Baby "too fat" to be insured-EBF

[Youngfrankenstein]

I had to see it to believe it. Tell me I'm missing something:

http://www.huliq.com/3257/87544/baby...urance-too-fat

[Bea]

Originally Posted by Youngfrankenstein

I had to see it to believe it. Tell me I'm missing something:

Nope, you're not missing anything. The insurance company has clearly suffered some type of corporate brain damage.

My son was 21lbs at the same age, thank goodness we didn't have to change insurance. They'd have prolly called CPS.

[lizziebits]

Yeah, we would have been up a creek too. My son has been was off the charts until he hit 2, now he's like 90-95.

How utterly ridiculous.

[Juvysen]

oh.my.g-d.

[tanyam926]

That is wrong on so many levels, I can't even formulate a coherant thought.

[Belle]

Wow. I'm at a loss for words.

[Juvysen]

I'm hearing from people I shared this with that the insurance company changed their mind once the story went public. Guess this is why we should all be going public with this stuff? Keep them in check? Sad.

[Youngfrankenstein]

Good point, Jenna. But someone at the onset felt "right" about this. Did it ever occur to them that the 5% at the top are normal too?

[newmum35]

Wow, incredible. It never did say how many lbs he was though? (not that it matters at 4 mos, I was just curious)

That's awful, I can't even imagine. Such ignorance.

My baby wasn't even in the 99% perentile... he was OFF the charts! (thats what they told me, if that's even possible?) He was born at 10+ lbs and for 4 or 6 months (can't remember exactly) he was off the charts, and then he dropped "onto" the charts and remained in the top % He was also EBF until 6+ months. He's nearly two now and I noticed for the last 6 months his weight has pretty much stabilized- no big gains, maybe a pound or two, nothing major as when he was younger. Definitely was never fat. He was a little over 20 lbs at 4 months (and today about 34 lbs)

[Mosaic]

I saw this on the news, and I believe he was over 18 lbs. He did get coverage and they changed their policy to cover "All healthy infants, regardless of weight."

[sarahr]

Crazy. Breastfeeding or not, it's crazy that health insurance companies can refuse to insure a baby (or anyone, for that matter) because of their weight. In case we needed another reminder of why health insurance reform is needed.

[Belle]

Originally Posted by sarahr

Crazy. Breastfeeding or not, it's crazy that health insurance companies can refuse to insure a baby (or anyone, for that matter) because of their weight. In case we needed another reminder of why health insurance reform is needed.

[proudmomof4]

Just the kind of support a bf family needs, huh?

[Dabble]

I saw this story posted on Facebook and was shocked and disturbed too. I've very glad to learn that the insurance company change their policy, and too bad they only did it because they were under pressure in the public eye.

It seems these days you're screwed unless your baby fits perfectly into the growth charts - too small and your doctor says failure-to-thrive and threatens you, too big and they won't insure him. I don't think this is what these growth charts were ever meant to do!

When are people going to get the message that weight does not equal health, and that size as an infant does not determine size as an adult?

[isabchi]

Just crazy!!..... Just an excuse to denied a service!!... Breastfeeding or not, it's not a healthy issue. The baby is healthy, period!

[vbactivist]

Originally Posted by Chimpmandee

I saw this story posted on Facebook and was shocked and disturbed too. I've very glad to learn that the insurance company change their policy, and too bad they only did it because they were under pressure in the public eye.

It seems these days you're screwed unless your baby fits perfectly into the growth charts - too small and your doctor says failure-to-thrive and threatens you, too big and they won't insure him. I don't think this is what these growth charts were ever meant to do!

When are people going to get the message that weight does not equal health, and that size as an infant does not determine size as an adult?

OT - but overweight people have statistically more health problems. I know its not a popular opinion around here, but carrying a lot of extra weight is not good for anyone.

[thepeach80]

Yes, but weight doesn't mean fat. My 37# almost 5yo is skin and bones and muscle. He looks nothing like the child I saw the other day who was his exact height and weight, she was much heavier looking than he is. AJ has always been heavier than he looks too, throwing off his BMI.

[vbactivist]

Originally Posted by thepeach80

Yes, but weight doesn't mean fat. My 37# almost 5yo is skin and bones and muscle. He looks nothing like the child I saw the other day who was his exact height and weight, she was much heavier looking than he is. AJ has always been heavier than he looks too, throwing off his BMI.

That is true. but I am talking about adults. and also even 100 extra pounds of muscle can cause problems.

[KimberlyD0]

Crazy

but not a BF issue..

[annettemarie]

Originally Posted by KimberlyD0

Crazy

but not a BF issue..

It is absolutely a breastfeeding issue. There are different growth charts for breastfed babies, and breastfed babies have a different growth curve than their formula-fed peers.