Would you get married (or divorced) for health insurance?

I live in a city that permits Domestic Partnerships, but that doesn't matter.  Even if I were to marry my full-time-working, live-in boyfriend who has group health insurance, I wouldn't qualify for his plan.  His plan only covers him. It won't cover any children he may have.  He is in a social work and health-related field.  His many female co-workers with children depend on California to insure their children.

In fact, assuming we keep our current jobs, he would be taking a risk marrying me!  Should anything happen, the financial responsibilty would fall on both of us.  I am considering postponing our marriage for that very fact.  If I have to go bankrupt, he shouldn't have to, as well.  If I lose my business and pay medical bills until I run out of money, at least I would then qualify for state healthcare. Iwould not want to have to exhaust his savings, too.

Background:
I'm self-employed, uninsured and have pre-existing conditions (ADHD & history of anxiety and mild
depression). My business is growing quickly, but not
fast enough to cover "high risk" premiums. I'm 32.  I have school loans & fortunately, no mortgage.  I practice vinyasa
yoga 4-5 times a week. I don't smoke. I don't drink. I don't do drugs.
I'm at normal weight and haven't had red meat or pork in 20 years!

 Great Point, but I have to agree with Denise I wouldn't get married again been there done that.

Look for me at:
( http://lose-pounds.org/ )Yeast Infection Remedies ( http://yeastinfectionremedies.org ) or check me out
at Lose Ten Pounds ( http://lose-pounds.org/ )

My partner and I have two small children and live like any other family -- just one without marriage. Fortunately, his employer recognizes domestic partnerships, and our family enjoys his full health coverage.

That said, in Washington State, gays and couples over 65 have been offered civil union status, which not only allows them shared health care but medical decision-making, property inheritance upon death, et al. Why not couples like us who prefer not to "legalize" our partnership? Because conservatives view offering us such an alternative as "a threat to the institution" of marriage. (Or, as we jokingly say of ourselves, "We're worse off than the gays!")

To qualify for domestic partnership benefits through his employer, we needed to prove six consecutive months of joint physical and financial ties. Why not offer this as a universal option for ALL Americans, thereby circumventing the need to marry for coverage at all?

Tracy

www.houseofclams.com ( http://www.houseofclams.com )

Excellent point.

Liz Rizzo ( http://blogher.org/blog/liz-rizzo )

I blog at Everyday Goddess ( http://everydaygoddess.typepad.com/ ).

I wouldn't do it but then again I wouldn't get married for any reason.

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

Am I the only one who thinks no?  Yet all the while thinking of Elizabeth Edwards....

I think it is great that most people have this opportunity to marry someone they love (albeit slightly earlier) and receive health insurance benefits and 401k benefits, etc. 

I would like to be able to offer this to my partner, but because I'm female and so is she, I can't do this.  

Wouldn't it be great if we lived in a  country in which everyone could have the coverage they need to get the treatments they need to be healthy? 

This situation has just presented itself into my life. I have been without health insurance for about 4 months or so. (I work but am contracted.) I didn't like it, but wasn't extremely worried. Five days ago I completely lost the vision in my right eye at the age of 32 years old. Now the doctor wants to do an MRI to check for MS. My fiance and I are planning to get married next year but may be doing a courthouse marriage earlier to add me on to his health insurance to off set the costs of the medical bills, and then have a more formal celebration at the time we had planned.

I was hesitant about this option because generally my fiance has very traditional views, but in this case, he loves me and wants me covered, and doesn't want to start our married life with a ton of debt (or more than we need to).

So, do I want to have two wedding dates? Not particularily. But will I to make my life and the burden that may have to come easier? Yes, I guess I would.

I'm glad this issue is in the limelight. A few years ago I had that
same thought about a remake of Green Card for health insurance.

And yesterday I was talking about writing a book: The Health Insurance-Driven Life.

Just as the health insurance system forces many would be entrepreneurs into
jobs, so is it likely people might stay married or marry for health
insurance. It's a sad state of affairs (or marriage).

Susie

The Life Lists Blog ( http://www.superviva.com/blog ) at SuperViva
( http://www.superviva.com )

I think there's a big difference between getting married sooner to someone you were going to marry anyway and marrying someone you wouldn't have except for health problems and their health insurance. The second situation has serious ethical implications. In a horrible health crisis, it's a call to be made, but I seriously hope I never see the day I would flat out use someone for health insurance.

Likewise, not divorcing after years of marriage for someone's treatment is different, because even if you were going to divorce, you have a relationship with that person, and you did make a commitment long ago.

It's the attachment of health insurance to jobs that really annoys me because it affects the ability of the job market to flow. Employees, theoretically, will leave bad employment... except, no, they won't because of health insurance and things like preexisting conditions. I think it's a huge problem in our economic system.

Finally, it does seem, from the comments I've read here and on my personal blog, that people think these health insurance issues are definitely getting worse for various reasons.

Liz Rizzo ( http://blogher.org/blog/liz-rizzo )

I blog at Everyday Goddess ( http://everydaygoddess.typepad.com/ ).

Used to be marriage for sharing an apartment, then marriage for a green card, and now this!

In California, in small group health insurance (2-50 employees) an employer has the option of offering domestic partner coverage, same or opposite sex. One differentiation is whether or not it has to be a registered partnership with the State. We'll see how and if this changes now that CA has enacted same sex marriage laws.

Health insurance especially for indivduals has gotten tighter and costs higher, mainly for the reasons Barb outlined above. Insurance was for hospitals, indivdiuals paid for office visits and prescriptions, and you weren't as likely to see a ton of tests run 'just in case' something was missed. I was an emergency nurse for many years before changing professions, and we saw that all the time. I would say probalby 99%+ of the neck xrays that were done on people after a car accident were unnecessary, but docs couldn't/wouldn't take the chance on missing something bizarre.

If the industry would go back to a medical practice, rather than medico-legal practice, aka defensive medicine, you would see costs drop. And then people could get married for old fashioned reasons.

Colleen King

Colleen King Insurance Agency

Northridge, CA

Blog: www.askcolleenking.com ( http://www.askcolleenking.com )

Web site: www.CKinginsurance.com ( http://www.CKinginsurance.com )

Email: Colleen@ckinginsurance.com

I'm in my late twenties and have experienced a Cancer diagnosis, ensuing treatment, failed marriage, and a bunkruptcy because of the incredible costs of treatment. I am now a 4 year survivor (yahoo!)

But now, the incredible costs of private health insurance are so astronomical that I can't afford it. After leaving my last 2 jobs, I've had to hold on to COBRA and if you can believe it ... it was cheaper than trying to get individual coverage outside of an employer package.

It's been almost two months since I've had health insurance coverage and I'm about to run into the last of my 60 day post-insurance period. Which means that on day 61 I will never again be able to cover the type of cancer I had, my follow-up visits (which are still every 6 months), labs, etc., etc. 1 visit alone costs me almost $5k between CT Scans, Bone Scans, Labs, Oncology fees, hospital administrative fees, physician fees, etc. It's utterly outgrageous!

My boyfriend of almost 3 years and I have been talking for quite some time about getting married. And we love each other a great deal. We have a beautiful daughter together and 3 other children from previous marriages. We have a great family life. But, instead of taking our vows with the motivation of a prosperous and fullfilling life ahead of us, we both know in the back of our minds that our rush to the alter is really because I can not afford to not have health insurance. 

So, in this presidential season, I truly hope that one of these candidates really does do what he says and makes it so that I don't have to keep filing bankruptcy every seven years. Makes it so that I really can experience the American Dream and realize my fullest potential in this life without having to worry if the only Oncologist in the country specialized in my form of Cancer is one that is also covered by my insurance. Chances are these days, he's not and I'm still screwed.

I think anyone who thinks she would *never* marry for health benefits doesn't understand just how mortal and susceptible we all are. Until there is a viable government healthcare system, I think it's common sense to marry for health benefits.

 That said, I would hope that you could get around it and only marry for love -- but there are worse reasons, by far. 

To those of you who think you'd only marry/divorce for cause:

I was 19 years old and healthy as could be. I was diagnosed with a rare neurological disease that put me on life support for three months. I was in the ICU for 3 weeks, a long-term care facility for 2.5 months and an intensive rehab facility (to learn to walk again) for 2 weeks.

 We later got a bill from ONE of my three or so docs at the long-term care facility. $70,000. Please bear in mind that doesn't include:

The other two docs

Bed/private room

Occupational therapist (for arms/hands)

Physical therapist

Respiratory therapist (to wean me off the ventilator)

Medicine

X-rays or other diagnostic tools

The ICU doctors/medicine/bed/care I got

The rehab center bed/meds/care I got

The two months of daily physical therapy once I got back home

The two months of weekly physical therapy after that

Heck, for awhile I considered marrying my friend who works for Microsoft. He doesn't even have copays when he sees a doctor!

Nakedanarchists put it more simply than I've ever heard it put before: I'm with my boyfriend because I love him, but we'll be going through the legal marriage process in part because it will make paperwork easier. We've already bought property together, and filing taxes on that was a hassle. And now that we're a few months away from having a baby, things are about to get even more complicated. Getting married won't change the way we feel about each other or alter our level of commitment, but it will certainly ease the burden that being "legal strangers" has created, particularly when it comes to health insurance and other "partner privileges."

I'm in my mid-50's, so roughly 20 years your senior. Old enough to remember the days when medical insurance was rarely needed for anything other than catastrophic or hospital care. Most routine doctor visits in the days before CAT scans, MRIs, and other sophisticated diagnostic equipment were fairly affordable.

I've recently retired from one of the dwindling number of employers who offer retiree health care.  Had this not been an option, well -- buying health care on your own at my age (pre-Medicare) is pricey. Even without pre-existing medical conditions, which I'm fortunate to be free of.

Then there's my friend who has MS.  Another two or three, who are cancer survivors.  They're all roughly my age, when health coverage gets more expensive.  And all with conditions that preclude them from affordable insurance (if they can get any at all). 

Are they making decisions about relationships and work based on health care?  You betcha.

My point is:  your perspective changes, based on where you are in your life.  What looks impossible at 35 might look like a valid option at 55.

The older I get, the less I realize I know -- trite but true.  I've learned to be very cautious with words like "always" and "never."

Barb

I have great insurance as a state employee and I am grateful.  It does just suck really badly that the prospect of losing that is a major factor in most of our decisions.  I decided not to stay home after maternity leave because we needed the insurance.  We have not opened the business we have always dreamed about largely because we needed my insurance.  

As a mom, it is also a lot of pressure for me that my entire family's healthcare depends on my keeping my job.  It also scares the crap out of me that if I got sick all of us would lose our insurance. 

The job and the insurance should have nothing to do with eachother.  Senators with guaranteed lifetime care don't think twice about it. 

Gina

http://momwifeworkerbee.blogspot.com/

I’d certainly like to say that I’d never get married/divorced for health insurance reasons (and I certainly have no plans to do so!). But I think the situations that currently drive these marriages/divorces are a lot more complicated. These people could potentially be facing tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills, and that's a huge factor.

Personal blog: Keep Up With Me ( http://www.zandria.us )
BlogHer blog: Singles/Fitness ( http://blogher.com/blog/zandria )

I think it's sad that elderly couples actually get divorced so the sicker spouse can receive public assistance without losing everything they own.

My ex-husband carries my kids on his insurance, but if for some reason he would lose his benefits, no one is going to take them on (without huge monetary backing) with all of their pre-existing conditions.

So, I've been joking with a male colleague of mine that I'm going to marry him for his health insurance.  I have a long list of questions when I go out on first dates ( http://houseforkim.com/blog/date-application-requi... )...

1. Are you married? (I'm not kidding)
2. Do you work?
3. Do you have group health insurance?  Bonus points for vision and dental.
4. What about your 401K....

My [now ex] husband suffered from a chronic medical condition not covered by his employer's health care plan.

He did not qualify for public medical services.

My health plan offered generous coverage.

At the time we lived together. Therefore, marriage was not a big leap into the unknown.

One of the catalysts to our quickie marriage in Las Vegas was his health.

The ethics or morality of the situation?

After we did become lawfully wed he became automatically eligible for my employer sponsored health care policy.

Just4Moi

I am with my husband because I love him, but I married him because it simplified insurance coverage.  I read the NYT article and had a similar reaction:"how is this newsworthy?"  Of course people marry for insurance. http://nakedanarchists.wordpress.com ( http://nakedanarchists.wordpress.com/ )