Misplaced Pages

Pre-existing condition: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:15, 12 July 2018 edit2605:e000:911a:d000:1137:a3c0:76ba:f3f4 (talk) Practice and effect: Changed what sounded like a very non objective sentence. “Deny people in need of treatment” is way more appropriate than “deny needy people treatment”.Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:29, 1 November 2024 edit undoGreenC bot (talk | contribs)Bots2,590,068 edits Move 2 urls. Wayback Medic 2.5 per WP:URLREQ#articles.sfgate.com 
(41 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Medical condition that started before a person's health benefits went into effect}}
{{about|the term in health insurance|medical use of the term|Complication (medicine)}} {{about|the term in health insurance|medical use of the term|Complication (medicine)}}
{{Multiple issues|
{{lead too short|date=March 2014}} {{lead too short|date=March 2014}}
{{Globalize|1=article|2=United States|date=January 2020}}
In the context of ], a '''pre-existing condition''' is a ] that started before a person's ] went into effect. Before 2014 some insurance policies would not cover expenses due to pre-existing conditions. These exclusions by the ] were meant to cope with ] by potential customers. Such exclusions have been prohibited since January 1, 2014, by the ].
}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=August 2022}}
In the context of ], a '''pre-existing condition''' is a ] that started before a person's ] went into effect. Before 2014, some insurance policies would not cover expenses due to pre-existing conditions. These exclusions by the ] were meant to cope with ] by potential customers. Such exclusions have been prohibited since January 1, 2014, by the ].

According to the ], more than a quarter of adults below the age of 65 (approximately 52 million people) had pre-existing conditions in 2016.


== Definitions == == Definitions ==
Line 9: Line 16:
Conditions can be broken down into two further categories, according to Lisa Smith of ]:<ref name="smith"/> Conditions can be broken down into two further categories, according to Lisa Smith of ]:<ref name="smith"/>


{{ quote {{ blockquote
| Most insurance companies use one of two definitions to identify such conditions. Under the "objective standard" definition, a pre-existing condition is any condition for which the patient has already received medical advice or treatment prior to enrollment in a new medical insurance plan. Under the broader, "prudent person" definition, a pre-existing condition is anything for which symptoms were present and a prudent person would have sought treatment. | Most insurance companies use one of two definitions to identify such conditions. Under the "objective standard" definition, a pre-existing condition is any condition for which the patient has already received medical advice or treatment prior to enrollment in a new medical insurance plan. Under the broader, "prudent person" definition, a pre-existing condition is anything for which symptoms were present and a prudent person would have sought treatment.
}} }}


Which definition may be used was sometimes regulated by state laws. Some states required insurance companies to use the objective standard, while others required the prudent person standard. 10 states did not specify either definition, 21 required the "prudent person" standard, and 18 required the "objective" standard.<ref name="statehealthfacts"/> Which definition may be used was sometimes regulated by state laws. Some states required insurance companies to use the objective standard, while others required the prudent person standard. 10 states did not specify either definition, 21 required the "prudent person" standard, and 18 required the "objective" standard.<ref name="statehealthfacts"/>

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, more than a quarter of adults below the age of 65 (approximately 52 million people) had pre-existing conditions in 2016.<ref name=":0">{{Cite news|url=https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/10/11/656503264/fact-check-whos-right-about-protections-for-pre-existing-conditions|title=FACT CHECK: Who's Right About Protections For Pre-Existing Conditions?|work=NPR.org|access-date=October 12, 2018|language=en|date=October 11, 2018|author=Julie Rovner}}</ref>


== Current U.S. federal regulation == == Current U.S. federal regulation ==


; ] (Pub.L. 111-148) enacted March 23, 2010<ref name="side-by-side"/> ; ] (Pub.L. 111–148) enacted March 23, 2010<ref name="side-by-side"/>
* Immediate reform: effective June 21, 2010 (90 days after enactment) * Immediate reform: effective June 21, 2010 (90 days after enactment)
** National high-risk pool for individuals with a pre-existing condition who have been uninsured for the prior 6 months ** National high-risk pool for individuals with a pre-existing condition who have been uninsured for the prior 6 months
Line 77: Line 86:
** 6 months: 50 states + DC ** 6 months: 50 states + DC


Pre-existing condition exclusions were prohibited for HIPAA-eligible individuals (those with 18 months continuous coverage unbroken for more than 63 days and coming from a group health insurance plan). Pre-existing condition exclusions were prohibited for HIPAA-eligible individuals (those with 18 months continuous coverage unbroken for no more than 63 days and coming from a group health insurance plan).


Individual (non-group) health insurance plans could exclude maternity coverage for a pre-existing condition of pregnancy.<ref name="jacobson" /> Individual (non-group) health insurance plans could exclude maternity coverage for a pre-existing condition of pregnancy.<ref name="jacobson" />
Line 85: Line 94:
== Practice and effect == == Practice and effect ==


Advocates against pre-existing condition rules argue that they cruelly deny people in need of treatment. ] spokeswoman K.C. Eynatten has said, "We realized our position was based on gut feelings, not hard numbers... we became aware that we were part of the reason a woman and her children might not leave an abuser. They were afraid they'd lose their insurance. And we wanted no part of that."<ref name="grim" /> Jerry Flanagan, health-care policy director of ], has stated that "insurance companies want premiums without any risk" and go to extreme "lengths... to go to make a profit".<ref name="hilzenrath" /> , an insurance quote provider website, has argued that even though health insurance is basically to protect people from very high costs of health care, the commercial health insurance system is not playing fair and are always trying to avoid risk in order to boost their profits.<ref name="allinsuranceinfo"/> Advocates against pre-existing condition rules argue that they cruelly deny people in need of treatment. ] spokeswoman K.C. Eynatten has said, "We realized our position was based on gut feelings, not hard numbers... we became aware that we were part of the reason a woman and her children might not leave an abuser. They were afraid they'd lose their insurance. And we wanted no part of that."<ref name="grim" /> Jerry Flanagan, health-care policy director of ], has stated that "insurance companies want premiums without any risk" and go to extreme "lengths... to go to make a profit".<ref name="hilzenrath" /> InsureMe, an insurance quote provider website, has argued that even though health insurance is basically to protect people from very high costs of health care, the commercial health insurance system is not playing fair and are always trying to avoid risk in order to boost their profits.<ref name="allinsuranceinfo"/>


Some practices by some ] companies, such as determining ] to be an excludable pre-existing condition, have been called abuses by Maria Tchijov, a ] new media coordinator, and by an ] report.<ref name="grim"/><ref name="johnson"/><ref name="tchijov"/> Some practices by some ] companies, such as determining ] to be an excludable pre-existing condition, have been called abuses by Maria Tchijov, a ] new media coordinator, and by an ] report.<ref name="grim"/><ref name="johnson"/><ref name="tchijov"/>
Line 99: Line 108:
== Public opinion == == Public opinion ==


A '']''-Abt SRBI poll in late July 2009 found that a large majority of Americans (80%) favored a requirement that insurance companies insure people even if they suffer from pre-existing conditions.<ref name="Abt SRBI" /> A '']''-Abt SRBI poll in late July 2009 found that a large majority of Americans (80%) favored a requirement that insurance companies insure people even if they have pre-existing conditions.<ref name="Abt SRBI" />


In September 2009, the monthly ] report said:<ref name="KFF tracking poll" /> In September 2009, the monthly ] report said:<ref name="KFF tracking poll" />


{{blockquote
{{quote
| The public’s most unanimous and bipartisan support is saved for a proposal to have the federal government require that health insurance companies cover anyone who applies, even if he/she has a pre-existing condition. Overall, eight in ten back the proposal, including 67 percent of Republicans, 80 percent of political independents and 88 percent of Democrats. | The public's most unanimous and bipartisan support is saved for a proposal to have the federal government require that health insurance companies cover anyone who applies, even if he/she has a pre-existing condition. Overall, eight in ten back the proposal, including 67 percent of Republicans, 80 percent of political independents and 88 percent of Democrats.
}} }}


== See also == == See also ==

* ] * ]


== References == == References ==


{{reflist|30em|refs= {{Reflist|30em|refs=
<ref name="Abt SRBI">{{cite web | date=July 29, 2009|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100915000000*/http://www.srbi.com/TimePoll4794_Final_%20Report.pdf|title=TIME magazine/Abt SRBI&nbsp;— July 27–28, 2009 survey |location=New York |publisher=SRBI |accessdate=September 21, 2009}}</ref> <ref name="Abt SRBI">{{cite web |date=July 29, 2009 |url=http://www.srbi.com/TimePoll4794_Final_%20Report.pdf |title=Time magazine/Abt SRBI&nbsp;— July 27–28, 2009 survey |location=New York |publisher=SRBI |access-date=September 21, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110116075242/http://www.srbi.com/TimePoll4794_Final_%20Report.pdf |archive-date=January 16, 2011 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
<ref name="KFF tracking poll">{{cite web | date=September 29, 2009 |title=Kaiser Health Tracking Poll—September 2009: Public opinion on health care issues |url=http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/7990.pdf |accessdate=January 16, 2010 |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=]}}</ref> <ref name="KFF tracking poll">{{cite web | date=September 29, 2009 |title=Kaiser Health Tracking Poll—September 2009: Public opinion on health care issues |url=http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/7990.pdf |access-date=January 16, 2010 |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=]}}</ref>
<ref name="UPMC">{{cite web|year=2010|url=http://www.upmc.com/HOSPITALSFACILITIES/FINANCIAL-SERVICES/Pages/billing-terminology.aspx|accessdate=January 16, 2010|location=Pittsburgh|publisher=] (UPMC)|title=Billing terminology|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20101003092545/http://www.upmc.com/HospitalsFacilities/financial-services/Pages/billing-terminology.aspx|archivedate=October 3, 2010|df=}}</ref> <ref name="UPMC">{{cite web|year=2010|url=http://www.upmc.com/HOSPITALSFACILITIES/FINANCIAL-SERVICES/Pages/billing-terminology.aspx|access-date=January 16, 2010|location=Pittsburgh|publisher=] (UPMC)|title=Billing terminology|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101003092545/http://www.upmc.com/HospitalsFacilities/financial-services/Pages/billing-terminology.aspx|archive-date=October 3, 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="jacobson">{{cite news |author=Jacobson, Louis |date=August 18, 2009 |title=Pregnancy a 'pre-existing condition'? Yes, for some |publisher=] |url=http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/aug/18/pregnancy-pre-existing-condition/|accessdate=January 17, 2010}}</ref> <ref name="jacobson">{{cite news |author=Jacobson, Louis |date=August 18, 2009 |title=Pregnancy a 'pre-existing condition'? Yes, for some |publisher=] |url=http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/aug/18/pregnancy-pre-existing-condition/|access-date=January 17, 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="smith">{{cite web |author=Smith, Lisa |date=February 16, 2009 |title=Health insurance: paying for pre-existing conditions |publisher=]|url=http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/09/covering-medical-costs.asp |accessdate=January 17, 2010}}</ref> <ref name="smith">{{cite web |author=Smith, Lisa |date=February 16, 2009 |title=Health insurance: paying for pre-existing conditions |publisher=]|url=http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/09/covering-medical-costs.asp |access-date=January 17, 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="statehealthfacts">{{cite web|url=https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/individual-market-portability-rules/|title=Individual Market Portability Rules (Not Applicable to HIPAA Eligible Individuals)|date=July 21, 2014|access-date=March 8, 2019}}</ref>
<ref name="statehealthfacts">http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparetable.jsp?typ=5&ind=355&cat=7&sub=87&sortc=2&o=a</ref>
<ref name="kassebaum-kennedy">{{cite journal |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.13.1.327 |author1=Gabel, Jon |author2=Liston, Derek |author3=Jensen, Gail |author4=Marsteller, Jill |date=Spring 1994 |title=The health insurance picture in 1993: some rare good news |journal=] |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=327–336 |url=http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/13/1/327.pdf |accessdate=February 22, 2010 |pmid=8188152}}</ref> <ref name="kassebaum-kennedy">{{cite journal |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.13.1.327 |author1=Gabel, Jon |author2=Liston, Derek |author3=Jensen, Gail |author4=Marsteller, Jill |date=Spring 1994 |title=The health insurance picture in 1993: some rare good news |journal=] |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=327–336 |url=http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/13/1/327.pdf |access-date=February 22, 2010 |pmid=8188152}}</ref>
<ref name="kassebaum-kennedy-2">{{cite web |author1=Kassebaum, Nancy Landon |author2=Kennedy, Edward M. |date=August 21, 1996 |title=Public Law 104-191. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=] |url=http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=104_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ191.104.pdf |accessdate=February 22, 2010|display-authors=etal}}</ref> <ref name="kassebaum-kennedy-2">{{cite web |author1=Kassebaum, Nancy Landon |author2=Kennedy, Edward M. |date=August 21, 1996 |title=Public Law 104-191. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=] |url=http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=104_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ191.104.pdf |access-date=February 22, 2010|display-authors=etal}}</ref>
<ref name="atchkinson-fox">{{cite journal |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.16.3.146 |author1=Atchkinson, Brian K. |author2=Fox, Daniel M. |date=May–June 1997 |title=The politics of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act |journal=] |volume=16 |issue=3 |pages=146–150 |url=http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/16/3/146.pdf |accessdate=February 22, 2010}}</ref> <ref name="atchkinson-fox">{{cite journal |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.16.3.146 |author1=Atchkinson, Brian K. |author2=Fox, Daniel M. |date=May–June 1997 |title=The politics of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act |journal=] |volume=16 |issue=3 |pages=146–150 |pmid=9141331 |url=http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/16/3/146.pdf |access-date=February 22, 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="nicholls-blumberg">{{cite journal |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.17.3.25 |author1=Nichols, Len M. |author2=Blumberg, Linda J. |date=May–June 1998 |title=A different kind of 'new federalism'? The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 |journal=] |volume=17 |issue=3 |pages=25–42 |url=http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/17/3/25.pdf |accessdate=February 22, 2010 |pmid=9637965}}</ref> <ref name="nicholls-blumberg">{{cite journal |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.17.3.25 |author1=Nichols, Len M. |author2=Blumberg, Linda J. |date=May–June 1998 |title=A different kind of 'new federalism'? The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 |journal=] |volume=17 |issue=3 |pages=25–42 |url=http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/17/3/25.pdf |access-date=February 22, 2010 |pmid=9637965}}</ref>
<ref name="pollitz-tapay">{{cite journal |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.19.4.7 |author1=Pollitz, Karen |author2=Tapay, Nicole |author3=Hadley, Elizabeth |author4=Specht, Jalena |date=July–August 2000 |title=Early experience with 'new federalism' in health insurance regulation |journal=] |volume=19 |issue=4 |pages=7–22 |url=http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/19/4/7.pdf |accessdate=February 22, 2010 |pmid=10916957}}</ref> <ref name="pollitz-tapay">{{cite journal |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.19.4.7 |author1=Pollitz, Karen |author2=Tapay, Nicole |author3=Hadley, Elizabeth |author4=Specht, Jalena |date=July–August 2000 |title=Early experience with 'new federalism' in health insurance regulation |journal=] |volume=19 |issue=4 |pages=7–22 |url=http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/19/4/7.pdf |access-date=February 22, 2010 |pmid=10916957}}</ref>
<ref name="gabel-jensen">{{cite journal |author1=Gabel, Jon R. |author2=Jensen, Gail A. |author3=Hawkins, Samantha |date=March–April 2009 |title=Self-insurance in times of growing and retreating managed care |journal=] |volume=22 |issue=2 |pages=202–210 |url=http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/22/2/202.pdf |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.22.2.202 |accessdate=February 22, 2010 |pmid=12674423}}</ref> <ref name="gabel-jensen">{{cite journal |author1=Gabel, Jon R. |author2=Jensen, Gail A. |author3=Hawkins, Samantha |date=March–April 2009 |title=Self-insurance in times of growing and retreating managed care |journal=] |volume=22 |issue=2 |pages=202–210 |url=http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/22/2/202.pdf |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.22.2.202 |access-date=February 22, 2010 |pmid=12674423}}</ref>
<ref name="side-by-side">{{cite web | date=March 22, 2010 |title= Side-by-side comparison of major health care reform proposals |location=Washington, DC |publisher=] |url= http://www.crawfordadvisors.com/whitePapers/Kaiser%20-%20Focus%20on%20Health%20Care%20Reform.pdf}}</ref> <ref name="side-by-side">{{cite web | date=March 22, 2010 |title= Side-by-side comparison of major health care reform proposals |location=Washington, DC |publisher=] |url= http://www.crawfordadvisors.com/whitePapers/Kaiser%20-%20Focus%20on%20Health%20Care%20Reform.pdf}}</ref>
<ref name="FR 28 June 2010">{{cite journal |author=U.S. Department of Health and Human Services |date=June 28, 2010 |title=Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Requirements for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Relating to Preexisting Condition Exclusions, Lifetime and Annual Limits, Rescissions, and Patient Protections; Final Rule and Proposed Rule |journal=] |volume=75 |issue=123 |pages=37187–37241 |url=http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-15278.htm |accessdate=July 26, 2010}}</ref> <ref name="FR 28 June 2010">{{cite journal |author=U.S. Department of Health and Human Services |date=June 28, 2010 |title=Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Requirements for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Relating to Preexisting Condition Exclusions, Lifetime and Annual Limits, Rescissions, and Patient Protections; Final Rule and Proposed Rule |journal=] |volume=75 |issue=123 |pages=37187–37241 |url=http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-15278.htm |access-date=July 26, 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="GHPI">{{cite web |author=] |date=January 2010 |title=Individual market portability rules (not applicable to HIPAA eligible individuals), January 2010 |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=] |url=http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=355&cat=7&sub=87&yr=138&typ=5 |accessdate=March 31, 2010}}</ref> <ref name="GHPI">{{cite web|date=January 2010 |title=Individual market portability rules (not applicable to HIPAA eligible individuals), January 2010 |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=] |url=http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=355&cat=7&sub=87&yr=138&typ=5 |access-date=March 31, 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="GHPI-2">{{cite web |author=] |date=January 2010 |title=Non-group coverage rules for HIPAA eligible individuals, January 2010 |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=] |url=http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=356&cat=7&sub=87&yr=138&typ=5 |accessdate=March 31, 2010}}</ref> <ref name="GHPI-2">{{cite web|date=January 2010 |title=Non-group coverage rules for HIPAA eligible individuals, January 2010 |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=] |url=http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=356&cat=7&sub=87&yr=138&typ=5 |access-date=March 31, 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="GHPI-3">{{cite web |author=] |date=January 2010 |title=Small group health insurance market pre-existing condition exclusion rules, January 2010 |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=] |url=http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=352&cat=7&sub=86&yr=138&typ=5 |accessdate=March 31, 2010}}</ref> <ref name="GHPI-3">{{cite web |date=January 2010 |title=Small group health insurance market pre-existing condition exclusion rules, January 2010 |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=] |url=http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=352&cat=7&sub=86&yr=138&typ=5 |access-date=March 31, 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="grim">{{cite news|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/14/when-getting-beaten-by-yo_n_286029.html|accessdate=September 19, 2009|publisher=]|title=When getting beaten by your husband is a pre-existing condition|first=Brian|last=Grim|date=September 14, 2009}}</ref> <ref name="grim">{{cite news|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/14/when-getting-beaten-by-yo_n_286029.html|access-date=September 19, 2009|work=]|title=When getting beaten by your husband is a pre-existing condition|first=Brian|last=Grim|date=September 14, 2009}}</ref>
<ref name="hilzenrath">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/18/AR2009091803501.html|title=Acne, pregnancy among disqualifying conditions|date=September 19, 2009|accessdate=January 16, 2010|first=David S.|last=Hilzenrath|newspaper=] |page=A3}}</ref> <ref name="hilzenrath">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/18/AR2009091803501.html|title=Acne, pregnancy among disqualifying conditions|date=September 19, 2009|access-date=January 16, 2010|first=David S.|last=Hilzenrath|newspaper=] |page=A3}}</ref>
<ref name="allinsuranceinfo">{{cite web | year=2007 |url=http://allinsuranceinfo.org/health/tricks.html |title=Health insurance tricks to beware of|accessdate=January 20, 2010|publisher=allinsuranceinfo.org}}</ref> <ref name="allinsuranceinfo">{{cite web | year=2007 |url=http://allinsuranceinfo.org/health/tricks.html |title=Health insurance tricks to beware of|access-date=January 20, 2010|publisher=allinsuranceinfo.org}}</ref>
<ref name="johnson">{{cite web |author=Johnson, Rhonda M. |date=August 30, 2000 |title=Rural health response to domestic violence: policy and practice issues |url=http://ruralhealth.hrsa.gov/pub/domviol.htm |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=] |accessdate=September 15, 2009}}</ref> <ref name="johnson">{{cite web |author=Johnson, Rhonda M. |date=August 30, 2000 |title=Rural health response to domestic violence: policy and practice issues |url=http://ruralhealth.hrsa.gov/pub/domviol.htm |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=] |access-date=September 15, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090425174825/http://ruralhealth.hrsa.gov/pub/domviol.htm |archive-date=April 25, 2009 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
<ref name="tchijov">{{cite web|author=Tchijov, Maria |url=http://www.seiu.org/2009/09/domestic-violence-victims-have-a-pre-existing-condition.php|title=Domestic violence is a 'pre-existing condition'? |work=SEIU Blog |publisher=]|accessdate=September 15, 2009|date=September 11, 2009}}</ref> <ref name="tchijov">{{cite web|author=Tchijov, Maria|url=http://www.seiu.org/2009/09/domestic-violence-victims-have-a-pre-existing-condition.php|title=Domestic violence is a 'pre-existing condition'?|work=SEIU Blog|publisher=]|access-date=September 15, 2009|date=September 11, 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090916025852/http://www.seiu.org/2009/09/domestic-violence-victims-have-a-pre-existing-condition.php|archive-date=September 16, 2009|url-status=dead}}</ref>
<ref name="chronicle">{{cite news|url=http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-11-17/news/17182067_1_health-care-health-insurance-pre-existing-medical-problem |newspaper=]|date=November 17, 2009|accessdate=January 16, 2010|title=Americans fear health law's costs poll finds|author1=Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar|author2=Trevor Tompson}}{{dead link|date=May 2017}}</ref> <ref name="chronicle">{{cite news|url=https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/2009-11-17/news/17182067_1_health-care-health-insurance-pre-existing-medical-problem |newspaper=]|date=November 17, 2009|access-date=January 16, 2010|title=Americans fear health law's costs poll finds|author1=Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar|author2=Trevor Tompson}}</ref>
<ref name="alonso-zaldivar">{{cite news|url=http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-11-17/news/17182067_1_health-care-health-insurance-pre-existing-medical-problems|newspaper=] |page=A118 |date=November 17, 2009|accessdate=January 16, 2010|title=Americans fear health law's costs poll finds|author=Alonso-Zaldivar, Ricardo |author2=Tompson, Trevor |agency=Associated Pres)}}</ref> <ref name="alonso-zaldivar">{{cite news|url=https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Americans-fear-health-law-s-costs-poll-finds-3210392.php|newspaper=] |page=A118 |date=November 17, 2009|access-date=January 16, 2010|title=Americans fear health law's costs poll finds|author=Alonso-Zaldivar, Ricardo |author2=Tompson, Trevor |agency=Associated Press)}}</ref>
<ref name="pledge">{{cite web|author=Suderman, Peter (opinion blog)|date=September 23, 2010|title=What the GOP's Pledge has in common with ObamaCare|work=Hit and Run|publisher=]|url=http://reason.com/blog/2010/09/23/what-the-gops-pledge-has-in-co|accessdate=September 23, 2010}}</ref> <ref name="pledge">{{cite web|author=Suderman, Peter (opinion blog)|date=September 23, 2010|title=What the GOP's Pledge has in common with ObamaCare|work=Hit and Run|publisher=]|url=http://reason.com/blog/2010/09/23/what-the-gops-pledge-has-in-co|access-date=September 23, 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="marketwatch">http://www.marketwatch.com/story/full-text-of-president-obamas-health-care-speech-2010-03-03</ref> <ref name="marketwatch">{{cite web|title=Text of President Obama's health-care speech |url=https://www.marketwatch.com/story/full-text-of-president-obamas-health-care-speech-2010-03-03 |access-date=September 15, 2018 |date=March 3, 2010}}</ref><ref name="aizenman-kornblut">{{cite news| url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/22/AR2010092205365.html | newspaper=The Washington Post | first1=N. C. | last1=Aizenman | first2=Anne E. | last2=Kornblut | title=Obama returns to stump for health care | date=September 23, 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="aizenman-kornblut">{{cite news| url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/22/AR2010092205365.html | work=The Washington Post | first1=N. C. | last1=Aizenman | first2=Anne E. | last2=Kornblut | title=Obama returns to stump for health care | date=September 23, 2010}}</ref>
}} }}

==Further reading==
* {{cite web | author=Timm, Jane C. | title=Fact check: Trump claims GOP is protecting people with pre-existing conditions. Evidence says otherwise. | publisher=] | date=October 23, 2018 | url=https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/fact-check-trump-claims-gop-protecting-people-pre-existing-conditions-n923056 | access-date=March 8, 2019}}
* {{cite web | author=Pear, Robert | title=Democrats Unite to Begin Push to Protect Pre-Existing Condition Coverage | website=] | date=February 6, 2019 | url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/06/us/politics/democrats-pre-existing-condition-coverage.html | access-date=March 8, 2019}}
* Lovelace, Berkeley Jr. & Breuninger, Kevin (September 24 2020). . ].


] ]
] ]
] ]
]

Latest revision as of 00:29, 1 November 2024

Medical condition that started before a person's health benefits went into effect This article is about the term in health insurance. For medical use of the term, see Complication (medicine).
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
This article's lead section may be too short to adequately summarize the key points. Please consider expanding the lead to provide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the article. (March 2014)
Globe icon.The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate. (January 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
(Learn how and when to remove this message)

In the context of healthcare in the United States, a pre-existing condition is a medical condition that started before a person's health insurance went into effect. Before 2014, some insurance policies would not cover expenses due to pre-existing conditions. These exclusions by the insurance industry were meant to cope with adverse selection by potential customers. Such exclusions have been prohibited since January 1, 2014, by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, more than a quarter of adults below the age of 65 (approximately 52 million people) had pre-existing conditions in 2016.

Definitions

The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center defines a pre-existing condition as a "medical condition that occurred before a program of health benefits went into effect". J. James Rohack, president of the American Medical Association, has stated on a Fox News Sunday interview that exclusions, based upon these conditions, function as a form of "rationing" of health care.

Conditions can be broken down into two further categories, according to Lisa Smith of Investopedia:

Most insurance companies use one of two definitions to identify such conditions. Under the "objective standard" definition, a pre-existing condition is any condition for which the patient has already received medical advice or treatment prior to enrollment in a new medical insurance plan. Under the broader, "prudent person" definition, a pre-existing condition is anything for which symptoms were present and a prudent person would have sought treatment.

Which definition may be used was sometimes regulated by state laws. Some states required insurance companies to use the objective standard, while others required the prudent person standard. 10 states did not specify either definition, 21 required the "prudent person" standard, and 18 required the "objective" standard.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, more than a quarter of adults below the age of 65 (approximately 52 million people) had pre-existing conditions in 2016.

Current U.S. federal regulation

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Pub.L. 111–148) enacted March 23, 2010
  • Immediate reform: effective June 21, 2010 (90 days after enactment)
    • National high-risk pool for individuals with a pre-existing condition who have been uninsured for the prior 6 months
      • Premium to be set at a standard rate for a standard population
      • Premium for older individuals allowed to be up to 4 times the premium for younger individuals
      • Premium for tobacco users allowed to be up to 1.5 times the premium for non-tobacco users
  • Immediate reform: effective September 23, 2010 (6 months after enactment)
    • Group health insurance plans and new (non-grandfathered) individual health insurance plans
      • Pre-existing condition exclusions prohibited for children under age 19
  • Reform delayed for 4 years: effective January 1, 2014
    • Individual and group health insurance plans
      • Pre-existing condition exclusions prohibited in all health insurance plans
      • Prohibit treating acts of domestic violence as a pre-existing condition
      • Waiting period for enrollment in new health insurance plans limited to 90 days
    • Grandfathered existing health insurance plans must prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions by January 1, 2014

Former regulation

Regulation of pre-existing condition exclusions in individual (non-group) and small group (2 to 50 employees) health insurance plans in the United States was left to individual U.S. states as a result of the McCarran–Ferguson Act of 1945 which delegated insurance regulation to the states and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) which exempted self-insured large group health insurance plans from state regulation. After most states had by the early 1990s implemented some limits on pre-existing condition exclusions by small group (2 to 50 employees) health insurance plans, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (Kassebaum-Kennedy Act) of 1996 (HIPAA) extended some minimal limits on pre-existing condition exclusions for all group health insurance plans—including the self-insured large group health insurance plans that cover half of those with employer-provided health insurance but are exempt from state insurance regulation.

Individual (non-group) health insurance plans
Small group (2 to 50 employees) health insurance plans
Large group (self-insured) health insurance plans
  • Maximum pre-existing condition exclusion period
    • 12 months: 50 states + DC
  • Maximum look-back period for pre-existing conditions
    • 6 months: 50 states + DC

Pre-existing condition exclusions were prohibited for HIPAA-eligible individuals (those with 18 months continuous coverage unbroken for no more than 63 days and coming from a group health insurance plan).

Individual (non-group) health insurance plans could exclude maternity coverage for a pre-existing condition of pregnancy.

Group health insurance plans sponsored by employers with 15 or more employees were prohibited by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 from excluding maternity coverage for a pre-existing condition of pregnancy; this prohibition was extended to all group health insurance plans by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA).

Practice and effect

Advocates against pre-existing condition rules argue that they cruelly deny people in need of treatment. State Farm spokeswoman K.C. Eynatten has said, "We realized our position was based on gut feelings, not hard numbers... we became aware that we were part of the reason a woman and her children might not leave an abuser. They were afraid they'd lose their insurance. And we wanted no part of that." Jerry Flanagan, health-care policy director of Consumer Watchdog, has stated that "insurance companies want premiums without any risk" and go to extreme "lengths... to go to make a profit". InsureMe, an insurance quote provider website, has argued that even though health insurance is basically to protect people from very high costs of health care, the commercial health insurance system is not playing fair and are always trying to avoid risk in order to boost their profits.

Some practices by some health insurance companies, such as determining domestic violence to be an excludable pre-existing condition, have been called abuses by Maria Tchijov, a Service Employees International Union new media coordinator, and by an Office of Rural Health Policy report.

The rationale behind pre-existing condition clauses, according to those who defend the policies, is that they reduce the cost of health insurance coverage for those who still receive it, thus giving more people an opportunity to afford insurance in the first place. The San Francisco Chronicle has reported that "osts for those with coverage could go up because people in poor health who'd been shut out of the insurance pool would now be included... they would get medical care they could not access before." Senator Mike Enzi, a Republican from Wyoming, has voted to allow insurance companies to consider domestic violence as a pre-existing condition and supported his vote by saying that covering such people could raise insurance premiums to the point where it would preclude others from buying it. He has remarked that "If you have no insurance, it doesn't matter what services are mandated by the state".

According to the California-based advocacy group Consumer Watchdog, other possible situations falling under pre-existing condition clauses are chronic conditions as acne, hemorrhoids, toenail fungus, allergies, tonsillitis, and bunions, hazardous occupations such as police officer, stunt person, test pilot, circus worker, and firefighter, and pregnancy and/or the intention to adopt.

Commentary by lawmakers

According to a Reason.com libertarian opinion blog by Peter Suderman, the 'Pledge to America' issued by the Republican Party in September 2010 stated, "Health care should be accessible for all, regardless of pre-existing conditions or past illnesses.... We will make it illegal for an insurance company to deny coverage to someone with prior coverage on the basis of a pre-existing condition." In a March 3, 2010, address, President Barack Obama said that coverage denied to those with pre-existing conditions is a serious problem that would only grow worse without major reforms. In a September 2010 visit with Falls Church, Virginia, residents, Obama referred to a woman with an eye condition and a woman with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma as personal examples in the audience of those benefiting from changing pre-existing condition rules.

Public opinion

A Time-Abt SRBI poll in late July 2009 found that a large majority of Americans (80%) favored a requirement that insurance companies insure people even if they have pre-existing conditions.

In September 2009, the monthly Kaiser Health Tracking Poll report said:

The public's most unanimous and bipartisan support is saved for a proposal to have the federal government require that health insurance companies cover anyone who applies, even if he/she has a pre-existing condition. Overall, eight in ten back the proposal, including 67 percent of Republicans, 80 percent of political independents and 88 percent of Democrats.

See also

References

  1. "Billing terminology". Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC). 2010. Archived from the original on October 3, 2010. Retrieved January 16, 2010.
  2. ^ Jacobson, Louis (August 18, 2009). "Pregnancy a 'pre-existing condition'? Yes, for some". PolitiFact.com. Retrieved January 17, 2010.
  3. Smith, Lisa (February 16, 2009). "Health insurance: paying for pre-existing conditions". Investopedia. Retrieved January 17, 2010.
  4. "Individual Market Portability Rules (Not Applicable to HIPAA Eligible Individuals)". July 21, 2014. Retrieved March 8, 2019.
  5. Julie Rovner (October 11, 2018). "FACT CHECK: Who's Right About Protections For Pre-Existing Conditions?". NPR.org. Retrieved October 12, 2018.
  6. "Side-by-side comparison of major health care reform proposals" (PDF). Washington, DC: Kaiser Family Foundation. March 22, 2010.
  7. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (June 28, 2010). "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Requirements for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Relating to Preexisting Condition Exclusions, Lifetime and Annual Limits, Rescissions, and Patient Protections; Final Rule and Proposed Rule". Federal Register. 75 (123): 37187–37241. Retrieved July 26, 2010.
  8. Gabel, Jon; Liston, Derek; Jensen, Gail; Marsteller, Jill (Spring 1994). "The health insurance picture in 1993: some rare good news" (PDF). Health Affairs. 13 (1): 327–336. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.13.1.327. PMID 8188152. Retrieved February 22, 2010.
  9. Kassebaum, Nancy Landon; Kennedy, Edward M.; et al. (August 21, 1996). "Public Law 104-191. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)" (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. Retrieved February 22, 2010.
  10. Atchkinson, Brian K.; Fox, Daniel M. (May–June 1997). "The politics of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act" (PDF). Health Affairs. 16 (3): 146–150. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.16.3.146. PMID 9141331. Retrieved February 22, 2010.
  11. Nichols, Len M.; Blumberg, Linda J. (May–June 1998). "A different kind of 'new federalism'? The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996" (PDF). Health Affairs. 17 (3): 25–42. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.17.3.25. PMID 9637965. Retrieved February 22, 2010.
  12. Pollitz, Karen; Tapay, Nicole; Hadley, Elizabeth; Specht, Jalena (July–August 2000). "Early experience with 'new federalism' in health insurance regulation" (PDF). Health Affairs. 19 (4): 7–22. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.19.4.7. PMID 10916957. Retrieved February 22, 2010.
  13. Gabel, Jon R.; Jensen, Gail A.; Hawkins, Samantha (March–April 2009). "Self-insurance in times of growing and retreating managed care" (PDF). Health Affairs. 22 (2): 202–210. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.22.2.202. PMID 12674423. Retrieved February 22, 2010.
  14. "Individual market portability rules (not applicable to HIPAA eligible individuals), January 2010". Washington, D.C.: Kaiser Family Foundation. January 2010. Retrieved March 31, 2010.
  15. "Non-group coverage rules for HIPAA eligible individuals, January 2010". Washington, D.C.: Kaiser Family Foundation. January 2010. Retrieved March 31, 2010.
  16. "Small group health insurance market pre-existing condition exclusion rules, January 2010". Washington, D.C.: Kaiser Family Foundation. January 2010. Retrieved March 31, 2010.
  17. ^ Grim, Brian (September 14, 2009). "When getting beaten by your husband is a pre-existing condition". The Huffington Post. Retrieved September 19, 2009.
  18. ^ Hilzenrath, David S. (September 19, 2009). "Acne, pregnancy among disqualifying conditions". The Washington Post. p. A3. Retrieved January 16, 2010.
  19. "Health insurance tricks to beware of". allinsuranceinfo.org. 2007. Retrieved January 20, 2010.
  20. Johnson, Rhonda M. (August 30, 2000). "Rural health response to domestic violence: policy and practice issues". Washington, D.C.: Office of Rural Health Policy. Archived from the original on April 25, 2009. Retrieved September 15, 2009.
  21. Tchijov, Maria (September 11, 2009). "Domestic violence is a 'pre-existing condition'?". SEIU Blog. Service Employees International Union. Archived from the original on September 16, 2009. Retrieved September 15, 2009.
  22. ^ Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar; Trevor Tompson (November 17, 2009). "Americans fear health law's costs poll finds". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved January 16, 2010.
  23. Alonso-Zaldivar, Ricardo; Tompson, Trevor (November 17, 2009). "Americans fear health law's costs poll finds". San Francisco Chronicle. Associated Press). p. A118. Retrieved January 16, 2010.
  24. Suderman, Peter (opinion blog) (September 23, 2010). "What the GOP's Pledge has in common with ObamaCare". Hit and Run. Reason. Retrieved September 23, 2010.
  25. "Text of President Obama's health-care speech". March 3, 2010. Retrieved September 15, 2018.
  26. Aizenman, N. C.; Kornblut, Anne E. (September 23, 2010). "Obama returns to stump for health care". The Washington Post.
  27. "Time magazine/Abt SRBI — July 27–28, 2009 survey" (PDF). New York: SRBI. July 29, 2009. Archived from the original (PDF) on January 16, 2011. Retrieved September 21, 2009.
  28. "Kaiser Health Tracking Poll—September 2009: Public opinion on health care issues" (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Kaiser Family Foundation. September 29, 2009. Retrieved January 16, 2010.

Further reading

Categories:
Pre-existing condition: Difference between revisions Add topic