Why aren't more using a Christian Plan?

[brewer12345]

Farm Bureau started as a fraternal benefit society and grew into todays successful entity...you completely missed my point.

Farm bureau became a regulated insurer for the same reason all the other fraternals did, namely there were problems with some fraternal.

 

[Carpediem]

Wow, someone needs to *brew* themselves another pot of coffee!

 

[ivinsfan]

Farm bureau became a regulated insurer for the same reason all the other fraternals did, namely there were problems with some fraternal.

Yes some fraternals had problems, not all, and regulations came along to weed out the crooked. Some were not crooked and continued to thrive. Therefore, all fraternals are not crooked and out to rob you of your last dollar or leave you unprotected. This is a point you don't seem willing to acknowledge. No one is telling you to use this method, so please just let the rest of us continue this discussion. You have made your feeling on the subject known many times over.

 

[brewer12345]

Yes some fraternals had problems, not all, and regulations came along to weed out the crooked. Some were not crooked and continued to thrive. Therefore, all fraternals are not crooked and out to rob you of your last dollar or leave you unprotected. This is a point you don't seem willing to acknowledge. No one is telling you to use this method, so please just let the rest of us continue this discussion. You have made your feeling on the subject known many times over.

Hey, in God we trust, all others show data. Faith based schemes do not show data to anyone, as far as I know. The amount at risk for the participants are not tiddly winks, so I think anyone trusting that these schemes will work needs to understand the very real risk that what they are counting on could just suddenly not be there. If you like these schemes, have at it, but go in with your eyes open.

Oh, and you have repeatedly pounded the table for these schemes yet do not participate. If you think they work so well, why haven't you jumped into the pool?

 

[ivinsfan]

Hey, in God we trust, all others show data. Faith based schemes do not show data to anyone, as far as I know. The amount at risk for the participants are not tiddly winks, so I think anyone trusting that these schemes will work needs to understand the very real risk that what they are counting on could just suddenly not be there. If you like these schemes, have at it, but go in with your eyes open.

Oh, and you have repeatedly pounded the table for these schemes yet do not participate. If you think they work so well, why haven't you jumped into the pool?

Well, due to the fact our family farm business had to drop our company sponsored insurance due to skyrocketing costs and due to pretty low commodity prices for the last 3 years' I'm on a subsidized ACA plan.

I live in a rural area that had been particularly hard hit by the jump in HI costs. Many friends and neighbors are struggling to put together some sort of package for their families that doesn't include huge premiums and/or very large out of pockets outlays. Even employee coverage is not filling in the gaps. You have employee coverage and if the cost of the employee insurance doesn't exceed around 10% of your income you must use the plan for your family no matter how big the total bill is. You do not have the ACA option you are stuck.

I am not advocating for the CS companies I am saying they are trying to fill an urgent need and might be an answer for someone. If I didn't have my ACA plan my costs would be 12K prem...6500 K out of pocket before insurance pays a dime..over 18K. I don't have any preexistings and I would have to seriously consider using the cost share.

To say I am pounding the table is not correct, but I have listened to many a friend and church member anguish over this decision. Your very use of the word schemes tell me you'd beat this horse into the ground.

I'm curious Brewer how you obtain your insurance and if you have ever struggled to get some coverage for your family.. Walk a mile in my shoes and all that.

 

[brewer12345]

I have swallowed huge premiums and deductibles via the exchange, in addition to wrestling with what must be the worst run organization I have ever dealt with. I am sensitive to the lack of affordability in health insurance for sure. That said, the faith based schemes appear to be a false promise from what I can tell. Better to face facts than wish upon a star.

 

[4legsgood]

...
My English uncle was killed in WW2 leaving behind a pregnant wife and a toddler, my Aunt got nothing from the government and had an incredibly difficult couple of decades because war time conditions meant no one in the family had anything extra to share. CP's might have their challenges but the fundamental premise is long standing and the way people took care of each other before the proliferation of government programs.

Hopefully, and possibly not in the family record, your Aunt did get some help via British National Health System, put in place in 1948.

 

[ivinsfan]

Hopefully, and possibly not in the family record, your Aunt did get some help via British National Health System, put in place in 1948.

I'm sure she had that as a British citizen. it was day to day living that was the problem...

 

[zinger1457]

That said, the faith based schemes appear to be a false promise from what I can tell. Better to face facts than wish upon a star.

And what is the false promise? It may not be for everyone but they seem to be fairly upfront on exactly what services they do or don't provide.

 

[copyright1997reloaded]

Hey, in God we trust, all others show data. Faith based schemes do not show data to anyone, as far as I know. The amount at risk for the participants are not tiddly winks, so I think anyone trusting that these schemes will work needs to understand the very real risk that what they are counting on could just suddenly not be there. If you like these schemes, have at it, but go in with your eyes open.

Oh, and you have repeatedly pounded the table for these schemes yet do not participate. If you think they work so well, why haven't you jumped into the pool?

Brewer, I normally value your posts (maybe because I am a fellow brewer ), but I think your last comment (in bold) is off base. It is one thing to point out potential negatives (as you have), and yet another to impune motives of a poster.

As you even mention yourself, many of today's mutual's were born from smaller mutual association/sharing groups. Part of the issue with today's healthcare is the lack of cost control, part of which is from the impersonal nature of large scale organizational control.

 

[MichaelB]

Health care insurance is a tough topic with no easy answers. Health sharing plans may have a long history, but not at the scale we're seeing today, and much of this discussion is really a contrast between their positive history, at a much smaller scale and more narrow user base, vs what might happen with a broader base, more widespread use and lack of oversight.

FWIW, I think all the posts (and posters) so far deserve the benefit of the doubt from all of us, because that question has no single answer and involves lots of speculation. Both those views can coexist. That is, the past use of these plans can be positive, while the future use can be problematic.

 

[ivinsfan]

I have no problem with the exchange between Brewer and I...I think it might even clarify things for some posters. Neither one of us is utilizing the plan at this point we are just interested observers. I think Brewer and I both agree healthcare is darn expensive.

 

[brewer12345]

I have no problem with the exchange between Brewer and I...I think it might even clarify things for some posters. Neither one of us is utilizing the plan at this point we are just interested observers. I think Brewer and I both agree healthcare is darn expensive.

I would say the great failure of aca was the lack of amy real cost controls and that will likely be its undoing.

 

[bobandsherry]

I did consider one of these plans. viability of the plan was a concern and ultimate deal breaker for me especially if it gets hit with a lot of members with high bills all in say one year or one quarter, and that was just something i knew i would fret over. As expensive as my retiree plan is at least I have peace of mind which I feel I would never have with a sharing plan. The other issue was the 24 pg pdf explaining all the exceptions and qualifications regarding what was covered, when and to what degree.

On balance, im glad these plans are available for those who are more shall we say optimistic than I am and also as a possible back stop even for me if nothing else is available

What would make you think that a traditional insurer would not fail?

What are some bankrupt insurance companies?

When this happens, there is a "Guaranty Association" that basically provides insurance for insurance companies and will then take over (kind of what FDIC does for banking). Not sure if these ministries are member or not. But given the size of some of these ministry based offerings, the larger ones may have enough members to have a decent risk pool:

1 million Americans pool money in religious ministries to pay for health care

 

[Midpack]

I would say the great failure of aca was the lack of amy real cost controls and that will likely be its undoing.

Special interests would never have let an ACA bill pass with any real cost controls, as you well know. And there’s nothing partisan about it, all parties/candidates ultimately need special interest contributions, even those who start with the best intentions.

 

[athena53]

When this happens, there is a "Guaranty Association" that basically provides insurance for insurance companies and will then take over (kind of what FDIC does for banking). Not sure if these ministries are member or not. But given the size of some of these ministry based offerings, the larger ones may have enough members to have a decent risk pool.

No, the Christian ministries wouldn't be. Guaranty associations are financed through surcharges collected on premiums and forwarded to the state Guaranty Fund. I'm pretty sure Christian Healthcare ministries would be outside of this system.

 

[brewer12345]

No, the Christian ministries wouldn't be. Guaranty associations are financed through surcharges collected on premiums and forwarded to the state Guaranty Fund. I'm pretty sure Christian Healthcare ministries would be outside of this system.

Correct.

 

[bobandsherry]

No, the Christian ministries wouldn't be. Guaranty associations are financed through surcharges collected on premiums and forwarded to the state Guaranty Fund. I'm pretty sure Christian Healthcare ministries would be outside of this system.

I didn't think so either, but again with the large number of members the risk pool is substantial and therefore would sustain a large "hit" for unusual claims. A search didn't find any references to failed ministry based plans/companies.

 

[LARS]

Short of declaring bankruptcy are these Faith Based groups contractually obligated to cover expenses of covered care? In other words, if you get some rare complicated Cancer, let's say, and the bills start approaching $1 million plus, are they contractually required to cover or is it out of the "goodness of their hearts"?

 

[flintnational]

I didn't think so either, but again with the large number of members the risk pool is substantial and therefore would sustain a large "hit" for unusual claims. A search didn't find any references to failed ministry based plans/companies.

The number of members would provide some protection from a few large claims. However, a larger member base can also hurt. If they are not charging enough to fund normal claims, they can quickly get in trouble. This is common with insurance companies and workers compensation. They set their rates too low and when the claims occur they lose money. This particular underwriting/rating problem is exasperated by larger member numbers.

 

[brewer12345]

I didn't think so either, but again with the large number of members the risk pool is substantial and therefore would sustain a large "hit" for unusual claims. A search didn't find any references to failed ministry based plans/companies.

There is nobody keeping these plans honest as to whether they are really solvent and with a scanty balance sheet combined with high growth they could rob Peter to pay Paul, at least for a while. When one of these breaks, it will probably be sudden and there will be no guaranty fund to help pick up the pieces.

 

[pb4uski]

What would make you think that a traditional insurer would not fail? ....

It's a deeper question than that, because even when a traditional insurer goes into receivership, in most cases there is no or little impact on policyholders. In many cases, some blocks of business will be sold to healthy insurers and they just step into the shoes of the original insurer. Companies have surplus to help deal with adverse experience and once that is exhausted then state guarranty funds step in.

For example, when Mutual Benefit Life imploded in the mid 90s, a group of insurers stepped forward to reinsure its contracts (including my employer at the time).

Finally, more strict financial solvency standards and monitoring were put in place in the 90s as a result of Executive Life and MBL that have significantly reduced insovencies.

 

[gindie]

Here is an extensive comparison between several of these programs and how they compare to insurance. It is from the blog of respected financial planner Michael Kitces (although it is by a guest writer):

https://www.kitces.com/blog/healthc...hm-medicare-lhs-samaritan-health-share-plans/

 

[samclem]

It seems to me that this whole industry/movement would benefit from more transparency. I'm all for letting adults make their own decisions to accept risk, but that's not possible without reliable information. I'd think these ministries/organizations would welcome and actually benefit from a set of agreed-upon standard measures of financial health and some respected third-party auditing of their books, with public release of same. Once there are failures (which are virtually inevitable), the whole enterprise will fall under public suspicion and lawmakers will be induced to "do something about this." Better to get ahead of the problem.

If there aren't legislated standards like we have for insurers (reserves, reinsurance, etc), then there should at least be transparency and tools for decisionmaking so people can make informed choices. We aren't talking about picking a toaster oven here, this is big money. And, to the degree that any failure of these "arrangements" results in people falling into the taxpayer-funded safety net (or cost-shifting by medical providers to paying customers/insurance companies), it's not solely a matter that affects just the individual.

 

[brewer12345]

Wholeheartedly agree. But what do I know? Only spent my whole career looking at insurers.