Think a pre-existing condition was a pre-Affordable Care Act reason for denial. BCBS story

[canoeist52]

During a routine exam at her gynecologist in which she had her annual pap smear, the 26-year-old singer-songwriter's doctor found a bump with precancerous cells. After her pap smear tested abnormal, her doctor recommended she have a colposcopy to examine the cervix and remove the suspicious bump that could potentially develop into cervical cancer.

Following the procedure, Haas switched from her parents’ insurance plan with Blue Cross Blue Shield to her own individual plan. No time lapsed between the two plans, and she was never without insurance. When filling out the online enrollment for her new plan, Haas was asked if she had ever undergone a non-routine procedure over the past year, and she listed the colposcopy.

“I didn’t think anything of it,” Haas said. “I didn’t think for a second this would affect my coverage. I didn’t see this polyp as a pre-existing condition. I saw it as proof I was a responsible adult that was taking charge of my health and dealing with a small health issue so it didn’t grow into something worse.”

Haas received a letter from Blue Cross Blue Shield stating that she was approved for the plan she had requested, but that she was denied coverage for many aspects of gynecological care related to an abnormal pap smear. This would include everything from women’s preventative health maintenance such as future pap smears, to coverage for cervical cancer, should that develop.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/heartless-how-one-abnormal-pap-smear-lost-woman-access-gynecological-care

[Laurian]

1. I hate insurance companies. They will do anything to deny coverage

and increase their profits. Evil, pure evil.

[geek tragedy]

2. Really poorly written article.

This incident dates back to 2011. Before the relevant ACA provision went into effect.

[herding cats]

3. I believe that was the point of the OP.

If so a comma ofter "think" would have perhaps have made it more clear, but I still feel that pointing out what it was like pre ACA was the intention.

[geek tragedy]

6. The article recounts the incident as "recent"

I'm not blaming the person who posted the article.

[herding cats]

10. I think the problem is we're viewing it from an angle the author didn't intend.

It's about the disregard on the part of the insurance provider for a core part of women's health, and how such a thing could even be considered for the reason they sited in the first place was a disgrace on the provider, and yet such exclusions have been SOP for a long time now. We, here know that's not the case under the ACA now in terms of preexisting conditions, but the author wasn't writing about the ACA, just what women have been dealing with for far too long in regards to our health care.

It's been the norm for women to see areas of their health care not covered, such as birth control, or poorly covered in other areas such as child birth and reproductive problems, for as long as I've been an adult. Her point still stands, even if it's not fully correct in this one instance of preexisting condition coverage as it's covered today vs. three years ago.

It's still a nice reminder to us of how this one type of exclusion by the insurance companies is no longer tolerated, and it's also an excellent example of how insurance companies used to manipulate the exclusions for preexisting conditions to limit coverage to healthy people. She gives us some substance here we can work with to make a case for the ACA, even if that wasn't her intention when she wrote the article.

[CreekDog]

7. The OP is posting this as a post-ACA thing, he doesn't deserve your benefit of the doubt

[herding cats]

11. I suppose I could be seeing that part wrong.

I'm guilty of attributing my feelings on things in error at times. Either way, the article does make a strong argument for the ACA, which is what I walked away with after I read it. What that woman went through cannot happen to anyone today under the ACA.

[CreekDog]

12. you're a better person than me!

certainly more charitable!

I'm glad guaranteed issue and elimination of pre-existing condition exclusions is part of the ACA.

[Nye Bevan]

5. "Obamacare put a stop to this kind of health insurance horror story"

would be a better title.

It's a good story as people should be reminded of the evil of medical underwriting (that the Republicans want to bring back).

[Gothmog]

4. This was all pre-ACA

When my middle child turned 26, we tried to get her on her policy and was denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions. This was in Sept. of 2013 and so we ended up waiting to get her on an ACA policy. I had no trouble getting her a policy that has been in effect since January 1 2014.

This problem in the OP can not happen under the ACA

[Ms. Toad]

8. This article is really not helpful.

situations like this were SOP BEFORE the affordable care act, but is prohibited now.

The article (and the snipped quoted) do not make that clear - so only people who are aware of, and pay close attention to, dates relative to the various provisions of the ACA will understand this.

And - because of this - this story will be trotted out as a tale of why the ACA is a failure, and spread like wildfire, much faster than the errors can be pointed out.

[gratuitous]

9. Yep, that's the way things used to be

And that's the way Republicans would like things to be again: Denials of coverage for pre-existing conditions; no-coverage insurance for anything except the most catastrophic illness; and if the insurance company overcharged their policyholders for coverage, they got to pocket the profit instead of refunding to their policyholders. All real good incentives for health insurance companies to charge premiums out the wazoo, deny coverage, and cover only the most catastrophic illnesses (provided the policyholder survived).

[daredtowork]

13. There was something on the radio this morning about Blue Shield losing nonprofit status

I wonder what that means within the context of the ACA.

This is also interesting since Blue Shield is one of the Medi-Cal provider HMOs.