Obamacare changing insurance options even after prostate cancer diagnosis?

Men (and the occasional lady out there):

Has anybody researched how Obamacare may change our insurance options?

From what I understand come January 1 2014 if you have an insurance plan that is restrictive as far as your treatment options or quality of care you may be able to dump them and get a totally different insurance plan, depending on what's available where you live.

They have to insure you at the general rate for your age, not at some elevated rate because of your prostate cancer.

BUT I don't really know this to be true. That's just my cursory understanding from internet research, which of course isn't really always a swell source.

If this is actually true all those with substandard insurance options trapped in an insurance plan now may have better options going forward?

Anybody have anything more definitive on this?

142 - I agree with your position, thanks for stating that up front - and hopefully everyone will take that into account.

Having said that, great thread Aachen - let's hope others will weigh in - appropriately - on this very important topic.

There is a website which discusses at length the options and impact as known at the present time.

http://www.healthcare.gov/

You will need to investigate what your own state of residence has or has not done, and what path they are taking, as that will have significant impact on what options you will have.

I don't believe that what might happen in 2014 should directly influence the treatment choices you make today.

Calling the new law Obamacare instead of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, does not make it political. Even the president prefers that term.

In any event, I don't think we will know how it affect coverage until after the exchanges open in October 2013. The most recent information released indicates that the policies available from the exchanges will be very expensive; in some states as much as 80-100% higher than premiums now. This is due to the fact that the people buying from the exchanges will tend to be older, and less healthy, than the population at large. As a result, the expenditures for that population will be higher and that will be reflected in the premiums. It only makes sense that expenditures will come under pressure in order to keep down premiums. This is not PCa specific, or even cancer specific, but simply an inevitable consequence of adding millions of people, likely to be less healthy than average, into the system. Time will tell. The good news is that coverage will be available without regard to pre-existing conditions, but we do not yet know the cost.

Calling the new law Obamacare instead of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, does not make it political. Even the president prefers that term.

Obama says he likes the name but nevertheless "obamacare" obviously has negative connotations.  when i first saw the headline i thought "here we go again" but i was pleased to see a non-partisan discussion which is refreshing since it is the law of the land.

ed

 

Moderators:

Do you have a position on posting information about Canadian pharmacies?

That has obvious political overtones, but Kaiser charges me $25 per Cialis pill, and I can get the exact same pill for about $4 a pill.

Discussion of "off shore" pharmacies or drug sources is not allowed, simply because the purchase of drugs from them is illegal in the US, and discussing anything illegal violates the rules.

If you have an authorized Canadian pharmacy that is legally allowed to do mail order business in the US (I know there are some), no issue with that.

I'm happy to see that this thread has not gone off to the politics of coverage. That's the issue. Discussing details of coverage, rather than motivations, no problem. Real issue for me is that there is a lot of time between now and January, and, at least in my state, the mere mention of healthcare goes very badly, very quickly.

My employer's insurance provider has made it clear that there will be no discussion of 2014 costs/coverages until open enrollment in November 2013. They feel the situation is too much in flux to make any predictions.

 

I don't believe that the benefits offered under an insurance policy will, at least initially, be more restrictive than current policies. In fact, the law requires that companies cover more things, not less, which is part of what is driving the increase in premiums.

If you are covered by insurance you have been protected against preexisting conditions when changing insurance companies for many years under HIPPA,.

The new Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka O.....you know...btw who remembers 1993 when they called the attempt Hillary Care???? and what about Romney Care in Massachusetts...but I digress)) extends that to remove health, occupationnal, and lifestyle conditions for coverage and premium rate calculations. Thus there will be no qualifying requirements to get coverage, other than figuring out the application which is some 61 pages long and includes a place to register to vote. Further the most healthy and the least healthy will be charged the same. If you stay outside the exchanges for your coverage then the same conditions exsist, but the application will depend on the insurance company and is expected to be less lengthy (only a couple of pages as no health questions need to be asked) than they are now.

Coverage will generally be broader for all and much broader for many as we will all now have to have a lot of coverages that we didn't used to have to buy. Reports from the insurance companies, state insurance commissioners and the CBO are that this will increase our insurance costs. In some cases in the 20-60% range as reported in the last several days. For example, my wife and I really don't need contraceptives or maternity coverage, but we will have to buy it to have a qualifying coverage.

As to the rates, many of PCa age will potentially get somewhat of a break as the "old age:young age" premium ratio is reduced from 5:1 to 3:1. Commentators I have read are mixed on the effect. If all the young people will buy the new coverage at about double the premium they now deem to be too much to pay and are thus not covered, Then it could hold seniors costs steady or even see some reductions. But, if the young people opt to pay a fine of $95 for the year and not buy the coverage that will costs thousands, then the insurance companies/exchanges will have to increase premiums on seniors. Easy to do the math.

2014 is a very pivotal year when we will all begin to feel the true effects of O...oops....The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. I am hopeful there will be positives, but they will come at a cost.

If I sound a bit cynical about the law, I am, as I think there were better ways of expanding coverage than The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. But, it is the law of the land and we will all follow it. Now, how about calling this Affordable Care instead of O.....Care??? Oh yeah, our premiums are going up....not a good idea.

those are politically charged terms that serve only one purpose.

It's the law of the land and addresses a profound moral issue. Without that law tens of millions of Americans would be left without any coverage. Glad to be paying my share for them as I do for the military and other subsidies like infrastructural needs in States far poorer than mine.

davidg, the only political statements in this thread are yours about Fox News. Obamacare is no more a politically charged term than McCain-Feingold. Your guy won the election, so get the chip for people that disagree with you off of your shoulder.

Perhaps I was wrong. What specific TV channel were you referring to?

It's just amazing to me that we're this far down the road, and most of the new system still remains mired in mystery. I've yet to meet anyone who feels they have a satisfactory understanding of how the new system will affect them. One thing I do know is that the promise that it would bring down premiums by $2,500 for the typical family definitely hasn't panned out. JNF's comments above are more informative than most news articles have been.