Health insurance question

[odile53]

I’ve worked for organizations that have provided employee health insurance ever since I started working (in my late teens.) I’m a woman in my fifties and had an emergency hysterectomy in my early forties. I need what is termed “reproductive services” coverage about as much as I need an antique victrola, or a pig on roller skates.

With the HHS mandate in the news, while I was going through my files (income tax season is on us,) I found and read my health insurance policy. Yep, there it was: full maternity coverage, including the offshoot abortion and birth control coverage (you do have to pay a small co-pay for prescriptions, low office visit co-pays, and a low hospitalization co-pay, same as for other health care, and right now, I’m not going to get into the philosophical question of whether abortion is “health care.”) Interestingly enough, the insurance coverage also covers infertility treatment (something else I don’t need at my age,) and organ transplantation (something I will need very soon, I have a corneal abrasion that is not healing and my eye doctor mentioned the possibility of a corneal transplant.) It doesn’t cover cosmetic surgery unless such surgery is to address an actual medical malfunction. In other words, no tummy tucks, but you can get reconstructive surgery if you had a mastectomy.

In other words, this is a pretty comprehensive policy. I imagine that many policies are as well. And my employer and I pay pretty healthy premiums for it, and have been doing so for years.

As a Catholic, is it morally questionable or objectionable for me to even own such a policy, even though these are services I am never going to use? The Church is objecting to its organizations and ministries being forced to provide these coverages, and pay for them. What about those of us who work for places where it is provided already? I admit, I haven’t done an exhaustive search for teaching on this specific issue (worker for an organization that does have this kind of insurance,) I do resent having to feed the kitty for other people’s abortions, artificial birth control, yadda, yadda, but I’m of an age where I need health care coverage in case I do develop a chronic illness, etc. Plus, all of us will have to have coverage, or pay a fine. Next year.

What’s a loyal, middle aged Catholic to do?

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

I’ve worked for organizations that have provided employee health insurance ever since I started working (in my late teens.) I’m a woman in my fifties and had an emergency hysterectomy in my early forties. I need what is termed “reproductive services” coverage about as much as I need an antique victrola, or a pig on roller skates.

With the HHS mandate in the news, while I was going through my files (income tax season is on us,) I found and read my health insurance policy. Yep, there it was: full maternity coverage, including the offshoot abortion and birth control coverage (you do have to pay a small co-pay for prescriptions, low office visit co-pays, and a low hospitalization co-pay, same as for other health care, and right now, I’m not going to get into the philosophical question of whether abortion is “health care.”) Interestingly enough, the insurance coverage also covers infertility treatment (something else I don’t need at my age,) and organ transplantation (something I will need very soon, I have a corneal abrasion that is not healing and my eye doctor mentioned the possibility of a corneal transplant.) It doesn’t cover cosmetic surgery unless such surgery is to address an actual medical malfunction. In other words, no tummy tucks, but you can get reconstructive surgery if you had a mastectomy.

In other words, this is a pretty comprehensive policy. I imagine that many policies are as well. And my employer and I pay pretty healthy premiums for it, and have been doing so for years.

As a Catholic, is it morally questionable or objectionable for me to even own such a policy, even though these are services I am never going to use? The Church is objecting to its organizations and ministries being forced to provide these coverages, and pay for them. What about those of us who work for places where it is provided already? I admit, I haven’t done an exhaustive search for teaching on this specific issue (worker for an organization that does have this kind of insurance,) I do resent having to feed the kitty for other people’s abortions, artificial birth control, yadda, yadda, but I’m of an age where I need health care coverage in case I do develop a chronic illness, etc. Plus, all of us will have to have coverage, or pay a fine. Next year.

What’s a loyal, middle aged Catholic to do?

If this is of any help, you as an employee don’t “own” the policy in any sense. Group insurance is a contract between the insurance company and the employer, for the benefit of the third parties who are the covered “classes” or groups of employees. Cost of coverage is usually shared between the employer and employees. Most states require that certain procedures that we find morally objectionable be covered. There have been threads here that go into issues like “remote, material cooperation with evil.” I for one don’t believe participating in group insurance is one of them. It is folly in this day to go without the protection of medical insurance when even a simple procedure can cost many thousands and the lack of coverage jeopardizes a family’s or individual’s health and security.

 

[odile53]

That’s kind of what I thought. Thanks for articulating it succinctly.

I’m grumbling a little about the “no co pay for birth control,” because it’s considered “preventative health care.” I still can’t see why I have to pay five bucks for my Restasis prescription (drops to treat dry eyes,) where a coworker twenty years my junior gets their prescription for BC filled without out of pocket costs at point of sale. Providing her with free reign to do whatever makes my (and everyone else’s) contribution to the kitty higher.

Guess I’m turning into a middle aged curmudgeon! Maybe I’ll write a letter to the union’s health benefit committee. If the mandate gets overturned, making people pay their own co pays might be a way to drive down the cost of premiums a little, but I’m not betting on it.

 

[markomalley]

I’ve worked for organizations that have provided employee health insurance ever since I started working (in my late teens.) I’m a woman in my fifties and had an emergency hysterectomy in my early forties. I need what is termed “reproductive services” coverage about as much as I need an antique victrola, or a pig on roller skates.

With the HHS mandate in the news, while I was going through my files (income tax season is on us,) I found and read my health insurance policy. Yep, there it was: full maternity coverage, including the offshoot abortion and birth control coverage (you do have to pay a small co-pay for prescriptions, low office visit co-pays, and a low hospitalization co-pay, same as for other health care, and right now, I’m not going to get into the philosophical question of whether abortion is “health care.”) Interestingly enough, the insurance coverage also covers infertility treatment (something else I don’t need at my age,) and organ transplantation (something I will need very soon, I have a corneal abrasion that is not healing and my eye doctor mentioned the possibility of a corneal transplant.) It doesn’t cover cosmetic surgery unless such surgery is to address an actual medical malfunction. In other words, no tummy tucks, but you can get reconstructive surgery if you had a mastectomy.

In other words, this is a pretty comprehensive policy. I imagine that many policies are as well. And my employer and I pay pretty healthy premiums for it, and have been doing so for years.

As a Catholic, is it morally questionable or objectionable for me to even own such a policy, even though these are services I am never going to use? The Church is objecting to its organizations and ministries being forced to provide these coverages, and pay for them. What about those of us who work for places where it is provided already? I admit, I haven’t done an exhaustive search for teaching on this specific issue (worker for an organization that does have this kind of insurance,) I do resent having to feed the kitty for other people’s abortions, artificial birth control, yadda, yadda, but I’m of an age where I need health care coverage in case I do develop a chronic illness, etc. Plus, all of us will have to have coverage, or pay a fine. Next year.

What’s a loyal, middle aged Catholic to do?

At most, your portion of the premiums that go to services opposed to the teachings of the Church would be classed as remote mediate material cooperation with evil. While some of your premium dollars go to providing abortions and artificial contraception, it’s not like you have a choice in the matter (unless there is a separate rider for the coverage which you could cancel). Moral theology does not attribute fault for remote material cooperation.

If you were a policy-maker in the insurance company (who has a strong voice in determining what is and is not covered), then your cooperation would be considered more formal. You could opt to not provide the coverage and, by providing the coverage, you are formally cooperating with evil by facilitating a physician prescribing the drugs to the individual. If you were a pharmacist filling the prescription, likewise, your cooperation would be more formal. If you were a principal in the company and the company was large enough to dictate to the insurance provider specifically what to cover and what not to cover, you would likewise be formally cooperating with evil.

But as an employee faced with the option to take the insurance or not take the insurance, your cooperation is extremely remote…at most.

BTW, on a practical matter, you should keep your ears open to see if, once the Health Care Exchanges are open, to see if they only offer coverage during an “open season” or if you can sign up at any time during the year. By law, they will not be allowed to exclude any pre-existing conditions. So if you have a diagnosed eye problem, you can sign up any time before your transplant and can’t be denied coverage.

Bottom line is if you can sign up at any time during the year, I would suggest that you consider waiting until shortly before you have to have some expensive procedure to do a contract with one of the providers on the exchange. After all, the fine for not having insurance is only 2% of your adjusted gross income. Chances are, the cost of the insurance would greatly exceed that amount (if you earn less than 400% of the poverty rate, the government would subsidize your premium so it would not be more than between 6 and 11 percent of AGI depending upon your income and family size…Of course, if you earn more than that amount, you’re on your own and get to pay the whole premium yourself).

Seriously, unless you are on some really expensive medication or are having really expensive procedures done, under Obamacare, it would likely be in your financial interest to self-insure until such time as you have to have a really expensive procedure (like a cornea transplant) done…and then drop the coverage as soon as you can after you’ve recovered from the procedure.

Just something to consider as 2014 gets closer and closer.

 

[odile53]

Mark, that’s an interesting strategy. I did check with HR, and there is only a six week option transfer period for the four different insurance options we have at work. The window closed December 15th, and won’t open again until November 1. I’ll keep my eyes open for other options once the exchanges are formed. Unfortunately, I’ll probably need to get this procedure done before then, the vision distortion under wrong lighting conditions is really annoying and could even be dangerous in terms of driving, etc.