- 218
For my benefit and hopefully to benefit some other agents on here could you please list your current state and any carriers that you know of in your state that offers child only coverage.
Child Only Health Coverage
- Thread starter TheSalesWolf
- Start date
- 14,809
MD. Only Coventry since per my rep, they don't believe they have to offer child GI until December.
- 14,809
In MD, KP is not offering child only plans:
"Is this a child-only quote? Yes No
No plans are available for an individual child under the age of 18 at this time. If you would like to discuss alternative options, please contact your broker or contact us at 1-800-914-8352."
"Is this a child-only quote? Yes No
No plans are available for an individual child under the age of 18 at this time. If you would like to discuss alternative options, please contact your broker or contact us at 1-800-914-8352."
- 8,448
Illinois - Only Blue Cross as far as I know, but this is still in the planning stages. Taking their sweet time (understandably) coming out with the plan. They did say that it would NOT be commissionable however.
There is a popular child program in Illinois called "All Kids". It's not dependent on income, but the doctors are sparse, due to the state paying them very SLOWLY.
Of course, there's always the new July 1, 2010 HHS/PCIP program as well. It's available in all states to children that meet eligibility, and isn't overly expensive.
-AC
There is a popular child program in Illinois called "All Kids". It's not dependent on income, but the doctors are sparse, due to the state paying them very SLOWLY.
Of course, there's always the new July 1, 2010 HHS/PCIP program as well. It's available in all states to children that meet eligibility, and isn't overly expensive.
-AC
- 323
MO and KS, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas City is it as far as I am aware.
- 8,448
Take a look at question #2 from the Rules and Regulations section of the Health and Human Services website:
Questions and Answers on Enrollment of Children Under 19 Under the New Policy That Prohibits Pre-Existing Condition Exclusions
Question #2: Do these interim final rules require issuers in the individual health insurance market to offer children under 19 non-grandfathered family and individual coverage at all times during the year?
A: No. To address concerns over adverse selection, issuers in the individual market may restrict enrollment of children under 19, whether in family or individual coverage, to specific open enrollment periods if allowed under State law. This is not precluded by the new regulations.
For example, an insurance company could set the start of its policy year for January 1 and allow an annual open enrollment period from December 1 to December 31 each year. A different company could allow quarterly open enrollment periods. Both situations assume that there are no State laws that set the timing and duration of open enrollment periods.
I wonder why all the carriers simply didn't just get together and set/share a specific Open Enrollment period for children? Are they concerned that only the most expensive (sickest) children would be enrolled and none of the insurers wanted any part of it?
There is growing discussion of "punishing" companies that will not enroll children as stand-alone's. Yeah right. And with each punishment, an insurer will find another loophole in this terrible legislation to take advantage of. The BCBS-IL guy said that the company would simply stop taking ALL new applicants if the mandates become too excessive.
-AC
Questions and Answers on Enrollment of Children Under 19 Under the New Policy That Prohibits Pre-Existing Condition Exclusions
Question #2: Do these interim final rules require issuers in the individual health insurance market to offer children under 19 non-grandfathered family and individual coverage at all times during the year?
A: No. To address concerns over adverse selection, issuers in the individual market may restrict enrollment of children under 19, whether in family or individual coverage, to specific open enrollment periods if allowed under State law. This is not precluded by the new regulations.
For example, an insurance company could set the start of its policy year for January 1 and allow an annual open enrollment period from December 1 to December 31 each year. A different company could allow quarterly open enrollment periods. Both situations assume that there are no State laws that set the timing and duration of open enrollment periods.
I wonder why all the carriers simply didn't just get together and set/share a specific Open Enrollment period for children? Are they concerned that only the most expensive (sickest) children would be enrolled and none of the insurers wanted any part of it?
There is growing discussion of "punishing" companies that will not enroll children as stand-alone's. Yeah right. And with each punishment, an insurer will find another loophole in this terrible legislation to take advantage of. The BCBS-IL guy said that the company would simply stop taking ALL new applicants if the mandates become too excessive.
-AC
HHS is in charge of writing regs and issuing clarification notices. They granted an open enrollment period without defining it. Carriers are using this as leverage to make their point about how flawed Obamacrap is.
If DC wants to run health insurance they need to understand their actions have consequences.
Carriers don't want the sick kids. They don't want sick adults either. Only when forced to do so (NY, MA, ME, etc) will the few that decide to play along and accept high risk individuals.
The mandates of Obamacrap are merging the underwriting rules for small group into individual health insurance rate making.
I did a pre-screen on a father & daughter yesterday. Father on Lipitor, daughter (12) on Adderall.
Aetna said +20% on dad, +100% on daughter. They also left it open for a decline . . .
Cigna said +50% or decline on dad, +50% or decline on daughter.
Haven't heard from others.
This is the first post 9/23 pre-screen I have done so times have definitely changed.
Similar threads
