RECENTLY ON TOL:
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
I, too am concerned about how the change in rules covering pre-existing conditions will be handled.
I am 49, and I suffered a stroke over 1-1/2 years ago. I have fully recovered (the medical term is that I 'show no neural deficit' -- although at the time the impact was profound). My doctors and specialists have determined the cause, and are completely confident that it was a one-time event, and I am at no more risk of further complications than an average man my age, and in fact, because of my general health and other factors, I probably am at LESS risk of future similar related problems.
I am now unemployed, and am paying (subsidized) COBRA (and have never had a lapse in coverage in my life). I would LIKE to start a company (as an entrepreneur), but have been assured by my doctors that 'til now I would not be able to get private insurance, owing to my situation and medical history.
In effect, this situation is forcing me to find employment at a company that offers reasonable medical coverage, as opposed to starting a new small business. It is my understanding that it is generally acknowledged that small business growth is the engine that first fuels an economic recovery.
However, I believe there is no such thing as a free lunch -- Are we to believe that this change will come without other adverse impact or otherwise shifted expenses?
Thank You for referring to the bill that was passed as "Health Insurance reform" and not "Health Care reform" -- there is MUCH more to be done to reform Health Care, and with so much money at stake, we can be sure that the existing interests will be fighting mightily to make sure they (continue?) to get what they *each* see as 'their fair shares' of the considerable pie.
posted 3 years, 1 month ago
view in context