Let me start this by saying: Cody got a raise. Just enough to bump him into the next tax bracket, not enough to make up the tax difference. This is a negative for us.
We're trying to decide whether or not we should keep health insurance. On Charlotte, absolutely. On us? That's the tricky question. It'll be nearly $5,000 per year through work, with an $8,000-deductible before anything's paid. On top of that, only a percentage is paid. For us, we'd have to spend $12,000 in a year for UHC to cover anything at all.
Adding Charlotte is $1,000 more per year than for the two of us.
Now, exempting the IVF we had, the totals for our medical care over the last five years or so is less than five years' worth of premiums alone. Even counting the midwife UHC's trying to not cover, even covering Cody's possible tonsillectomy (I say "possible," because I wouldn't put it past UHC to try denying that, even though tonsillitis is recurring for him, his only medical problem ever, lucky dog). If we had to pay for all of it out of pocket, less than five years of just premiums. In no year was even spent on our medical care to even touch the deductible, exempting IVF, which is not something that happens out of necessity to staying alive and healthy. If you want to add in the IVF cost, then we're still under the cost of five years of premiums plus deductibles. Only because IVF all happened in one year did we meet our deductible and have anything covered. We are not planning another IVF cycle. Ever. Any further children will be natural, with a chance of as close to 0 as can be for still having ovaries and/or a uterus.
So, since we, medical-necessity-wise, get less out of our insurance than we put in and pay out of pocket, we aren't convinced anymore that it's worth it. This is taking a large chunk of money out of our pockets each more, straining us severely. Starting over again in January, we'll have to pay $8,000 out of pocket before UHC covers anything. If we don't have $8,000 to spend, there's no point to insurance at all.
I know, I know, what about catastrophic events. Well, not only is the chance of those small and care given no matter what in the case of catastrophe, but our insurance has a cap on yearly care anyway.
And the thing I learned about catastrophe the hard way is that not everything is necessarily covered anyway. You may have a half-million-dollar hospital bill and find that $80,000 of that is for uncovered services, or services provided by someone at the hospital who is out-of-network when someone in-network was available. Especially in true emergencies, whoever is nearest and available is the one called to the job. If you have out-of-network coverage, you could find yourself on the hook for 30%, if not 100% of certain services. What's the difference between filing bankruptcy on $80,000 versus half a million? Nothing but the premiums you paid only to go bankrupt anyway. Thank my personal experience ten years ago for finding this out.
I'm thinking that, for us, it might be better to take the money we're pay on premiums for our own insurance and sock that away into savings. With our credit union, it's a great interest rate. And then getting Charlotte private coverage. If our typical yearly medical costs are less than our premiums, and then we'd have to pay a further $8,000, it seems we'd get ahead by saving instead. It's a gamble either way, yes, and there's a much higher chance that we'd spend more money on premiums than we would on care in any given year, which has been the trend.
We have some time to think it over more and decide. Can anyone give us any compelling reasons for KEEPING our own coverage rather than paying as we go from the premiums put into savings? (Again, Charlotte would still have coverage.)