RSS Feeds Feeds: Articles | Issues
Articles About TAP Subscribe Donate
TAPPED  |  Beat the Press

Remember Me
Forgot your password?

The symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.


 



The group blog of The American Prospect

More on Domestic Violence and Health Reform.

Regarding my earlier post, it's important to point out that insurance company discrimination against domestic violence victims applies regardless of whether the woman is still married to or living with the abuser. In other words, women who have successfully left an abusive relationship and turned their lives around continue to be punished for a crime that was committed against them.

A 1994 Judiciary Committee report found that eight of 16 large insurers considered past domestic violence-related medical claims when choosing whether to insure a customer and what premium to charge her. A 2000 Health and Human Services report on rural domestic violence features this particularly horrific story:

...a woman from rural Minnesota was beaten severely by her ex-husband. After remarrying, she applied for health insurance and was told that should would not be covered for treatment relating to the abuse-related pre-existing conditions of depression and neck injury.

Insurance discrimination against past domestic violence victims is especially pernicious because it discourages victims from reporting abuse. If a woman never informs law enforcement or medical professionals of domestic violence, then she can at least rest assured that she won't lose her health insurance coverage. It's an inhumane system that protects criminals while re-victimizing innocent women.

--Dana Goldstein



COMMENTS

I would also point out that banning this practice has nothing to do with the public option, so if you're willing to shoot down the bill if it doesn't have a public option, this is part of the status quo that would continue if that happened.

And that's why the moderate left is pissed off at the "more-progressive-than-thou" left right now.

Dana,

Why are you a sexist pig?

You know that domestic violence anywhere from 30-60% male victims depending on the research. You know that 30% of lesbian relationships suffer domestic violence. You know women initiate domestic violence more often than men.

So why frame it as husband beats wife? How does diminishing and ridiculing victims help anyone out?

Fight for a single payer system. Fight against blatant, explicit, arrogant sexism such as your own.

Thanks for the great post,i love to read articles that are informative and beneficial in nature.

Post a comment


Search TAPPED for:

Archives

About TAPPED

TAPPED, the Prospect's award-winning group blog, is a link-intensive collection of musings, ramblings, opinions and other assorted writing on the political developments of the day. See a list of our contributors.

| RSS | Twitter


Renew your print subscription or e-subscription.
Get an e-subscription for $14.95.
Give the gift of political insight. Send The American Prospect to a friend.
Change your email address or street address.
YES! I want to receive The American Prospect
— the essential source for progressive ideas.
Explore The American Prospect's award-winning investigative journalism and provocative essays in a free trial issue. Continue receiving The American Prospect at only $19.95 for a one-year subscription - a savings of 60% off the newsstand price!
First Name
Last Name
Address 1
Address 2
City
State
ZIP     
Email

Should you decide not to continue receiving the magazine after the initial free issue, simply write "cancel" on the invoice and you will not be billed.

© 2010 by The American Prospect, Inc.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Permissions and Reprints