Yeah....our new healthcare reform has some real intelligent people running it

  1. 3
    Just heard that our families that use the FSA to pay for breastpumps will no longer be able to, where as if you are on WIC/welfare you get a nice pump for FREE, compliments of the government.

    Why, you ask...because the committee feels that there are NOT enough health benefits to breastmilk, it is only a more healthy alternative. ***. This reform is going to be a real mess.
  2. Get the Hottest Nursing Topics Straight to Your Inbox!

  3. 1,054 Views
    Find Similar Topics
  4. 9 Comments so far...

  5. 0
    Actually, breast pumps weren't covered even before the healthcare bill was passed. Which is still ridiculous in any case, but just wanted to point that out.
  6. 0
    Actually, you could use your Flex Spending Account to get reimbursed, but your regular insurance wouldn't. Just wanted to point that out.
  7. 0
    huh?? That certainly hasn't been the policy for my relatives who have had kids in the last 5 years. Two aunts and a friend of mine tried to get a breast pump covered but weren't able to do it through their FSA...
  8. 2
    The purchase or rental of durable medical equipment is currently allowed under FSA regulations, so I'm puzzled as to why your relatives haven't been able to use their funds for payment of a breast pump, unless their employer imposed restrictions above and beyond federal regulations.

    But I agree with the OP that Obamacare is very unfriendly to peole who rely on FSAs. I'm going to show my political stripes here, but what the heck. I believe the Dems deliberately restricted FSAs as part of their agenda to lead us toward nationalized health care. They want to be able to say, "See...people can't control or afford their health care costs with FSAs, so now we need to take over all payment of health care expenses!" The new restrictions on FSA include the following:

    Limit of $2500/yr that can be contributed to a FSA. For families with high deductible plans, this may not be enough to meet their deductible.

    Since FSA contributions are made pre-tax, limiting contributions effectively raises a family's income tax liability.

    Restrictions on what may be purchased with FSA funds. OTC meds and supplies such as contact lens solutions are no longer eligible expenses. (This is just one example. Many things that are currently allowable expenses won't be in the future.) Again, by limiting what may be purchased with pre-tax dollars, families' tax liability increases, and ability to plan and budget expenses is harmed.
    HeartsOpenWide and NeoNurseTX like this.
  9. 0
    It had something to do with showcasing a medical need, for which they were denied since their infants were healthy (again, ridiculous, but anyway...)

    I thought people with high-deductible plans didn't do FSA, but did HSA instead? The federal limits for HSA are about $6,500 for a family and an HSA is superior, IMO, since the money rolls over every year and you don't have to worry about having to spend it all...
  10. 0
    Quote from babyRN.
    It had something to do with showcasing a medical need, for which they were denied since their infants were healthy (again, ridiculous, but anyway...)

    I thought people with high-deductible plans didn't do FSA, but did HSA instead? The federal limits for HSA are about $6,500 for a family and an HSA is superior, IMO, since the money rolls over every year and you don't have to worry about having to spend it all...
    It depends in large part upon what the employer has offered. Only recently were HSAs made available to families with high-deductible plans, and in many respects, they are superior and more flexible. But tax law doesn't make them available to everyone.

    We recently purchased a family plan. Hubby lost his job 18 months ago and our COBRA ran out. We had to choose a high deductible plan in order to qualify to establish a HSA. Had we chosen a traditional plan (even with a comparable premium), we would not have been eligible for an HSA.

    So again, the government is throwing a roadblock in our way of planning, saving and budgeting for our own health care expenses by limiting our choices for coverage.
  11. 0
    Well, I was/am all for single-payer which would take that out of the equation (plus the option of private if folks wanted) My husband is British and loves the NHS. Maybe some day!
  12. 0
    oh--looked up my own personal HSA, through Aetna:

    "The cost of a breast pump is considered a medical expense if the pump needs to be used to treat a medical condition."

    https://member.aetna.com/member/hsa_...ses_table.html

    and not covered through Aetna FSA

    Eligible Limited FSA Expenses

    So...??? Like I said, I hadn't heard about breast pumps being covered in general...can you post any examples? Again, I think this has little to do with the health care reform, but general practices that were put into place long before. However, it's still ridiculous! Think of all the $$ we could save from babies not getting sick due to having the benefits of BM!
    Last edit by babyRN. on Nov 1, '10
  13. 0
    Ours covers it...as long as it is hospital grade and you have a prescription/note for it. Not all FSA's are the same. Most of the girls I work with have used ours to be reimbursed.

    They were talking about the healthcare reform on CNN and it was brought up. The Academy of Peds is going to fight it.

    Jolie, what you wrote is my feelings exactly.


Top