[quote=The-Shoveler] . . . This will end up much worse than doing nothing, (You might want to check if your company will cover your spouse and kids next year). . . [/quote]
Shoveler, most companies and govm’t entities OFFER spouse and children coverage but the employee has to pay all or nearly all of their premiums out of his/her pay. Most company and govm’t plans charge the same child premium whether the employee has one child or ten children. Minor children and college students up to age 26 are relatively cheap to cover and lower-income employees in CA can just sign up for “Healthy Families” which has a sliding scale of $37 – $57 for a monthly premium for the first child and lower for succeeding children, IIRC.
In addition, military retirees can put a 18-26 yo son or daughter on Tricare Prime (HMO) for a $422 ANNUAL premium. This premium is not income-dependent or dependent on the kid being a “FT college student.”
It is the SPOUSE who is traditionally expensive on employee health plans. The only time it is worth it for the employer to fully cover a SPOUSE is when the SPOUSE also works for that same employer and is eligible for healthcare coverage in their own right. It is patently UNFAIR to single employees when married employees or those employees in registered domestic partnerships get generous spouse coverage at low or no cost to the employee. This amounts to unjust enrichment to some employees due to marital status.
If your able-bodied SPOUSE needed medical coverage in the past and you couldn’t afford his/her premiums out of your pay, then why weren’t they WORKING enough hours somewhere to get their own coverage?
Sorry, the presence or absence of minor children in the home have nothing to do with it. And this is coming from a mom.
Come 2014, unemployed spouses will be able to get coverage on the state exchanges but they will still have to pay what is remaining of their monthly premium after any tax credits they are eligible for are taken into consideration.
