrl
I think insurance companies and employers will try to get out of paying for anything they can avoid. This would be just a path to the road I don't think we should be on.
i agree
|
Posted 2/16/06 9:56 PM  |
| |
|
Long Island Weddings
Long Island's Largest Bridal Resource |
skew
LIF Adult
Member since 5/05 6794 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by dm24angel
Posted by Redhead
50% as opposed to 100% is different IMO.
But 100% of smokers will not get sick or have heart disease and cancer either... So thats different as well
huh?
|
| Posted 2/16/06 9:57 PM |
| |
|
Redhead
You Live, You Learn
Member since 5/05 31871 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by nrthshgrl
Posted by dm24angel
Posted by Redhead
50% as opposed to 100% is different IMO.
But 100% of smokers will not get sick or have heart disease and cancer either... So thats different as well
Also what about people that don't have a choice as others have mentioned. Those subjected to second hand smoke?
what about those people?
they don't get increases in anything....
even if it is the child of a smoker...
the higher rate is there because of the SMOKER not the child or spouse...
the smoker is the health insurance holder...no?
|
| Posted 2/16/06 9:59 PM |
| |
|
DjPiLL
Member since 5/05 3664 total posts
Name:
Richard
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by baghag
What about those who are around second hand smoke, like firefighters? Or the children of smokers?
Second hand smoke would probably not be picked up in a medical exam.
I have worked in bars for 12 years. Exposed to PLENTY of second hand smoke in my lifetime. Never took a single puff though.
I just applied for Life Insurance and was approved for their super-premium best non-smoking rate. I passed the exam with flying colors.
If they detected any sort of nicotine in my system... they would have jacked my rate.
So i doubt this would be an issue for most.
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:01 PM |
| |
|
dm24angel
Happiness
Member since 5/05 34581 total posts
Name:
Donna
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by Redhead
Posted by dm24angel
Posted by Redhead
50% as opposed to 100% is different IMO.
But 100% of smokers will not get sick or have heart disease and cancer either... So thats different as well
what do they die of then?
even my aunt...who was a BIG smoker. Got alzheimers and STILL died of cancer...
they will not get sick, not have heart disease or cancer...what are they dying from?
car accidents? I mean IMO thats a silly question. A heroin addict doesnt always overdose.
My grandmother died from alzheimers, she was 96, she smoked till 85.
My uncle had a heart attack and died, turns out he had a heart defect, he smoked till he died.
My other uncle died from non hodgkins lympohoma, he smoked for years and years , and his cancer has no correlation.
my aunt has MS, she smoked, didnt cause her MS and ultimately her death,
see where Im goine here?
I dont think the question has to do with the deaths, but the costs incurred while living and health risks to them while alive.
Im not sure how I feel but I see both sides....
and again obesity leads to much much more health risks yet what do we do, set a weight minimum and maximum to each "tier" of health insurance.
We have to think rationally to what can and cant happen.
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:02 PM |
| |
|
baghag
:P
Member since 5/05 10278 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by Redhead
what about those people?
they don't get increases in anything....
even if it is the child of a smoker...
the higher rate is there because of the SMOKER not the child or spouse...
the smoker is the health insurance holder...no?
Lets say I am a smoker who has health ins, and I pay for it.
Lets also say that i have a child, who is subjected to my second hand smoke.
What happens if my insurance carrier says that my child is a smoker- just b/c there is evidence of smoke in her lungs?
It would be ridiculous for the ins comany to deny my child care- claiming she's a smoker- but I wouldn't put it past them.
My point is that I don't think that making smokers pay for their insurance is an altruistic thing. I think most of the motivation is to reduce costs.
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:03 PM |
| |
|
Redhead
You Live, You Learn
Member since 5/05 31871 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Most smokers die of heart disease or cancer...
those that don't are lucky.
I see the fear of the open door but i am trying to not think of it that way and just think about it in terms of smoking...
and in that sense...i am still for it!
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:04 PM |
| |
|
dm24angel
Happiness
Member since 5/05 34581 total posts
Name:
Donna
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by skew
Posted by dm24angel
Posted by Redhead
50% as opposed to 100% is different IMO.
But 100% of smokers will not get sick or have heart disease and cancer either... So thats different as well
huh?
I said 50% of people with diabetes have it because it was self inflicted due to obesity....
And then Jens reply that Smokers 100% of the time inflict themselves...which is true
but 100% of smokers do not have health related illness's due to them smoking.
so that scenario puts diabetics as cost
de-fective as smokers in the end.
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:05 PM |
| |
|
baghag
:P
Member since 5/05 10278 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by DjPiLL
Posted by baghag
What about those who are around second hand smoke, like firefighters? Or the children of smokers?
Second hand smoke would probably not be picked up in a medical exam.
I have worked in bars for 12 years. Exposed to PLENTY of second hand smoke in my lifetime. Never took a single puff though.
I just applied for Life Insurance and was approved for their super-premium best non-smoking rate. I passed the exam with flying colors.
If they detected any sort of nicotine in my system... they would have jacked my rate.
So i doubt this would be an issue for most.
I would not put it past an insurance company to "discover" test to detect minute levels os second hand smoke, right in the nick of time. kwim?
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:05 PM |
| |
|
dm24angel
Happiness
Member since 5/05 34581 total posts
Name:
Donna
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by Redhead
Most smokers die of heart disease or cancer...
those that don't are lucky.
I see the fear of the open door but i am trying to not think of it that way and just think about it in terms of smoking...
and in that sense...i am still for it!
I see the fear as well , and I do still think smokers allow the extra risk and should be held responsible for its effect on health care, Im just disagreeing with the "most smokers die of" part because thats not proven fact at all and in this argument is equivalent to many other health issues which are self inflicted like obesity.
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:07 PM |
| |
|
DjPiLL
Member since 5/05 3664 total posts
Name:
Richard
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by baghag
I would not put it past an insurance company to "discover" test to detect minute levels os second hand smoke, right in the nick of time. kwim?
Neither would I. But you also have a right to get a copy of your medical exam to see "why" you scored low.
I am sure if they found even the slightest bit in my system... my rate would have been $5 more a month.
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:07 PM |
| |
|
Redhead
You Live, You Learn
Member since 5/05 31871 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by baghag
Posted by Redhead
what about those people?
they don't get increases in anything....
even if it is the child of a smoker...
the higher rate is there because of the SMOKER not the child or spouse...
the smoker is the health insurance holder...no?
Lets say I am a smoker who has health ins, and I pay for it.
Lets also say that i have a child, who is subjected to my second hand smoke.
What happens if my insurance carrier says that my child is a smoker- just b/c there is evidence of smoke in her lungs?
It would be ridiculous for the ins comany to deny my child care- claiming she's a smoker- but I wouldn't put it past them.
My point is that I don't think that making smokers pay for their insurance is an altruistic thing. I think most of the motivation is to reduce costs.
1. regardless of whether there is smoke in a childs lungs i was assuming this was about SMOKERS....Smokers would have the increase...period. Not people who have smoke found in their lungs by means which is not by their own purposeful acts...
2. i didn't htink this was about being denied anything....just increases
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:07 PM |
| |
|
baghag
:P
Member since 5/05 10278 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by Redhead
1. regardless of whether there is smoke in a childs lungs i was assuming this was about SMOKERS....Smokers would have the increase...period. Not people who have smoke found in their lungs by means which is not by their own purposeful acts...
2. i didn't htink this was about being denied anything....just increases
Right now, it seems like it is just the smokers themselves. I am just afraid that it will get really out of hand, like the example I gave you. I don't believe that an insurance company is going to care how the smoke got there. If it is there, you will have to pay for it even if it wasn't your fault i.e kids, fire fighters, bartenders.
Right now, no one is being denied care, I'm just saying that it might eventually happen. The thought scares me.
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:20 PM |
| |
|
baghag
:P
Member since 5/05 10278 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
I gotta go to bed. Good discussion, I'll talk to you tomorrow!  
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:21 PM |
| |
|
Redhead
You Live, You Learn
Member since 5/05 31871 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by baghag
Posted by Redhead
1. regardless of whether there is smoke in a childs lungs i was assuming this was about SMOKERS....Smokers would have the increase...period. Not people who have smoke found in their lungs by means which is not by their own purposeful acts...
2. i didn't htink this was about being denied anything....just increases
Right now, it seems like it is just the smokers themselves. I am just afraid that it will get really out of hand, like the example I gave you. I don't believe that an insurance company is going to care how the smoke got there. If it is there, you will have to pay for it even if it wasn't your fault i.e kids, fire fighters, bartenders.
Right now, no one is being denied care, I'm just saying that it might eventually happen. The thought scares me.
i see your point nad the biggest concern here is the opening of doors...
i see and understand that...
In another thread i got yelled at saying that i look and think about the "open doors" too much and that i need to take the issue at face value...which is what i did in case...on this thread...
take the article and apply it to the specific aspect being SMOKERS...
So that is where my answer comes from..
|
| Posted 2/16/06 10:23 PM |
| |
|
Shanti
True love
Member since 6/05 12653 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
There are about 18 million diabetics in the US. About 1 million of them are Type 1, which is juvenile, and they did nothing to cause it. The other 17 million are either elderly or overweight.
As the daughter of a Type I diabetic (who has always been thin amd athletic) and the grandaughter of 2 Type II diabetics (again, both thin and active), I am concerned about where this could lead.
What about AIDS patients? Liver problems due to drinking?
|
| Posted 2/17/06 9:29 AM |
| |
|
baghag
:P
Member since 5/05 10278 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by DMcK
There are about 18 million diabetics in the US. About 1 million of them are Type 1, which is juvenile, and they did nothing to cause it. The other 17 million are either elderly or overweight.
As the daughter of a Type I diabetic (who has always been thin amd athletic) and the grandaughter of 2 Type II diabetics (again, both thin and active), I am concerned about where this could lead.
What about AIDS patients? Liver problems due to drinking?
I think there will be a push by the insurance companies for people to start being more accountable for their health.
I wonder how they will "watch" everyone, though.
|
| Posted 2/17/06 9:51 AM |
| |
|
Shelly
She's 7!!!
Member since 8/05 14624 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
I am very concerned about the slippery slope- I think the next group would be people who are overweight. I am very concerned about that.
Also, what about ex smokers who quit? What happens to them. Their lungs are still damaged, but they made a choice to quit. If they quit a month ago, 6 months ago, a year ago, 5 years ago- would that be taken into consideration.
I am also concerned that people who need insurance will not get it because they can't afford it, just because they are a smoker. Granted- I didn't read the article- I don't knwo if they addressed that.
Just because you smoke, does not mean that you should be denied basic medical care. What if you develop a condition completely unrelated to smoking? Or if you get lung cancer? Just becaseu you smoke, should you be denied health insurance because you can't afford it? That's a tough one to me....
|
| Posted 2/17/06 10:08 AM |
| |
|
dpli
Daylight savings :)
Member since 5/05 13973 total posts
Name:
D
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by Christine
Posted by Moehick
I see your point but feel that in all the examples you gave people aren't choosing to put their life in danger....where as smokers know what smoking cigarettes does to their health and CHOOSE to do it anyway.
I see your point also -- I am just looking at the bigger picture from a different angle.
Maybe this is comperable- what if you were treated for an STD? Could an insurance company jack your rates up for that? You made a choice to have sex, possibly and probably unprotected sex, which caused that health condition and required treatment.
I am anti-smoking as well and I say tax cigarettes as high as possible as a deterrent, but I think this benefits insurance companies, and that's all.
Message edited 2/17/2006 10:19:40 AM.
|
| Posted 2/17/06 10:18 AM |
| |
|
Christine
2nd verse same as the 1st
Member since 5/05 15287 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by dpli
I am anti-smoking as well and I say tax cigarettes as high as possible as a deterrent, but I think this benefits insurance companies, and that's all.
I agree with this. Based on the CNN article the motive was purely to save money for both the companies purchasing the group plans and the insurance companies.
Several times the article mentions that this surcharge is supposed to be an incentive to quit smoking but I think they are going about it the wrong way. Perhaps covering smoking cessastion programs or rewarding people that participate in them would be a better incentive (like a lot of ins. companies reimburse people if they use their gym memberships).
|
| Posted 2/17/06 10:25 AM |
| |
|
MrsA
.............................
Member since 1/06 2012 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by Redhead
Posted by Moehick
Posted by Christine
I see where they are coming from but do not like where they can go. Does this mean morbidly obese people will have to pay more until they lose weight? Will women during childbearing years be charged more insurance? These are other examples of potentially higher medical costs to insurance companies that can be applied to a group of people.
Morbidly obese people I would say yes...they have many more medical bills....and I mean MORBIDLY not overweight.
Pregnancy is a temporary condition and not something one does to themselves to deteriorate their health like smoking
i agree
I agree too.
|
| Posted 2/17/06 11:26 AM |
| |
|
kathleeng
Member since 5/05 3775 total posts
Name:
Kathleen
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by Shellyesq
I am very concerned about the slippery slope- I think the next group would be people who are overweight. I am very concerned about that.
Also, what about ex smokers who quit? What happens to them. Their lungs are still damaged, but they made a choice to quit. If they quit a month ago, 6 months ago, a year ago, 5 years ago- would that be taken into consideration.
I am also concerned that people who need insurance will not get it because they can't afford it, just because they are a smoker. Granted- I didn't read the article- I don't knwo if they addressed that.
Just because you smoke, does not mean that you should be denied basic medical care. What if you develop a condition completely unrelated to smoking? Or if you get lung cancer? Just becaseu you smoke, should you be denied health insurance because you can't afford it? That's a tough one to me....
Very well said and I totally agree.
|
| Posted 2/17/06 11:29 AM |
| |
|
Jesaroo
is not the girl you knew
Member since 5/05 14266 total posts
Name:
Jes
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
fair
|
| Posted 2/17/06 11:30 AM |
| |
|
BaroqueMama
Chase is one!
Member since 5/05 27530 total posts
Name:
me
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
I think it's something that, in theory, I can agree with, however, in practice, it could be a dangerous road to go down for all of the reasons already mentioned.
|
| Posted 2/17/06 11:35 AM |
| |
|
BabyAvocado
Happy New Year
Member since 5/05 17334 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Smokers charged more for health insurance
Posted by nrthshgrl
It still surprises me when insurance companies pay for c-sections that are medically unnecessary or epidurals when natural childbirth is an option.
Okay - a little off the topic here but you don't feel insurance should pay for epidurals??? Bite your tongue woman!!!!  
|
| Posted 2/17/06 11:35 AM |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 |
