Here I am worried about cancer or diabetes making me solely responsible for medical expenses that I could never possibly afford. Apparently being battered is also something that the insurance companies think you should pay for yourself.

But, in DC and eight other states, including Idaho, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wyoming, insurance companies have gone too far, claiming that “domestic violence victim” is also a pre-existing condition.

…according to this article posted on SEIU.org.

Not meaning to belittle the issue, so far I have not quite been able to qualify this claim, based on what I read in the article. Is anyone out there able to cite reliable media coverage of this?

The article goes on to ask readers to do something about it, stating:

It is clear that insurance companies refuse to police themselves. It’s up to us to call on Congress to take action now to pass health care reform and end discrimination against patients with pre-existing conditions.

Again, I think domestic violence is pretty crummy, but is this article about domestic violence being labeled as a pre-existing condition, or about pre-existing conditions being bad. Does this mean that a person who is not against pre-existing conditions is not against domestic violence?

That’s as far as I’m going to stick my neck out on this one. I dare not play devils advocate on the question of whether or not it should be legal for an insurance company to make these claims. Nope. No way. Not going to do it. You want to? Fine. Comment!