Insurance wont cover?

[radioman]

You missed my point!

It is like you would decide to wait until after your car got accident and walks up to insurance guy, pay em and ask them to pay for the repair on that accidented car. IT wont happen, because it is like trying to take advantage of Insurance system.

Or the other view, you bought a car that already had an accident in the past then asking insurance company to cover the loss, it won't happen.

The idea of having insurance is to cover the cost of the loss on future unexpected, unplanned events, it was never intended to cover the past losses.

SAME THING!

Your statement is invalid. why? if your car already has dent when you bought it, and IF you have collision coverage, your dealer will already sent pics to insurance company. If it was a private sale, your insurance will be revoked if you dont take in the vehicle within 14 days for pics and they WILL find that dent. If you crash on way to insurance company for pics, too bad. deafness cannot be explained nor remedied for the most part. its a PART of your body. that is what MEDICAL INSURANCE is for covering ANY body issues.
A car CAN be repaired back to perfection if you want. Deafness cannot. This is why insurance medical coverage SHOULD help those who need assistance. Deafness is ALREADY a known medical issue, its not a fraud issue. a car can be a fraud issue.

You have tried to set a poor example. you are deaf, and you SHOULD be supporting those who need insurance coverage for HA's.

 

[Cheetah]

You missed my point!

It is like you would decide to wait until after your car got accident and walks up to insurance guy, pay em and ask them to pay for the repair on that accidented car. IT wont happen, because it is like trying to take advantage of Insurance system.

Or the other view, you bought a car that already had an accident in the past then asking insurance company to cover the loss, it won't happen.

The idea of having insurance is to cover the cost of the loss on future unexpected, unplanned events, it was never intended to cover the past losses.

SAME THING!

The reason you cannot compare Health Insurance with Car Insurance is they are completely different things. When is the last time a Car Insurance company suggested that you take your car in for a tune up? Never, but the Health Insurance wants you to take your body in for a physical. The difference is there is no price limit on your body. When the body breaks its over, it's the only one you will ever have. When your car breaks, you can get another one. It's really not fair to compare the two.

 

[Frisky Feline]

It does not make sense that ipod is way cheap than HA. If HA costs less than 500 bucks then health insurance will cover it with no problem.

i ll like to change my HA every 3 years!

 

[Beowulf]

It does not make sense that ipod is way cheap than HA. If HA costs less than 500 bucks then health insurance will cover it with no problem.

i ll like to change my HA every 3 years!

Weird, isn't it? Insurance companies are leery of paying for cheap hearing aids yet see no problem with shelling out over a hundred grand for a CI.

 

[Cheetah]

It does not make sense that ipod is way cheap than HA. If HA costs less than 500 bucks then health insurance will cover it with no problem.

i ll like to change my HA every 3 years!

I totally agree with you... HA's (and CIs) are getting more and more expensive. No way the insurance company wants to spend "their" money on them.

 

[sequoias]

Wirelessly posted (sent from a smartphone. )

in·sur·ance   /ɪnˈʃʊərəns, -ˈʃɜr-/ Show Spelled
[in-shoor-uhns, -shur-] Show IPA

–noun
1. the act, system, or business of insuring property, life, one's person, etc., against loss or harm arising in specified contingencies, as fire, accident, death, disablement, or the like, in consideration of a payment proportionate to the risk involved.
2. coverage by contract in which one party agrees to indemnify or reimburse another for loss that occurs under the terms of the contract.
3. the contract itself, set forth in a written or printed agreement or policy.
===============================
I think it is unfair to demand from insurance companies because this is no accident, you already have hearing loss. It is like, ok here is the insurance premium here and I am paying so you can pay me for my hearing aid and accessories. To Insurance company it is a pure loss to them.
I know some of you would disagree, but here is the dose of reality.
Money don't come from tree. It comes from somebody that pays for it.

Then where did they get all that money to pay for a 60,000 dollar coclear implant and how abt paying for a 2,000 dollar hearing aids, its all b.s.

 

[radioman]

Wirelessly posted (sent from a smartphone. )



Then where did they get all that money to pay for a 60,000 dollar coclear implant and how abt paying for a 2,000 dollar hearing aids, its all b.s.

I totally agree with you... HA's (and CIs) are getting more and more expensive. No way the insurance company wants to spend "their" money on them.

Weird, isn't it? Insurance companies are leery of paying for cheap hearing aids yet see no problem with shelling out over a hundred grand for a CI.

Thats is another thing- CI's is considered permanent and unable to upgrade after a certain amount of time or particular model. with technology making jumps and waves, it makes more financial sense just to cover HA's.
Case in point- a freind of mine had her CI external part destroyed and it had to be special ordered for replacement. she came to find out that the next model up is better on batteries time, but cannot use it as its not compatible. Now, how does this make sense?! She had to pay out of her pocket for replacement and it really hurts when you know there is a better model.

 

[Frisky Feline]

Thats is another thing- CI's is considered permanent and unable to upgrade after a certain amount of time or particular model. with technology making jumps and waves, it makes more financial sense just to cover HA's.
Case in point- a freind of mine had her CI external part destroyed and it had to be special ordered for replacement. she came to find out that the next model up is better on batteries time, but cannot use it as its not compatible. Now, how does this make sense?! She had to pay out of her pocket for replacement and it really hurts when you know there is a better model.

I agree. my hub lost his CI. He wore the wornout wire along with ci that he has to be more careful that our insruance does not cover for his CI because he lost it. :roll: so He is stuck with the worn out CI. that sucks! He didnt realize how it actually happened with insurance that does not cover it. He said if he knew about expenses then he would probably stick with HA in the first place. but too late now.

 

[Cheetah]

I agree. my hub lost his CI. He wore the wornout wire along with ci that he has to be more careful that our insruance does not cover for his CI because he lost it. :roll: so He is stuck with the worn out CI. that sucks! He didnt realize how it actually happened with insurance that does not cover it. He said if he knew about expenses then he would probably stick with HA in the first place. but too late now.

That's one thing they never really explain. I too wish I knew about this (I was at the very end of HAs actually helping me). but then again just one year later I no longer have any hearing left to worry about. Now I'm going back for a second CI. Insurance pays for it... nothing to lose at this point.

 

[radioman]

I agree. my hub lost his CI. He wore the wornout wire along with ci that he has to be more careful that our insruance does not cover for his CI because he lost it. :roll: so He is stuck with the worn out CI. that sucks! He didnt realize how it actually happened with insurance that does not cover it. He said if he knew about expenses then he would probably stick with HA in the first place. but too late now.

I think I'll call it bait and switch....

 

[deafdyke]

One of these days, DD -- we keep crossing paths, I know we are going to meet up and look forward to it! Hoping I'll get my ASL up to par in time.

It's tricky. To get insurance coverage, they are making a case to a legislature and public voters made up of primarily hearing people, if not all hearing people, that hearing aids are used as an accommodation for some typical physiological function that is missing, more like a prosthetic device or glasses than a nice to have technology that anyone might use to make our lives easier or better like a smartphone, macbook, or alarm clock. You don't expect them to argue that 'eh, HAs, take them or leave them' at a rally to get insurance coverage for them, do you ?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....yeah but on the other hand, god the AG Bellers who showed up just seemed so preoccupied with speech and hearing access. And they just seemed so entitled as to best of the best health care. My friend Betsy who testified, put it better " I can hear, and I can sign and I can lipread. I can't depend on those things seperately, but togehter they help me a lot" I liked that approach a lot better

 

[diehardbiker]

I understand that, and do support Deaf. My point still stands.

When you lose hearing aids, you need a specific coverage for this. Health insurance should not cover this, what should cover is either your personal, renter, homeowner insurance.

Batteries are considered maintenance, they don't just happens by unexceptionally.

This thread is about "why insurance won't cover", and my statement actually answered that question.

Im not interesting in starting war here, Im only saying how these Insurance industries viewed "Insurance Purpose".

Your statement is invalid. why? if your car already has dent when you bought it, and IF you have collision coverage, your dealer will already sent pics to insurance company. If it was a private sale, your insurance will be revoked if you dont take in the vehicle within 14 days for pics and they WILL find that dent. If you crash on way to insurance company for pics, too bad. deafness cannot be explained nor remedied for the most part. its a PART of your body. that is what MEDICAL INSURANCE is for covering ANY body issues.
A car CAN be repaired back to perfection if you want. Deafness cannot. This is why insurance medical coverage SHOULD help those who need assistance. Deafness is ALREADY a known medical issue, its not a fraud issue. a car can be a fraud issue.

You have tried to set a poor example. you are deaf, and you SHOULD be supporting those who need insurance coverage for HA's.

 

[Oddball]

It does not make sense that ipod is way cheap than HA. If HA costs less than 500 bucks then health insurance will cover it with no problem.

i ll like to change my HA every 3 years!

I agree. CI is more expensive than HAs and I still don't understand why health insurance tends to cover CI instead of HAs. That does not make sense at all. :roll:

 

[radioman]

I understand that, and do support Deaf. My point still stands.

When you lose hearing aids, you need a specific coverage for this. Health insurance should not cover this, what should cover is either your personal, renter, homeowner insurance.

Batteries are considered maintenance, they don't just happens by unexceptionally.

This thread is about "why insurance won't cover", and my statement actually answered that question.

Im not interesting in starting war here, Im only saying how these Insurance industries viewed "Insurance Purpose".

again- you are going off the point- the OP question "Insurance doesnt cover hearing aides for people over 17 and under 65" was not related to lost HA's. I agree that batteries wouldnt be covered by insurance, but since its medically related, it would be nice to get tax breaks. Look at the portable dialysis machines.. they need new batteries all the time and needs tax breaks which eliminate the need to go to hospital as often.

No matter how you slice and dice it- HA's is a medical need and needs to be covered by insurance. The benefits of having HA's covered outweighs the costs in terms of alerting of HOH of dangers, conversations, careers, etc.