Market, Health Insurance, and Pre Existing Conditions

Companies exist to make a profit.  If you’re in the insurance game, you are gambling.  You are gambling that your customers will largely remain healthy, and you won’t have to pay out too much for care.

Pre-existing conditions seriously cramp that style.  (NYTimes):

In a telephone interview, the Frosts said they had recently been rejected by three private insurance companies because of pre-existing medical conditions. “We stood up in the first place because S-chip really helped our family and we wanted to help other families,” Mrs. Frost said.

This is a problem with leaving health insurance up to private companies.  Given a choice, who would choose to insure people who already have dangerous conditions?  How will you turn a good profit?

It is important to keep the uninsurable caste in mind when debating health care.  A rare recessive genetic defect or an accident should no more be a barrier to health insurance than skin color or religious creed.  If we don’t have a right to access medical care, of what practical meaning is the “right to life”?


2 Responses

  1. Big reason to not endorse anything a Clinton says.

    And I’m not supposed to call her Hitlery so I won’t call her Hitlery because Hitlery is too harsh or some crap.

  2. What was the complete phrase on that? Hmmm…

    “Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.”

    I agree that insurance companies must comply with the law.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: