I guess that I am also a "devil's advocate".. so here we go..

I addressed this in my comments. The fact that there may be additional companies willing to give the family better rates does not negate the point that what THIS company did is absurd and just another example of why health care reform is needed.
You also apparently missed the quote from the insurer that said they "do it because everyone else does it", not because there is an actual good reason for doing it. What she said is not quite but is close to price fixing. Think about it.

You'll note I said "medical director" and not Pediatrician. I'm pretty sure they are two different people, but you'd probably know that if you read the article.


The story said, "His pediatrician had never mentioned any weight concerns about the baby they call their "happy little chunky monkey."

There were no concerns from his pediatrician. And, if you think there was some kind of doctor that reviewed the case to determine eligibility then think again, a person behind a desk at the insurance company made that decision using charts full of probabilities or a computer that just calculates all the charts up automatically to determine eligibility and rates.

You're right.. once again I didn't read in the article that a person behind a desk at the insurance company made that decision using charts full of probabilities or a computer that just calculates all the charts up automatically to determine eligibility and rates. Maybe because.. wait for it.. it's not in the article. And I agree that his case probably wasn't reviewed by a doctor, because doctors typically don't work for the underwriting department in an insurance company. Actuaries do.

That being said, insurance isn't a right.. it's a business. Insurers can choose to insure whoever they want.

Personally, I agree that in a country as prosperous as the United States, healthcare should be plentiful for anyone that needs it. And I feel that it's shameful that the system has become what it is.. But in the case of this article, the writer seems to want to crucify the insurance company for using statistical data to determine if the baby is a risk they want to insure. To me, it's the same as someone with a house right on the Gulf of Mexico, who is complaining because nobody will insure their house. Statistically, the house has a greater risk of being destroyed in a hurricane.

Statistically, the obese baby has a greater risk of health problems, according to the insurance company's calculation.