Insurance Won't Cover Smartphones, When Pricey Alternatives Exist

consonant writes "The NY Times has an article on insurers refusing to cover cheaper devices such as iPhones and netbooks which may be used by the speech-impaired, and instead requires them to acquire devices that cost from 10 to 20 times as much. The reason? 'Insurance is supposed to cover medical devices, and smartphones or PCs can be used for nonmedical purposes, like playing video games or Web browsing.' From the article: 'For the millions of Americans with A.L.S., Down syndrome, autism, strokes and other speech-impairing conditions, the insurance industry's aversion to covering mainstream devices adds to the challenges they face. Advocates say using an everyday device to communicate can ease the stigma and fear of making the adjustment. At the same time, current policies mean that the government and private insurers may be spending unnecessary dollars on specialty machines.'"

Comments

It's government's fault

[commodore64_love]

This "insurance is supposed to cover medical devices" comes directly from government regulation. Even if an insurance company like Nationwide wanted to provide coverage to buy an Iphone for their hearing-disabled customer, they could not do it, else they'd be fined by the U.S. Congress.

Re:It's government's fault

[commodore64_love]

>>>I said that you are providing a positive statement without any proof

Yes well I don't have time to read the 10 million pages of health and insurance-related legislation that Congress has passed over the last 80 years. I'm sorry if that offends you, but as Representative Conyers commented, "Who has time to read the bill? It's too long and would require two lawyers to explain what it means. We don't have time for that."

Precisely. I don't have time to do that research, but I know for a fact that if an insurance company says, "We can't provide Iphones for heating-impaired persons; only medically-approved devices," it's not because they don't want to provide the cheaper option to their loyal customers (and save money for themselves). It's because their lawyers are telling them it's currently illegal to provide non-certified equipment.

Brilliant!

[celtic_hackr]

Amazingly, insurance companies rarely cover hearing aids. Actual medical devices for enabling those of us with hearing disabilities to partake in conversations. Why a smartphone is a medical device is a mystery to me. So, until the article poster can get insurance companies to cover real medical devices, he should just stop whining about his ipod not being covered! I pay out of pocket for my hearing aids, $1200-$5000 per. Don't come whining to me about your $300 PDA! You want to use a PDA and you have a communicative disease, shell out the bucks. he fact you can get actual medical devices and have them covered by insurance says to me you have no room to complain. Most companies won't pay for my REAL medical devices.

Not that they are any better than sticking a megaphone to my ear, which is mainstream and I could use, and would be cheaper. Be thankful you are covered for actual devices that are designed to work for your medical condition and come back and complain when you have a real issue! Hell, hearing aids are little amplifiers they made to stick in your ear, which only speeds the further degradation of your hearing, and thus you need to keep buying more and more powerful devices. There is surgery for some conditions and I could get an implant to actually help fix my problem, but insurance companies don't cover that $10,000 surgery. SO STOP YOUR WHINING! You don't hear me writing articles whining about my sad state.

Yet, you hear all these people complaining about the public option, and the healthcare reform, but offer no alternative. If you're not willing to be a part of the solution and come out of your little private self-interest corner and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT FOR EVERYONE, then you have no right or reason to complain!