health insurance crisis

[Brian121957 43]

If you actually find your self in such a situation try to negotiate down the price BEFORE. Many hospitals can reduce the cost but you should do it before you get the services. Most communities also have faith based groups (churches) who you can turn to for help.

As I understand receiving discounts from the hospital or help from local churches does not violate your promise to not except public (government) assistance.

[Sayha or bust. 71]

Hi everybody, my wife arrived from Colombia on k1 visa May 12, 2012 and we married on May 14,2012. I had spoken with my employer before her arrival and explained that she was coming from another country on a fiancee visa and they said no problem just show us the marriage certificate and you can enroll her in a health care plan. So we hand delivered the marriage certificate yesterday afternoon, no problem, they said ok you're good to go. Then this morning I get an email from them saying they can't enroll her without a social security number. I called them to explain why she doesn't have a SSN and was told they can't enroll her without a SSN. So I've been calling around looking for insurance for immigrants, and they seem to all have pregnancy clauses where they won't cover someone for pregnancy until 10 months in. Well, we've already been trying to get pregnant as we both would love to have kids. Does anybody have any advice other than waiting to have kids? Thank you

I'm glad I didn't have any problems with health with my insurance ,in fact they added her and her kids right away and paid for an expensive eye surgery for her. Good luck.

[mfa 1]

i am told that sponsoring someone means you will have to pay for any "government handouts" that the immigrant receives.

so, i am curious...has anyone done this?

that is, sponsored someone and ended up paying for a child birth?

then, i asked, if anyone has done this (or heard detailed stories of others) about sponsors assuming they would get billed for a government handout, but never receiving a bill.

i am simply curious about actual experiences/stories as to how this financial responsibility has played out.

[mfa 1]

If I understood your question, you were asking if you can get services in a hospital in the USA for free. You can't, the USA does not have free medical care. Was there a different question you're asking?

i am told that sponsoring someone means you will have to pay for any "government handouts" that the immigrant receives.

so, i am curious...has anyone done this?

that is, sponsored someone and ended up paying for a child birth?

then, i asked, if anyone has done this (or heard detailed stories of others) about sponsors assuming they would get billed for a government handout, but never receiving a bill.

i am simply curious about actual experiences/stories as to how this financial responsibility has played out.

[Caryh 5,206]

i am told that sponsoring someone means you will have to pay for any "government handouts" that the immigrant receives.

so, i am curious...has anyone done this?

that is, sponsored someone and ended up paying for a child birth?

then, i asked, if anyone has done this (or heard detailed stories of others) about sponsors assuming they would get billed for a government handout, but never receiving a bill.

i am simply curious about actual experiences/stories as to how this financial responsibility has played out.

Ah now I understand what you're looking for. Technically if they have a child at a hospital, the mother is the responsible party. If she can't pay, they will go after her. As to the I-864 affidavit of support, thats a contract with the government saying means tested benefits will get paid for by the sponsor should the beneficiary apply for them and get them. A private entity like a hospital cannot use that to go after the sponsor very easily. They would have to take the sponsor to court, and expensive proposition for them, then prove a contract with the government is a contract with a private entity to. A pretty hard thing to do. If they went to a publicly owned hospital, there would be an easier time trying to prove that. They would also have to go a bit further after that and try to prove that not paying the hospital bills somehow equates to a need tested benefit. But its actually more straight forward to go after the person directly responsible for the bill, which would be the parents of the child that was born. Hospitals regularly get people who do not pay. They try for a while and then sell the bad debt to collection agencies. The collection agencies then attempt to chase after the responsible party until they pay. If they can even get access to the information on who a sponsor is, a collection agency may attempt to threaten a sponsor, but as far as taking them to court? Well that seems to me like too hard of a case to prove, with too little chance of success, for too much cost.

There is a member here who worked for either a state agency I believe it was. And they mentioned cases where the immigrant got a needs tested benefit, but said it is very rarely followed up on, because if the immigrant qualified for it, generally the sponsor couldn't afford to pay either, given the sponsor was generally a family member. Again its only the government which is in a direct position to enforce the affidavit of support. I've heard of some divorce cases where a lawyer has fought for alimony based on the affidavit of support and won alimony. But that probably had more to do with a spouse not being able to support her or himself after a marriage break up.

[rocks 494]

i am told that sponsoring someone means you will have to pay for any "government handouts" that the immigrant receives.

so, i am curious...has anyone done this?

that is, sponsored someone and ended up paying for a child birth?

then, i asked, if anyone has done this (or heard detailed stories of others) about sponsors assuming they would get billed for a government handout, but never receiving a bill.

i am simply curious about actual experiences/stories as to how this financial responsibility has played out.

If their income is below a certain level and they qualified for Medicaid, the birth of the child would be covered for a non-USC. This is not deemed as a public charge. They would have to pay for their own prenatal visits though.

Q. What publicly funded benefits may not be considered for public charge purposes?

A. Non-cash benefits (other than institutionalization for long-term care) are generally not taken into account for purposes of a public charge determination.

Special-purpose cash assistance is also generally not taken into account for purposes of public charge determination.

Non-cash or special-purpose cash benefits are generally supplemental in nature and do not make a person primarily dependent on the government for subsistence. Therefore, past, current, or future receipt of these benefits do not impact a public charge determination. Non-cash or special purpose cash benefits that are not considered for public charge purposes include:

• Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases; use of health clinics, short-term rehabilitation services, and emergency medical services) other than support for long-term institutional care
  
• Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
  
• Nutrition programs, including Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs
  
• Housing benefits
  
• Child care services
  
• Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
  
• Emergency disaster relief
  
• Foster care and adoption assistance
  
• Educational assistance (such as attending public school), including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary, or higher education
  
• Job training programs
  
• In-kind, community-based programs, services, or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter)
  

[Teddy B 17,252]

If their income is below a certain level and they qualified for Medicaid, the birth of the child would be covered for a non-USC. This is not deemed as a public charge. They would have to pay for their own prenatal visits though.

Q. What publicly funded benefits may not be considered for public charge purposes?

A. Non-cash benefits (other than institutionalization for long-term care) are generally not taken into account for purposes of a public charge determination.

Special-purpose cash assistance is also generally not taken into account for purposes of public charge determination.

Non-cash or special-purpose cash benefits are generally supplemental in nature and do not make a person primarily dependent on the government for subsistence. Therefore, past, current, or future receipt of these benefits do not impact a public charge determination. Non-cash or special purpose cash benefits that are not considered for public charge purposes include:

• Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases; use of health clinics, short-term rehabilitation services, and emergency medical services) other than support for long-term institutional care
  
• Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
  
• Nutrition programs, including Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs
  
• Housing benefits
  
• Child care services
  
• Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
  
• Emergency disaster relief
  
• Foster care and adoption assistance
  
• Educational assistance (such as attending public school), including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary, or higher education
  
• Job training programs
  
• In-kind, community-based programs, services, or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter)
  

The "Public Charge" clause above is used for admissability and AOS only. Once the immigrant is admiited into the US and has a sponsor(s), that sponsor(s) are responsible to pay for any federal or state means tested public benefit.

Means Tested Public Benefits

Federal means tested public benefits are the following:

Food stamps

Supplemental Security Income (SSI)

Medicaid

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

State Child Health Insurance Program (CHIP)

FAQs: Means Tested Public Benefits

Can the applicant use government assistance or public benefits?

If the sponsored immigrant uses federal means tested public benefits, the sponsor must repay the cost of the benefits.

What assistance programs are not considered means tested public benefit programs?

The following types of assistance are not considered means tested public benefits and do not have to be repaid.

Emergency Medicaid

School lunches

Immunizations and treatment for communicable diseases

Student assistance to attend colleges and institutions of higher learning

Some kinds of foster care or adoption assistance

Job training programs

Head start

Short-term, non-cash emergency relief

My link

[rocks 494]

The "Public Charge" clause above is used for admissability and AOS only. Once the immigrant is admiited into the US and has a sponsor(s), that sponsor(s) are responsible to pay for any federal or state means tested public benefit.

Exactly, so emergency Medicaid would cover the birth of a child if they did not have health insurance.

[Teddy B 17,252]

Exactly, so emergency Medicaid would cover the birth of a child if they did not have health insurance.

Why are you so focused on what medicaid covers? The posters question never mentioned medicaid. The poster simply asked what the sponsor is responsible for. The list you posted was from the public charge clause, that list is not used outside of admissability and AOS.

[rocks 494]

Why are you so focused on what medicaid covers? The posters question never mentioned medicaid. The poster simply asked what the sponsor is responsible for. The list you posted was from the public charge clause, that list is not used outside of admissability and AOS.

The OP asked about coverage for pregnancy.

I was responding to the question I quoted in my response. Maybe you didn't read it?

i am told that sponsoring someone means you will have to pay for any "government handouts" that the immigrant receives.

so, i am curious...has anyone done this?

that is, sponsored someone and ended up paying for a child birth?

then, i asked, if anyone has done this (or heard detailed stories of others) about sponsors assuming they would get billed for a government handout, but never receiving a bill.

i am simply curious about actual experiences/stories as to how this financial responsibility has played out.

[Teddy B 17,252]

The OP asked about coverage for pregnancy.

I was responding to the question I quoted in my response. Maybe you didn't read it?

I still don't see where the poster mentions anything about medicaid, do you? The poster was asking about "government handouts" in general, he used the birth of a child as an example. What led you to medicaid and posting the public charge clause is puzzling to say the least.

[rocks 494]

I still don't see where the poster mentions anything about medicaid, do you? The poster was asking about "government handouts" in general, he used the birth of a child as an example. What led you to medicaid and posting the public charge clause is puzzling to say the least.

It's just as well I wasn't replying to you then. Clearly you didn't read the post, let me try one more time before I give up.

i am told that sponsoring someone means you will have to pay for any "government handouts" that the immigrant receives.

so, i am curious...has anyone done this?

that is, sponsored someone and ended up paying for a child birth?

then, i asked, if anyone has done this (or heard detailed stories of others) about sponsors assuming they would get billed for a government handout, but never receiving a bill.

i am simply curious about actual experiences/stories as to how this financial responsibility has played out.

As I stated, if they qualified for Medicaid ("government handouts"), then the non-USC would be eligible for coverage for child birth under Emergency Medicaid, which would mean nothing would have to be repaid by the sponsor.

Edited June 15, 2012 by rocks

[Teddy B 17,252]

It's just as well I wasn't replying to you then. Clearly you didn't read the post, let me try one more time before I give up.

As I stated, if they qualified for Medicaid ("government handouts"), then the non-USC would be eligible for coverage for child birth under Emergency Medicaid, which would mean nothing would have to be repaid by the sponsor.

The poster never mentioned a medicaid scenario, you answered a question that wasn't asked. My reply wasn't to refute your medicaid comment, (I know you wanted it to be, but it wasn't) it was to point out that your posting the public charge clause was irrelevant to the discussion. The public charge clause is used by USCIS to determine the admissibility of a potential immigrant, it has nothing to do with what a sponsor is responsible for once the immigrant is admitted.

[rocks 494]

The poster never mentioned a medicaid scenario, you answered a question that wasn't asked. My reply wasn't to refute your medicaid comment, (I know you wanted it to be, but it wasn't) it was to point out that your posting the public charge clause was irrelevant to the discussion. The public charge clause is used by USCIS to determine the admissibility of a potential immigrant, it has nothing to do with what a sponsor is responsible for once the immigrant is admitted.

The poster asked about government handouts, their example was childbirth. Why do you always have to argue when you're wrong?

I'm done with this conversation.

[Teddy B 17,252]

I'm done with this conversation.

You were never in it.

Why did you post the public charge clause?

Edited June 15, 2012 by Teddy B