Monday, March 28, 2005
Insurance Fun
It has been about 6 years since I last got a new eyeglasses prescription. I've noticed that my eyes are tired and things just are not in tight focus these days so I decided to make an appointment to get my eyes checked and probably get new glasses. Since lenses, frames and the appointment itself are pretty expensive these days I thought I'd see if my insurance carrier (Federal Blue Cross/Blue Shield) would cover any of the cost.
I called BC/BS to check. They will cover glasses and contact lenses in three instances only:
1) I need glasses due to some sort of an accident (shot in the eye with a nailgun for instance)
2) Need glasses due to an eye injury as a result of surgery (botched LASIK)
3) Need glasses in lieu of surgery ONLY if the surgery cannot be done due to age or medical condition
I indicated I've been wearing glasses for the past 32 of my 37 years and don't want LASIK or any other surgery, thank you very much. I asked if they would cover my glasses if I simply chose not to have surgery. Nope. I pointed out that it seems they are directing people to have eye surgery instead of wearing glasses since they will not cover glasses except in three very specific instances.
I then asked if they cover the surgery (not intending to get it, mind you, just curious). Nope.
So, they won't cover my eyeglasses if I simply prefer to not have surgery. Any they don't cover the cost of the surgery because it is elective and not medically necessary. Thanks Blue Cross/Blue Shield. I think I'll be shopping for another provider. Oh, and by the way, your dental coverage sucks too.
I called BC/BS to check. They will cover glasses and contact lenses in three instances only:
1) I need glasses due to some sort of an accident (shot in the eye with a nailgun for instance)
2) Need glasses due to an eye injury as a result of surgery (botched LASIK)
3) Need glasses in lieu of surgery ONLY if the surgery cannot be done due to age or medical condition
I indicated I've been wearing glasses for the past 32 of my 37 years and don't want LASIK or any other surgery, thank you very much. I asked if they would cover my glasses if I simply chose not to have surgery. Nope. I pointed out that it seems they are directing people to have eye surgery instead of wearing glasses since they will not cover glasses except in three very specific instances.
I then asked if they cover the surgery (not intending to get it, mind you, just curious). Nope.
So, they won't cover my eyeglasses if I simply prefer to not have surgery. Any they don't cover the cost of the surgery because it is elective and not medically necessary. Thanks Blue Cross/Blue Shield. I think I'll be shopping for another provider. Oh, and by the way, your dental coverage sucks too.
posted by Anonymous, 11:05 AM
1 Buffaloes were bitter enough to post comments:
I feel your pain, Matt. I really do. Why, for instance, do insurance companies routinely decline birth control coverage, but will happily fork over well in excess of $10,000 for a live birth? I don't get it.
(Insert standard legal blurb here: "I am not an insurance agent, but I play one on this one guy's blog...")
Still, I don't think you should fault BC/BS on this one. In every instance with which I have been aware, standard insurance plans do not cover vision care unless (as you noted) there is a medical need for it. While I agree it's inconvenient to see less than 20/20, it's usually not a medical condition unless your vision cannot be corrected optometrically. You need a specific "vision care" policy for that -- which your employer should offer. Or, Google "vision care insurance" and see what hits to evaluate the cost/benefit of buying your own insurance.
You can also apply the cost of vision care against your Flexible Spending Plan so, assuming you planned well enough ahead, it should at least be a tax-deductible expense.
Boy... how did this blog get so technical all of a sudden?
(Insert standard legal blurb here: "I am not an insurance agent, but I play one on this one guy's blog...")
Still, I don't think you should fault BC/BS on this one. In every instance with which I have been aware, standard insurance plans do not cover vision care unless (as you noted) there is a medical need for it. While I agree it's inconvenient to see less than 20/20, it's usually not a medical condition unless your vision cannot be corrected optometrically. You need a specific "vision care" policy for that -- which your employer should offer. Or, Google "vision care insurance" and see what hits to evaluate the cost/benefit of buying your own insurance.
You can also apply the cost of vision care against your Flexible Spending Plan so, assuming you planned well enough ahead, it should at least be a tax-deductible expense.
Boy... how did this blog get so technical all of a sudden?