New Posts  All Forums:
 

Health Insurance - Page 2

post #21 of 51
12/30/06 at 2:29pm
Though, as I understand it, even if he got cheaper insurance, he'd still be paying the same each month as his CS paid to the mother would go up if the insurance cost decreased. He still has to pay 1000 a month, that is his obligation.
Sponsored Links
post #22 of 51
12/30/06 at 3:30pm
Either way, $1000/month for ONE kid sounds like a lot to me. I get $1000/month for two kids, and I live in an expensive area and only make about $20K/year of my own.

Either the father is very well-off, or the mother is very broke.
post #23 of 51
12/30/06 at 3:51pm
I agree with what the PP in MI said about looking into SCHIP coverage for DSD thru DH. However, I, too, am in MI, and OP is in TX. According to my cousin in TX, it's just about impossible to get SCHIP there. Sorry, mama!

This is just one more example of how !#@%&! up our current health system is. How on earth does one child use $7200 in health care per year? Assuming that she is reasonably healthy, I wonder if it would be cheaper for DH to pay for her medical expenses out of pocket, and carry a separate (presumably court ordered) high deductable, low premium catastrophic plan for DSD. Unless insurance specifics are laid out in the custody agreement or TX state law, (something I highly doubt) such a policy could be pretty bare bones. DSD is double covered by Medicaid, so she's covered no matter what, so DH really doesn't have to worry about that.

OT: Honestly, I think it is ridiculous to expect ANY parents to pay for health insurance for their children. If we have Medicare for the elderly, why should we not have something similar for the other non-working population of kids? Say it with me, people: Universal. Single Payer. Medicare for ALL! *end rant here*
post #24 of 51
12/30/06 at 3:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by boobybunny View Post
Hairstylist,

Are you really trying to say that the state, or we the people should be paying for medical coverage that your husband is court ordered to pay?


Universal coverage is the only way to go in my opinion, but then I think you would be complaining about the extra $$ she would be getting in child support.


Sometimes with your posts, all I see in them are the bitterness you have towards the woman who has a child with your husband. I feel so very sorry for this child, and yours as well. At some point you really need to put the child's best interest ahead of your own negative feelings.
Whoa. How 'bout a side helping of snark with that dish full 'o judgement?
post #25 of 51
12/30/06 at 4:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leta View Post
Whoa. How 'bout a side helping of snark with that dish full 'o judgement?

I admit I am being judgemental about hairstylist's posts, almost everything she has ever posted here about her step daughter's bio mom has been complaining about money. What I think she does not get, no matter how much myself and others try to explain to her, it that is not the bio mom saying how much child support should be, it is the state. And the state of Texas decided that 400 a month plus dad pay for insurance (very standard btw) is what is fair for this baby.
post #26 of 51
12/30/06 at 5:07pm
Oh, agreed. The state makes the call, for sure.
post #27 of 51
12/30/06 at 9:00pm
I think this issue keeps coming up over and over again with the complaints over biomom not pulling her weight. The issue is irrelevant, it seems, the bottom line is that her DH pays too much despite state guidelines. I can sense her enormous frustration and it must be very hard to deal with on a daily basis. I know it is easy for me and other to say, but it is best to just accept the fact that this is how it is and stop wasting energy. Good luck, mama!!!
post #28 of 51
12/31/06 at 12:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leta View Post
Whoa. How 'bout a side helping of snark with that dish full 'o judgement?
You know, when you (or me, or anyone else) points out judgement, you're being judgemental, too.

The old saying...when you point a finger, three point back at you...
post #29 of 51
12/31/06 at 9:49pm
Thread Starter 
The BM and I get along great now. There is no bitterness towards anyone or anything. She even told me the other night when I was at her house visiting her DD, that she did not see why he got Medical Insurance on the DD when she is on Medicaid. She said that Medicaid pays for EVERYTHING and not only would he be saving himself money but would also be saving her money by taking the child off of Insurance. She said that she knows the papers say he is supposed to pay insurance but they do not have to go DIRECTLY by the papers.

They have a conference in February to have the whole Child Support Papers to be looked over and for either of them to request changes. Everything is going good between all of us for now and I hope it continues to stay that way.

I know some of my posts may seem like I am gripping about money but I just need some advice and suggestions, not rude comments.
post #30 of 51
1/1/07 at 2:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hairstylist View Post
The BM and I get along great now. There is no bitterness towards anyone or anything. She even told me the other night when I was at her house visiting her DD, that she did not see why he got Medical Insurance on the DD when she is on Medicaid. She said that Medicaid pays for EVERYTHING and not only would he be saving himself money but would also be saving her money by taking the child off of Insurance. She said that she knows the papers say he is supposed to pay insurance but they do not have to go DIRECTLY by the papers.

They have a conference in February to have the whole Child Support Papers to be looked over and for either of them to request changes. Everything is going good between all of us for now and I hope it continues to stay that way.

I know some of my posts may seem like I am gripping about money but I just need some advice and suggestions, not rude comments.

Please be careful with this. Be sure that Medicaid knows that the child has insurance. In general, the state will not pay if there is a parent who can afford to do so. It is fraud. Dss's biomom applied for some benefits in his name and dh was billed by the state, and she was investigated for welfare fraud. Dss's mom has state insurance and we'd love him to have free insurance, but he doesn't qualify based on our income.

Do your papers say 444 a month plus insurance, or 1044 a month including insurance (which is what I believe is most common)?

If it is 444 a month plus insurance, why not look for cheaper insurance?
post #31 of 51
1/1/07 at 1:39pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flor View Post
Please be careful with this. Be sure that Medicaid knows that the child has insurance. In general, the state will not pay if there is a parent who can afford to do so. It is fraud. Dss's biomom applied for some benefits in his name and dh was billed by the state, and she was investigated for welfare fraud. Dss's mom has state insurance and we'd love him to have free insurance, but he doesn't qualify based on our income.

Do your papers say 444 a month plus insurance, or 1044 a month including insurance (which is what I believe is most common)?

If it is 444 a month plus insurance, why not look for cheaper insurance?

It is 444 without insurance but he was having to pay 25 a month because he had not gotten insurance on the child yet. So child support should only be 419. But he also has to pay 25 a month for back child support when the DD was first born. He will probably keep insurance just to save his self in the long run. Insurance is 600 all together but only 300 and some odd dollars for the children to be on it. (Forgot to put that in an earlier post)
post #32 of 51
1/1/07 at 2:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hairstylist View Post
It is 444 without insurance but he was having to pay 25 a month because he had not gotten insurance on the child yet. So child support should only be 419. But he also has to pay 25 a month for back child support when the DD was first born. He will probably keep insurance just to save his self in the long run. Insurance is 600 all together but only 300 and some odd dollars for the children to be on it. (Forgot to put that in an earlier post)
That sounds pretty reasonable, then. I thought you meant it was 600 just for her. I thought I had the most expensive insurance in the world and it is 300 per person.
post #33 of 51
1/1/07 at 3:22pm
It is $394 a month for support, $25 a month for arrears, $25 a month to go to the state for medicaid. It is NOT required to have insurance in the support agreement. Insurance was never required or ordered. Insurance was chosen just to be on the safe side. Insurance is $634 a month which includes momma, daddy, 2 kids for medical,dental and life on all but momma. It's roughly $350 for the children alone, whether it is one child or 5 kids.
What hairstylist seems to be asking is that support papers say each parent is 50/50 responsible for any medical bills, shouldn't she also be responsible for 50% of insurance? Why not? The father can't afford it any more than biomom can. Whereas biomom refuses to work anyway, would rather live with mommy,medicaid,wic,child support,foodstamps,federal grants.

As far as billing medicaid first, that's what was told by several doctors to myself. That it is against the law for them to not bill medicaid. Biomom has insurance card, so if she refuses to use it and uses medicaid, are you saying it is daddy's fault and to be careful?
post #34 of 51
1/1/07 at 3:34pm
Daddy has a job, right? And the mom doesn't so how can dad not afford it as much as mom can't afford it? It is expensive, sure. Have you looked for insurance other than what is available through your work? I called up Blue Cross directly and got a much cheaper plan than available through my work (less than 1/2 the price). Can the child be on Medicaid with Medicaid having the full knowledge of th father's income? Will they let the child be on Medicaid just because it is expensive to have private insurance?

Your support order is strange. Generally they require the non-custodial parent to carry insurance on the child (which I agree is strange since no one requires kids whose parents are married to have insurance on their children). They then say that all expenses not covered by insurance are split 50/50. Your support order doesn't say this? Did you create your own support order? In general, the state doesn't want to pay where there is a parent who should.
post #35 of 51
1/1/07 at 5:18pm
I'm confused.

Confuseddaddy is kinda sounding like he's an involved party (hairstylists dh?)

If $350 is charged for the kids, regardless of 1 or 2... well, wouldn't you be paying $350 a month for maddox, and dsd essentially be free?

So... why are you complaining? Would you not have insurance on your own kid?
post #36 of 51
1/1/07 at 7:01pm
Usually, how HMO thru employer health coverage works is this:

Single: $X amount
Employee plus spouse: $Y amount (usually X plus 25-50%)
Family: $Z amount (usually roughly double of X)

So for family coverage, if you want to get the "most bang for your buck", you are better off having a bunch of kids, because you'll pay the same for 11 kids as you will for one.

Many (most?) people do not understand this. I, myself, am unsure why it works like this. So if hairstylist and her dh have a child together, they are paying the family rate. It makes sense to sign up DSD, too, because chances are they aren't paying any more.

Having said that, it seems like hairstylist's DH shouldn't have to pay any out of pocket costs regarding his daughter's health care if she is insured thru him and has Medicaid. If there are any left over, uncovered health expenses, it seems to me only fair that the parents split them 50-50. (Not that I'm a family court judge or anything. : )

And yes, I agree wholeheartedly with the pp who said that it's silly to mandate in a custody agreement that a parent provide their child with health insurance, since this is not done when parents are married/living together. Seems like discrimination to me.

Thank God DH has good relationship with DSS's mom, and we've never gone to court.
post #37 of 51
1/1/07 at 8:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leta View Post

And yes, I agree wholeheartedly with the pp who said that it's silly to mandate in a custody agreement that a parent provide their child with health insurance, since this is not done when parents are married/living together. Seems like discrimination to me.
mandated coverage is often so the state does not get stuck paying for kiddos whose NCP leaves and does nothing. It is a way for the government to get back some of the money they put in to raising the children.

There are times, when I wish we could drop my former spouse's insurance. It sucks, even though he is in local government... his inurance is SOOO slow to pay, we often have to pay and get reimbursed if we do not want things showing up on our credit. BUT the divorce says I have to use his first. And usually in the case of private insurance, who ever has the first birthday of the year is the primary coverage. My former spouses birthday is in May, my husbands is in August, mine is in Sept. So by private insurance rules.. My former spouses is primary, my husband's secondary and mine is third.

Secondary and Third (or whatever number following) will NOT pay a dime until the primary has paid.
post #38 of 51
1/2/07 at 1:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by boobybunny View Post
mandated coverage is often so the state does not get stuck paying for kiddos whose NCP leaves and does nothing. It is a way for the government to get back some of the money they put in to raising the children.

Oh, I understand the thinking behind mandating a non-custodial parent to provide health insurance. I just disagree with it. I think we should have single payer health care, period.
post #39 of 51
1/2/07 at 12:01pm
we've had health insurance issues in the past with ex as well. It wasn't really address in the decree, basically each parent pays 50%. I'm thinking the dc has medicaid at the time, but one would have thought the lawyer could have thought ahead:
ex was getting family coverage for her other 2 dc from her husband's military insurance so adding the 2 children in question wouldn't have cost extra, but was trying to get my Dh to pay 50% of the total bill, not 50% after insurance. ex already had a family plan, they're a family of 6, 2dc are Dh's. Dh's previous work offered such an awful plan that our dd and I went out and got independent insurance.
To stop ex from trying to get us to pay 50% of the bill before insurance, we added the 2dsd when Dh got a job with better insurance. ex hasn't said a thing about insurance since then, but she never uses ours. I can't blame her. As a family of 3 that actually use the insurance, we never met our deductible.
post #40 of 51
1/2/07 at 5:00pm
yeah, we've had issues also.

SD#5 has been living with her maternal gradmother for about 4 years.
DH is providing the health insurnace. For the first couple years of this, DH had the main job (I worked part time) and so he had the insurance through his job. Then he was laid off and IMMDIENTLY grandma started griping about doing without (excuse me, but all the other kids are doing with less also now, why should any of the kids get treated different!) so I (YES, ME) went back to work full time. I am the one who has the insurance through my job now. Out of the kindness of my heart, I put her on my insurnace. I didn't have to. I did it because I don't think she should do without if the other kids got it. It's only fair. There are now 4 kids on this policy.

Do you think grandma is satisfied with that? HELL NO!! SHE COULDN'T BRING SD TO THE CLINIC *SHE* WANTED TO! EXCUSE ME! All the other kids on this policy have had to change clinics/doctors 3 times in the last five years because of all the insurance changes. Your lucky I was able to get her on my insurance!! (I had to fib to my HR a little) So then she took SD out of network and tried to bill us for the entire thing. Luckily the judge saw throught that one and ruled on our favor. So come this past Oct, she petitioned to have DH and biomom sign over complete custody to her so she could get SD on her insurance (amongst other reasons). Fine, if that's the way you want it. Well, at that same time, I found out my work was switching insurance companys and we would be going back the one DH had before he was laid off. Wasn't good enough for her. So I said fine, I am going to do all the annual paper work within the next couple weeks and I will drop SD from my policy effective for Dec 31, 2006. It's only a couple of more months. Certainly you can live with it until then. Appretnly not, since she started calling MY HR dept and harrassing them about dropping SD. Luckily my Hr dept is really good and straight out told her she should not be calling there and they can't say anything to her or take her orders.