U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-24-2011, 08:19 AM
 
4,267 posts, read 5,143,379 times
Reputation: 3579

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonChick View Post
Dorthy wrote:


Which is off topic since insurance premiums aren't the government, but I'll put it back on topic...
My quote was in response to something that someone said that got deleted for discussing the poster, not the topic.

Quote:
No one has the right to impose their disease-carrying child on the community. I don't agree that insurance premiums should go up, however I do feel that insurance companies should cover vaccinations 100%, no deductible, as preventative health care. I feel that they should -also- refuse to cover anyone whose parent -refused- to vaccinate them, if that child gets the sickness that the vaccine is supposed to cover. I also feel that insurance companies should go after the parent of the child whose unvaccinated illness causes other people to get sick.
So are you saying that if a child gets the flu (parent refused the flu shot) and the child exposes someone else to the flu the child should be dropped from health insurance and be forced to pay any medical bills of the person that they gave the flu to? Would they lose coverage forever for something like that? What if an unvaccinated adult passes the flu onto someone? What if a vaccinated child passes the flu on? What if a child who just got the live virus vaccine (flu mist) passes the flu to someone post vax? Also, how can you prove who gave who the flu? This seems overly complicated.

I posted this question earlier before things went OT. Do we charge people higher premiums for eating a steady diet of junk food? Do we charge higher premiums for people who choose to formula feed rather then breastfeed? Both of those things have been shown to increase public health costs just like smoking. Where does it end?

 
Old 01-24-2011, 08:34 AM
 
Location: In a house
13,258 posts, read 34,646,355 times
Reputation: 20198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorthy View Post
My quote was in response to something that someone said that got deleted for discussing the poster, not the topic.

So are you saying that if a child gets the flu (parent refused the flu shot) and the child exposes someone else to the flu the child should be dropped from health insurance and be forced to pay any medical bills of the person that they gave the flu to? Would they lose coverage forever for something like that? What if an unvaccinated adult passes the flu onto someone? What if a vaccinated child passes the flu on? What if a child who just got the live virus vaccine (flu mist) passes the flu to someone post vax? Also, how can you prove who gave who the flu? This seems overly complicated.

I posted this question earlier before things went OT. Do we charge people higher premiums for eating a steady diet of junk food? Do we charge higher premiums for people who choose to formula feed rather then breastfeed? Both of those things have been shown to increase public health costs just like smoking. Where does it end?
No, I'm saying the sickness that COULD have been prevented by a vaccine, that a parent chose not to give his child, should not be covered by insurance. Just like car insurance (which I did mention) - if I get in an accident and I wasn't wearing a seatbelt, the insurance company shouldn't have to cover the cost of my whiplash. I *chose* not to wear the seatbelt, I *chose* to accept responsibility for the risk of whiplash if I got into an accident.

You CHOOSE to accept the responsibility of your child getting pertussis, if you choose not to vaccinate him against it. Accept the responsibilities of the risks you choose to take, and don't dump it on the doorstep of the insurance company.
 
Old 01-24-2011, 08:46 AM
 
4,267 posts, read 5,143,379 times
Reputation: 3579
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonChick View Post
No, I'm saying the sickness that COULD have been prevented by a vaccine, that a parent chose not to give his child, should not be covered by insurance. Just like car insurance (which I did mention) - if I get in an accident and I wasn't wearing a seatbelt, the insurance company shouldn't have to cover the cost of my whiplash. I *chose* not to wear the seatbelt, I *chose* to accept responsibility for the risk of whiplash if I got into an accident.

You CHOOSE to accept the responsibility of your child getting pertussis, if you choose not to vaccinate him against it. Accept the responsibilities of the risks you choose to take, and don't dump it on the doorstep of the insurance company.
I see. You keep saying "parent and child" but really this would apply to anyone who refuses a vaccine. I know plenty of adults who refuse flu vaccines and plenty more who don't get their DTP boosters. I'm assuming that they would be held accountable as well under this proposal?
 
Old 01-24-2011, 08:49 AM
 
Location: In a house
13,258 posts, read 34,646,355 times
Reputation: 20198
I haven't given it much thought because it isn't relative to the topic, which is in the Parenting category and not the health and wellness category. Perhaps you might want to open a thread there, to discuss how people feel about adults choosing whether or not to vaccinate themselves, and the insurance implications.
 
Old 01-24-2011, 08:59 AM
 
4,267 posts, read 5,143,379 times
Reputation: 3579
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonChick View Post
I haven't given it much thought because it isn't relative to the topic, which is in the Parenting category and not the health and wellness category. Perhaps you might want to open a thread there, to discuss how people feel about adults choosing whether or not to vaccinate themselves, and the insurance implications.
It is relevant to the topic. Vaccinations are not just for children. Un or under-vaccinated adults spread VPD to others (sometimes even small babies who are too young to be vaccinated). I would think that a parent who's baby died from pertussis that they contracted from an unvaccinated adult would agree that it's relevant.
 
Old 01-24-2011, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Geneva, IL
12,976 posts, read 11,796,877 times
Reputation: 14677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorthy View Post
I posted this question earlier before things went OT. Do we charge people higher premiums for eating a steady diet of junk food? Do we charge higher premiums for people who choose to formula feed rather then breastfeed? Both of those things have been shown to increase public health costs just like smoking. Where does it end?
Many insurance companies already do charge higher premiums for certain lifestyles, or offer discounts for improved health, depends on the way you look at it. The big companies offer reduced rates if you stop smoking, lose weight, reduce your cholesterol, control diabetes, etc. This should be another incentive IMO.
 
Old 01-24-2011, 09:25 AM
 
4,267 posts, read 5,143,379 times
Reputation: 3579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zimbochick View Post
Many insurance companies already do charge higher premiums for certain lifestyles, or offer discounts for improved health, depends on the way you look at it. The big companies offer reduced rates if you stop smoking, lose weight, reduce your cholesterol, control diabetes, etc. This should be another incentive IMO.
Yes but there are still more things out there that they could be charging higher premiums for and there are still other things out there that they could be offering incentives for. My concern is that if we charge people higher premiums for not vaccinating or even refusing a single vaccine, we could also find ourselves being charged more for things like not breastfeeding, or eating fast food, etc. My concern is that it gives too much power and control to the insurance companies and will price many more people out of being able to afford health insurance. It seems like a very slippery slope.
 
Old 01-24-2011, 09:36 AM
 
Location: Geneva, IL
12,976 posts, read 11,796,877 times
Reputation: 14677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorthy View Post
Yes but there are still more things out there that they could be charging higher premiums for and there are still other things out there that they could be offering incentives for. My concern is that if we charge people higher premiums for not vaccinating or even refusing a single vaccine, we could also find ourselves being charged more for things like not breastfeeding, or eating fast food, etc. My concern is that it gives too much power and control to the insurance companies and will price many more people out of being able to afford health insurance. It seems like a very slippery slope.
It is a slippery slope, but there are certain indisputable facts, breastfeeding is healthier for the baby, too much fast food is bad for you, exercise is good, vaccines protect you, etc., and there are repurcussions for choosing unhealthy lifestyles. Bottle-feed your baby, and choose not to vaccinate, then that baby is more than likely going to end up with more doctor visits. There are decades worth or research on preventive health care, and healthy lifestyle choices. If the insurance companies choose to use those to adjust premiums, or use them as incentives for people to get healthier, I have no problem with that.
 
Old 01-24-2011, 09:39 AM
 
Location: In a house
13,258 posts, read 34,646,355 times
Reputation: 20198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zimbochick View Post
Many insurance companies already do charge higher premiums for certain lifestyles, or offer discounts for improved health, depends on the way you look at it. The big companies offer reduced rates if you stop smoking, lose weight, reduce your cholesterol, control diabetes, etc. This should be another incentive IMO.
Totally agreed and to extend that, many insurance companies offer discounts for special programs, dollars or percentages off membership prices for health clubs, free aerobics classes, free courses in health management - there was an HMO I was in that gave a gift card if I turned in receipts for the local organic food market.
 
Old 01-24-2011, 09:50 AM
 
Location: THE USA
3,254 posts, read 5,260,543 times
Reputation: 1982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorthy View Post
It is relevant to the topic. Vaccinations are not just for children. Un or under-vaccinated adults spread VPD to others (sometimes even small babies who are too young to be vaccinated). I would think that a parent who's baby died from pertussis that they contracted from an unvaccinated adult would agree that it's relevant.
The article is only about childhood diseases. Not a yearly ever changing vaccine that may not even be the correct strain. Read the article and stay on topic. It is about parents ridiculous fear of autism affecting their decision to not get their kid the polio/mmr etc... Vaccines. I would think you can't charge Adults because If it wore off you would not know unless you had it checked. How do you know it was offered when you were a child? Too many variables.

Last edited by Taboo2; 01-24-2011 at 10:02 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top