Individual Health Insurance / COBRA?

grint

New Member
5
Why is COBRA considered better than individual health insurance plans? When I did some research,for almost the same kind of coverage but cheaper premiums, I could find individual health insurance plans.But I keep hearing that given an option, going for COBRA is the wiser decision. I don't understand what the catch could be in these individual plans. Any insight?
 
Last edited:
COBRA is not always the more expensive, or better, or worse option. It depends.

If you have a pre-ex condition, then COBRA might be a better option.

If you are above age 50, the COBRA might be more affordable.
 
Why is COBRA considered better than individual health insurance plans? When I did some research,for almost the same kind of coverage but cheaper premiums, I could find individual health insurance plans.But I keep hearing that given an option, going for COBRA is the wiser decision. I don't understand what the catch could be in these individual plans. Any insight?



BUT....you can only keep cobra for 18 mo.......what if you are diagnosed with cancer in your 4th mo of cobra......no one can take a individual policy if you pay the prem.....
 
You'd have to compare individual plans with benefit levels commensurate to the group plan to do apples-to-apples. Most group plans, esp. large group plans, have little or no deductible, low out-of-pocket and comprehensive preventative care. Not to mention Rx. Most larger group plans will cover things like fertility treatments, not so with individual plans.

Another issue is non-severe mental health. Most group plans pay for this with little or no limitation whereas at least in CA, individual plans basically pay nothing. Same with Chiro, Accupuncture and so on.

I think if you really research it, you will find that a comparable individual plan (if one were available) would run in the same premium range as COBRA group premium rates.

18 months federal, CA has additional 18 months state Cal-COBRA for 36 total in most cases. If they get sick, we have HIPAA available after the continuation as I believe all states are required to provide in some form or other.
 
Yes...and some state's HIPAA program, like Florida, is using private insurance companies and requiring them to offer HIPPA plans......at a 300% increase.
 
HIPPA plans......at a 300% increase.


there is no such thing as a hippa plan....but there are 1 man groups and risk pools that had to be established per state to be compliant with The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act....
 
what do you think HIPAA is.....

A law that, in part, requires each state to provide guaranteed-issue health insurance to those exhausting group coverage via continuation or other loss of said group coverage.

there is no such thing as a hippa plan....but there are 1 man groups and risk pools that had to be established per state to be compliant with The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act....

In CA, HIPAA is implemented and requires each carrier selling IFP in the state to provide two of their most popularly marketed health insurance plans under HIPAA guaranteed-issue. These plans here are separate plans, not available outside of HIPAA, and comprise unique plan numbers. Therefore they are HIPAA plans, specifically. They may mirror IFP plans, but they are not IFP plans. MRMIB here sets rates guidelines in line with MRMIP (Major Risk) however the plan servicing and profit/loss fall onto the carrier, not MRMIB. They are not group plans, as that would actually preserve HIPAA eligibility, but individual and family plans. That's why you can't change HIPAA plans in CA once you have been enrolled.

I write 40-60 HIPAA cases a month, I think I know how it works out here.

This has gone way off topic, I think the original question was to do with group versus IFP benefit and pricing levels.
 
well here in texas wes call it da risk pool......
It differs in each state, I have heard that Illinois also runs it through the state major risk pool (CHIP) and there can be a waiting list.

CA has phenominal health offerings through the state and state mandates, not inclusive of what Arnold has proposed.

Honestly, there is no reason that anyone in California should be uninsured, except by choice.
 
Back
Top