Make Pregnancy Expensive Again: A Woman’s Guide to the New Health Bill
(Bloomberg) -- Prior to the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, women who sought to purchase health insurance regularly confronted some harsh market conditions. Insurance companies in the era before Obamacare often wouldn't underwrite pregnant women or would issue policies that excluded care during pregnancy. Having delivered a child via cesarean section, as more than 1 million women do every year in the U.S., also pushed women into a higher-cost category, or disqualified them altogether. Post-partum depression was considered a pre-existing condition. So was infertility, a history of abnormal pap smears, and in certain states, even sexual assault or domestic violence.
By guaranteeing maternity care and making coverage available for people with pre-existing conditions, Obamacare largely did away with the markup on women's health insurance. Critics groused that this shifted the burden unfairly to men and women who didn't plan to have children; in March, for instance, Illinois Representative John Shimkus, a Republican, said one of his primary objections to Obamacare was "men having to purchase prenatal care."
This could all change if the American Health Care Act passed by the House of Representatives on Thursday becomes law. The legislation gives states the freedom to make their own rules for insurers in a way that would restore their ability to raise prices for women who expect maternity coverage, or deny such coverage altogether.Â
The U.S. Senate has yet to take up the bill, and recent reports suggest senators might abandon the House legislation and start from scratch. But it's still necessary to understand the potential consequences of the legislation passed by the House. Alina Salganicoff, director of women's health policy at the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan research foundation, suggests reviewing what states allowed insurers to do prior to 2011. “We can't predict what the states will do,” she said of uncertainties facing the House bill. “The best we can do is look back at how it used to be and extrapolate from that.”
So let's do that.
Prior to Obamacare, insurance companies could—and did—charge more for pre-existing conditions. There were no requirements for insurers selling policies to individuals to cover what Obamacare would dub "the 10 essential services," which includes maternity care. All employer-provided health plans had been required by a 1978 law to cover maternity care, but this didn't apply to individual policies. A year before the passage of Obamacare, a National Women's Law Center survey found that only 13 percent of individual insurance plans available to a 30-year-old woman provided any kind of maternity coverage.Â
The problem with allowing people to opt-out of maternity coverage is that people who don't plan to get pregnant will opt for cheaper coverage, leaving only the pregnant or soon-to-be-pregnant women in the insurance pool. That's what happened prior to Obamacare, said Lydia Mitts, associate director of affordability initiatives at consumer health-care advocacy group Families USA. "When maternity coverage was electable, it was only purchased by women who were expecting. It was wholly unaffordable for both women and insurance companies," she said. "That's why it was so rare for maternity coverage to be sold in the past."
And that's why, Mitts said, in states that apply for waivers envisioned under the AHCA, maternity coverage is likely to be one of the first essential benefits discarded in plans offered to individuals.
There are alternatives to employer-provided insurance and coverage purchased on the individual market. Many women have health insurance through Medicaid, a program that expanded under Obamacare. Maternity care is covered by Medicaid, and about half the births in the U.S. are paid for by Medicaid, according to an estimate from the George Washington University School of Public Health.Â
But the AHCA would limit how much Medicaid will reimburse states, which in turn "will force states to make trade-offs,” said Salganicoff. “There's no specific determination of what states need to cover. Pregnant women may not be affected by the cap; there are plenty of related services—lactation consultants, parenting classes, breast pumps—that could be scaled back.”Â
The AHCA also prevents Medicaid from reimbursing Planned Parenthood for medical services for one year, which in light of the threat to maternity coverage could be a double-whammy for women. Planned Parenthood sees 2.5 million patients every year. Most are women, and almost half are covered by Medicaid.Â
To contact the author of this story: Claire Suddath in New York at csuddath@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Janet Paskin at jpaskin@bloomberg.net.
-
Why Amazon And Flipkart Are Struggling To Beat Meesho In India's Smaller Cities
With 274 million users and lowest-cost logistics, Meesho is defending its value commerce crown against giants like Amazon and Flipkart.
-
High US Salaries, No Green Card Certainty: The Financial Calculation Facing Indian H-1B Families
The suspension of PERM processing at eight technology employers does not cancel existing H-1B visas. What it does is force a question many Indian families have been avoiding: is the US salary worth tying your career and family plans to one employer?
-
Swiggy vs Eternal: Food Delivery's Two Rivals Are No Longer In The Same Race
Eternal is building a private AI assistant, dark.ai. Swiggy is still working out how to make Instamart pay, with an operating loss of Rs 895 crore in the July-September quarter while Blinkit stayed profitable.
-
Where You Live Shapes How You Get To Work | The Reason Why
Two-wheelers are the most popular way to get to work in India, accounting for nearly 43% of workplace commutes.
-
Unhedged Position: Can India See An Indonesia-Style Time Correction?
The Nifty is trading below levels it first clocked in 2024. Is there, then, as I have suggested in the headline, potential that the current time correction drags on painfully for the next three-five, even ten years?
-
Navigating Friction And Energy Realities: An Analysis Of Marco Rubio's October Visit To India
Occurring at a critical juncture marked by stalled trade negotiations and escalating geopolitical pressures over global energy supplies, the visit offers a profound window into modern US-India relations.
-
India Exports Capital. Why Not Export Trusteeship?
The big question, then, is whether India can build an institution that global borrowers, investors, banks, and lawyers can trust, even without an Indian connection.
-
France's Economy & Politics Are In Crisis | The Reason Why
Let's look at how the French economy and politics evolved under Nicolas Sarkozy, Franois Hollande and Emmanuel Macron.
-
You May Inherit The Business. You Must Earn Its Credibility.
Succession tests the founder's ability to share authority as much as it tests the next generation's readiness to assume it.
-
Signing Deals Is One Thing; Making Them Work Is Another | The Week In Whys
Sometimes, things don't turn out as planned. Indian companies have lost some bids to rivals, some projects won't produce until 2030.