Any Medi-Share users out there?

[DawgMan]

As expected, my health insurance provider is dropping out of the Obamacare plan at the end of the year.... same as the year before. Last year, my premiums jumped about 40% with inferior coverage from the previous year. This year, new plan is going up about 35% and agin the plans are worse, including none of our docs participate. At the suggestion of a friend and after some research, we are going to give Medi-Share a shot. I estimate I will save over $17K a year just on premiums! That’s almost real money! Honestly, I don’t know how a family’s that make just over the income subsidy number can keep insurance when as much as a 1/3rd of their income can easily go towards premiums and health care costs. For ERs, I suppose this is the largest bogie to manage until 65. Any real life experiences using Medi-Share?

 

[Sunny]

I've been looking at the healthcare sharing programs, of which Medi-Share is one, but also Liberty, Christian healthcare ministries, and Samaritan. There is an older thread you may want to peak at for Liberty, as some of the thoughts in that thread may also apply to Medi-Share. http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f38/healthcare-ministries-and-selfpay-options-83112.html

Something that nags me about all of these programs though is their contradiction. They push they are based on the Christian value and biblical requirement to share each other's burdens. Sounds great, but they all have a maximum they'll pay out, and won't cover pre-existing conditions. So...they only believe in the Christian value of carrying your neighbor's burden only up to a point? And after that dollar amount despite your family being good Christians and doing nothing wrong other than having catastrophic health issues, it is sorry, you and your family can go ahead and suffer into the financial abyss?

I understand from a business standpoint why they have limits and exclude pre-existing conditions, but they are offering themselves up as faith-based help, not a business. This contradiction raises quite the red flag for me, but maybe I am not understanding something.

 

[ivinsfan]

It nags at you, don't use it then. Uhh, it's people banding together to help each other out when times get tough...all the money comes from the plan members.

Who is the benevolent person that should give every penny they have to help someone in need? Your comment makes no sense to me...if they used the method you seem to espouse one family might get all the money in the pot leaving nothing for someone else who also had problems.

 

[ivinsfan]

Dawg at this point you can take that plan and bank the 19K, the big advantage is that's its approved by ACA so no penalty and that it gets you discount insurance rates so you don't get charged rack rates. Possible downside if any pre-existing conditions clause become law thru ACA you might get locked out of a regular HI plan. But I think this would come with a lot of advance notice giving you time to get a regular policy.

 

[DawgMan]

Dawg at this point you can take that plan and bank the 19K, the big advantage is that's its approved by ACA so no penalty and that it gets you discount insurance rates so you don't get charged rack rates. Possible downside if any pre-existing conditions clause become law thru ACA you might get locked out of a regular HI plan. But I think this would come with a lot of advance notice giving you time to get a regular policy.

It sort of begs the question... if someone was on Medi-Share (or like plan) and the worst scenario occurred where either a preexisting condition escalated to a more significant ongoing expense, I am assuming you could just make the decision to jump back to Obamacare the following year if the math/healthcare suggested that was the better deal. Yes, I suppose you would have exposure for the year (or remaining year) you are in Medi-Share, but seems like a pretty good risk to take based on the savings. I suppose the same strategy could be taken if you hit their limit on a new condition as well.

Let me know if I am missing something here.

 

[ivinsfan]

It sort of begs the question... if someone was on Medi-Share (or like plan) and the worst scenario occurred where either a preexisting condition escalated to a more significant ongoing expense, I am assuming you could just make the decision to jump back to Obamacare the following year if the math/healthcare suggested that was the better deal. Yes, I suppose you would have exposure for the year (or remaining year) you are in Medi-Share, but seems like a pretty good risk to take based on the savings. I suppose the same strategy could be taken if you hit their limit on a new condition as well.

Let me know if I am missing something here.

I agree, right now the flexibility is there to switch if it becomes necessary. In the future that could change because of changes to ACA.you would need to keep an eye on this....if underwriting would come into play again people could get locked into their existing insurance like back in the old days.

 

[Sunny]

..if they used the method you seem to espouse one family might get all the money in the pot leaving nothing for someone else who also had problems.

I am not espousing any method, and recognize the difficulties in sharing potentially great costs. I was trying to point out what seems like a contradiction to me, Christian values center stage and the core of the plan, vs limits in how far those values will be applied.

If they marketed it solely as just a healthcare sharing system period...people contribute $x amount each month and the costs are distributed to those with bills, up to $y amount per year/incident, then that could be a business or a non-profit. There wouldn't be a contradiction that their proclaimed Christian values helping others out...but that only goes so far monetarily. They'll cut you loose if your operations for whatever conditions cost too much.

I fully admit it could just be my odd way of looking at the main, faith-based premise for these vs that faith-based help only goes so far.

 

[ncbill]

iirc, Medi-Share is probably the most restrictive on weight - if you are over their guidelines you get charged more, put on a weight improvement plan, & are kicked out if you don't make sufficient progress on that plan.

since I have the above "issue" I'd look at Christian Healthcare Ministries instead.

 

[Gallaher]

Wife and I are on Samaritan medi-share. I had a 30 year career in pharma sales. Over time lots of customers (doctors) suggested it as a good option.
I was downsized 8 months before vesting in retiree healthcare.
So far so good! However, we are both healthy and take no prescriptions. Both aged 57.
The “plans” do lots of screening.
You need to be a believer and actively involved in a church.
We are both always have been.
It works for us.
I think what works best is managing your lifestyle.
Samaritan cost us $450 month for both of us, total

 

[zinger1457]

The “plans” do lots of screening.
You need to be a believer and actively involved in a church.
We are both always have been.
It works for us.
I think what works best is managing your lifestyle.
Samaritan cost us $450 month for both of us, total

When I looked at some of the different ministries it seemed that Samaritan was the most strict when screening new members, they actually required your pastor to fill out a section of your application confirming that you are a member of the church and a regular attendee. I don't recall any of the others requiring a pastor to sign off on your application.

 

[Gallaher]

Others do require a Pastor’s note.
Maybe not all.
As I mentioned, not an issue for us. We have been church members our entire 30 year marriage.
I don’t think any of these, faith based, biblical medi-shares will endorse co-habitation, same-sex marriage. They limit tobacco and alcohol use. as we reviewed plans, they are pretty conservative on lifestyle issues.
It automatically limits some higher risk members.
Not being judgmental, just saying.
Part of the economics is not covering some higher risk people/behaviors.
Medi-share is not for everyone.
I would not change my lifestyle to be covered. However, my lifestyle meets the mission.
It works for us.

 

[travelover]

I am not espousing any method, and recognize the difficulties in sharing potentially great costs. I was trying to point out what seems like a contradiction to me, Christian values center stage and the core of the plan, vs limits in how far those values will be applied.

If they marketed it solely as just a healthcare sharing system period...people contribute $x amount each month and the costs are distributed to those with bills, up to $y amount per year/incident, then that could be a business or a non-profit. There wouldn't be a contradiction that their proclaimed Christian values helping others out...but that only goes so far monetarily. They'll cut you loose if your operations for whatever conditions cost too much.

I fully admit it could just be my odd way of looking at the main, faith-based premise for these vs that faith-based help only goes so far.

I think that the religious angle is critical because there is an increased sensitivity to the government messing with religious freedom. If you tried to create an identical scheme without the religious affiliation, it would probably get shut down.

 

[zinger1457]

Others do require a Pastor’s note.
Maybe not all.

It has been awhile but when I last looked Liberty Healthshare, Medi-Share, and Christian Healthcare Ministries required you to sign on the application that you agree with their 'belief statement', they didn't require a sign off from your church or pastor.