Short-term health insurance policy needed

[MadMonk]

So, I've recently accepted a position with a new company and they have a 90-day waiting period before I can get health insurance. I want to get a short-term policy to cover devastating injuries/illlnesses for myself and family. Has anyone had any experience (good or bad) with this sort of thing? Any recommendations on a good place to start looking?

I haven't called anyone yet, and I thought I'd get some feedback from "the street" first.

[kevinpate]

Was there insurance from your prior position that remains available via COBRA?

[MadMonk]

Yes, that is an option but, it's rediculously expensive and I think I can find a better alternative to cover us for major problems (emergencies, etc) with a relatively high deductible. I can put the extra money I'll have in my paycheck into our savings account to cover any minor medical expenses that come up during these 90 days (plus I have some unused vacation that I'll be getting paid for when I leave my current company).

[bradzilla]

its 90 days, just roll the dice.

[blake]

its 90 days, just roll the dice.

Call Strategic Employee Benefit Services. They are one of the largest brokers in the country and they happen to have an office in the Waterford. Tell them Blake sent you. 405-840-6479. Ask for John Ritchie.

[PennyQuilts]

its 90 days, just roll the dice.

Spoken like a young, healthy man under the age of forty!

[Roadhawg]

Spoken like a young, healthy man under the age of forty!

No kidding... my dice don't roll that good any more *lol*

[Joe Daddy]

There's certainly something to be said for working toward a healthcare system in the U.S. that is not tied to employment so folks don't have to stress job changes, or remain in dead end jobs just for the health insurance.

[PennyQuilts]

People who leave a job realize just how much their employers are spending to provide the benefit. I like the idea of portability but if it isn't attached to a job as a benefit, it is going to be all the more expensive for the individual to have something that provides anything remotely close to the ones provided by an employer. I worry about young people who are used to job hopping because unless they are dilligent, they are going to be in a world of hurt when it comes time for them to retire. As a cultural observation, I really feel concern for the kids who are putting off having their kids until they are older. They don't have a pension, they are often faced with their kids' college expenses at an age where their parents were retiring and with the debt, their health insurance is going to shrink up. I am not sure what is going to happen to them.

High income people can save if they are using their head. However, lower income people living from paycheck to paycheck who aren't working in the factories with the promise of a pension (even small) - what is going to happen to them when it comes time to retire? Private employers used to provide that safety net but no more. There is not way the government will be able to afford to spend much on these people. They'll be working until they die if they don't save.

[Joe Daddy]

People who leave a job realize just how much their employers are spending to provide the benefit. I like the idea of portability but if it isn't attached to a job as a benefit, it is going to be all the more expensive for the individual to have something that provides anything remotely close to the ones provided by an employer.

It's true that you find out what the employer pays when you quit and have to pick up the premiums yourself. That's the problem our system has produced.

I disagree with the notion that a portable system would be more expensive. I've seen it done in Australia, and it works. They have a two level system called "Private Cover" and "Public Cover". My cousin has lived there since 1975, and I have friends there as well. My friends are middle class, in the $150K family income range, and my cousin makes a lot less than that, and is a "casual" employee. My friends have private cover, and my cousin has the public cover. Both are extremely satisfied with it. I spoke with dozens of Aussies while there, and they are all quite happy with it. They will readily admit it is not perfect...that system has yet to be developed anywhere on the planet. But it is the best I've ever seen, and it could be easily done here.

Insurance companies there are heavily regulated, unlike here. And every single Australian contributes, so the cost is spread out and affordable for all, at all levels. There are no Australian bankruptcies due to medical bills.

What we have here results in thousands of bankrupt families annually. It would not hurt to have a look at better systems and implement a working American version. I doubt anyone would argue that our current system does not have massive flaws that need to be fixed.

[PennyQuilts]

It's true that you find out what the employer pays when you quit and have to pick up the premiums yourself. That's the problem our system has produced.

I disagree with the notion that a portable system would be more expensive. I've seen it done in Australia, and it works. They have a two level system called "Private Cover" and "Public Cover". My cousin has lived there since 1975, and I have friends there as well. My friends are middle class, in the $150K family income range, and my cousin makes a lot less than that, and is a "casual" employee. My friends have private cover, and my cousin has the public cover. Both are extremely satisfied with it. I spoke with dozens of Aussies while there, and they are all quite happy with it. They will readily admit it is not perfect...that system has yet to be developed anywhere on the planet. But it is the best I've ever seen, and it could be easily done here.

Insurance companies there are heavily regulated, unlike here. And every single Australian contributes, so the cost is spread out and affordable for all, at all levels. There are no Australian bankruptcies due to medical bills.

What we have here results in thousands of bankrupt families annually. It would not hurt to have a look at better systems and implement a working American version. I doubt anyone would argue that our current system does not have massive flaws that need to be fixed.

Well, by shoving through Obamacare so that Obama and Pelosi could claim credit for "something," this congress/administration killed the chances of getting something like what Australia has. It also put the lid on trying to put together something less drastic that could have improved the system without gutting it.

[Joe Daddy]

Well, by shoving through Obamacare so that Obama and Pelosi could claim credit for "something," this congress/administration killed the chances of getting something like what Australia has. It also put the lid on trying to put together something less drastic that could have improved the system without gutting it.

Sad but true. Too much political infighting left the job incomplete. The insurance companies won that battle big time, although eliminating pre-existing condition exclusion was a postitive step. Other than that, we essentially have the same system we had before. We can do so much better if we just put politics aside and do what is right for the American people.

[PennyQuilts]

Sad but true. Too much political infighting left the job incomplete. The insurance companies won that battle big time, although eliminating pre-existing condition exclusion was a postitive step. Other than that, we essentially have the same system we had before. We can do so much better if we just put politics aside and do what is right for the American people.

They put ego and ambition ahead of their jobs.