Insurer refuses to cover baby, says he’s ‘too fat’

By Raw Story
Monday, October 12th, 2009 -- 7:50 am
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

baby on scale Insurer refuses to cover baby, says hes too fatUPDATE: INSURER FLIP FLOPS, WILL COVER 'HEAVY BABIES;' FULL STORY HERE.

As if there weren't enough problems with health insurance companies: a new report reveals that insurance companies now deny coverage to babies that are above the 95th percentile for height or weight after they are born, effectively considering their size a "pre-existing condition."

In a report published this weekend, The Denver Post revealed the story of Alex Lange, "a chubby, dimpled, healthy and happy 4-month-old."

Lange's parents say he was denied coverage because he's in the 99th percentile for infant weight. Rocky Mountain Health Plans turned him down, saying insurers don't take babies over the 95th percentile, no matter how healthy they are.

"I could understand if we could control what he's eating. But he's 4 months old. He's breast-feeding. We can't put him on the Atkins diet or on a treadmill," his frustrated father, Bernie Lange, told the Post. "There is just something absurd about denying an infant."

Story continues below...

Bernie and Kelli Lange tried to get insurance for their growing family with Rocky Mountain Health Plans when their current insurer raised their rates 40 percent after Alex was born. They filled out the paperwork and awaited approval, figuring their family is young and healthy. But the broker who was helping them find new insurance called Thursday with news that shocked them.

" 'Your baby is too fat,' she told me," Bernie said.

Up until then, the Langes had been happy with Alex's healthy appetite and prodigious weight gain. His pediatrician had never mentioned any weight concerns about the baby they call their "happy little chunky monkey."

His brother had trouble putting on weight, his parents say, so they've been more conscious in feeding their new son. Later, the story noted:

At birth, Alex weighed a normal 8 1/4 pounds. On a diet of strictly breast milk, his weight has more than doubled. He weighs about 17 pounds and is about 25 inches long.

"I'm not going to withhold food to get him down below that number of 95," Kelli Lange said. "I'm not going to have him screaming because he's hungry."

More details on the Lange's saga can be read here.

The question of weight isn't purely academic when it comes to health insurance, but studies suggesting higher premiums for people with higher "body mass index" measurements give only tepid support to such a pricing scheme. Those with very high BMIs do cost insurers more, though the correlation is weaker than some might suspect.

On one hand, statistically, people who are obese (BMI above 29.9) have higher insurance costs than those who have healthy weights (BMI of 19 to 25). The CDC estimates that as much as 10 percent of U.S. health care costs are due to overweight and obese people. So perhaps they should pay a higher premium for their health care.

However, I don't think folks with a BMI of 27 or 28 cost insurers much more than someone with a BMI of 25 -- I just haven't seen the evidence -- and almost certainly they don't cost 20 percent more. So I don't think that's fair.

Moreover, most football players, because of their high muscle mass, have BMIs above 30, so what of those people who lift weights? And finally, it is true that someone with a BMI in the high 20s or low 30s who exercises regularly is more healthy than a couch potato with a healthy weight.

You can calculate your own body mass index here.

Share this article:
  • Print this article!
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Story comments are below...
  • disappointed voter
    Medical insurance companies contribute nothing to the well-being of the country. It's time to put them all out of business.

    Medicare for all!
  • Max_1
    Being born is NOW a pre-existing condition!

    .
  • J C
    Isn't this a prime example of an insurance company "death panel"? Not only is this kid denied health care coverage but he now has huge negative mark on his health care record that will follow him throughout his life. He's freaking 4 months old... Where is the common sence?
  • laydownthelaw
    thats almost a normal weight for a baby. wtf. Reform NOW!!!
  • The insurance copany will attempt to get as much money as we give them. Their time is running out on the kibles and bits. We as humens change our bodies we don't walk with a bend back. Humens are metaphysically changing and the health insurance has to change to. The general public has to know that.
  • arios
    My children weighed that much at that age. I think that's ridiculous, to cancel a baby's insurance on that ground.
  • paulatme
    The story is a little deceptive. The insurance wasn't canceled, they tried to get different insurance when the rate at their original insurance company went up 40%.The new insurance company wasn't interested in them as a new customer.
  • wyrdless
    They didn't cancel coverage, they just made it completely unaffordable without a good reason.

    This family should at the very least get a rebate from this company. Since people pay into insurance to cover future risks, and these people paid in, they have some value vested into the company, which they deserve to get back.
  • binnysmythe
    Call 'em out!! For crying out loud - what's the name of the insurance company? (It's Rocky Mountain Health Plans - 800-854-4558 -- if you follow the link) Where's their comment? Ask them how they justify this. The journalist didn't seem to get a good answer, maybe you will.
  • leathersmith
    sky wizard must really hate the soul of the infant, wonder who it was in past lives......maybe fat old Jesse Helms! :)
  • bintexas
    My son weighed 16 pounds at 2 months . . . he was also 26 inches long. He was exclusively breast fed until he was 6 months old. He was not fat, he was just VERY LARGE. He is a VERY LARGE man. He's 6'3 and weighs about 240 lbs, wears size 14 shoes and is not fat. He's just BIG.

    This is stupid.
  • lazlodelarental
    This is the magic of the invisible hand. Perhaps if they were conscientious and respectful of the invisible hand they would have asked the insurer the optimal weight for the baby at each age and made sure the child was within that range. Or had the father throw himself in front of a speeding train to take himself off the policy and reduce costs by removing one expensive family member. If insurance companies didn't have the freedom to throw babies into the gutter to die, would freedom mean anything at all?
  • thepoliticalcat
    I hope everyone noticed that this family's insurance rates increased by 40 per cent after the birth of the child, even though they're young, healthy, and have no "pre-existing conditions." The insurance companies, according to several reputable business journals, are planning to raise their rates across the board by between 20 and 50 per cent next year. The same journals are reporting that most employers have already stated that they will pass the costs on to their employees. So, whatever you're paying for health insurance now, you can expect to be paying more. A lot more. If that doesn't make you want to fight for health care reform, you have too much money and not enough sense.
  • sdelaney83
    Reform wont help this b.s cant you see...the government is the reason things are changing for the worse anyway, open your eyes american...we are all going to be screwed over one way or another. To Deny a BABY coverage is horrible. I bet anyone in the governments kids are covered even if they are fat babies.. America is crumbling... Fast... reform.. right.. we dont need reform we need positive CHANGE as are so called fearless leader said he was going to do, Yeah i've seen change... nothing but negitive change. Ooo Rah!
  • tiac0818
    That is totally crazy!!! My son was off the charts as a baby and now he is three years old and is in the 50% for weight and 70% for height. Just because they are off the charts as a baby doesn't mean anything. My neice was the same way as baby and now she is 11 yrs old and is very thin...hard to find clothes to fit her small waist. These insurance companies need to get a clue. The BMI stuff is a bit old fashion anyway and has flaws in it. They need to come up with a way to calculate that doesn't have faulty results!
  • loona_c
    Totally, totally absurd. When my son was born (8 ' 13") I breast fed him exclusivly for the first few months. By his 3rd month he had doubled his birth weight. The Dr. found that amusing, and a little amazing but wasn't worried about it. By his first year he was a chunky baby. Now he is 25, 6' and less than 150 lbs. THERE IS NO CORRELATION to birth and infant weight to adult weight! Insurance companies are ridiculous and this is yet another reason there needs to be reform.
  • d3bug
    he was 8ft 13inches high when born? WOW that must have been horrible :P not to mention after 25yrs he seems to have lost 2ft 13inches in height. :)
  • David
    My child is simply outside all these 'percentile' counting. My baby is 18 months old and is wearing clothes listed as 2-3 years. The pediatrician had a chart to show what percentile my child was in, and she was too tall to fit in any percentile. good thing no one is giving me a hard time about her size.... Keep tuned, in 18 years she'll be the tallest woman around ;)
  • mrlewish
    My question is.. are these people for or against health reform?.. if they are against it let their baby be uninsured and pray.
  • JL
    You idiots. What they are not telling you is that RMHP is not for profit org. It's basically a public plan. All three of my kids were just as heavy, Aetna and Blue-Cross covered them just fine.
blog comments powered by Disqus