Firearm questions asked by health ins co.

[Owen Sparks]

My wife is a teacher so I am on her state health insurance polocy. Tonight I had to fill out an on line questionare. Most of the questions were things like Do you smoke? How much do you drink? (notice the question is structured so as to presupposes that you drink) Do you wear a seat belt? Things like that. But then, it asked if I owned firearms and if they were kept unloaded and had locks on them. I was somewhat taken aback at this and refused to answer. Evidently these people look at firearm ownership as a health hazard just like smoking or obecity.
I hate these A B C choice surveys. One question was how many hours did you work last week? IT'S FRIGGIN CHRISTMAS! I didn't work at all. Our business was closed all week.

 

[jhco50]

I would have told them to kiss my cumquat as well.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

That's just what actuaries do. Having a firearm in the home makes it more likely there will be a firearm accident in the home than if there isn't one. It's just like when they ask you how far your house is from a fire hydrant or how far you commute.

 

[NeoSpud]

I had a similar experience on a job application health screening questionnaire. I didn't answer, and no one seemed to mind my disobedience, so oh well.

I would have told them to kiss my cumquat as well.

Not go Freudian or anything, but that particular shrub is spelled with a K, not a C.

 

[Owen Sparks]

"I would have told them to kiss my cumquat as well."

I wish I could. The problem is that these things only give you check boxes like this.

Are you still beating your wife when you get drunk?
Yes__
No __

 

[kingpin008]

You might want to check out this link - http://www.dsgl.org/BVD.htm

I'm not 100% sure, but I'd bet that those sorts of questions fall under the "boundary violation" definition.

I'd call the customer service number of your provider, and explain to them that not only are those types of questions irrelevant, but also intrusive and possibly actionable.

 

[Owen Sparks]

Thanks Kingpin008,

I had no idea such an orginization even existed. Evidently this type of questioning by medical professionals and insurance companies has become common enough cause a problem. It seems to me that the "medical angle" is just another attempt to chip away at our liberties.

 

[kingpin008]

I would agree with you. Actually, I got that website from a blog post made by our own moderator, XavierBreath. He's got a blog (seperate from THR) that's quite a good read, and since he's in the medical field himself, often has some very interesting insights on the profession and it's views of firearms ownership.

Perhaps he might be a good person to contact with questions, although how much he'd know about the insurance side of things is anybody's guess.

 

[GigaBuist]

I have no qualms with answering personal questions when dealing with a medical professional that might relate to my health. If I actually had a primary care phyiscian I'd freely discuss my shooting, how much I do it, where I do it, whether or not I reload, etc. That kinda knowledge would allow him to jump to a likely dianosis of lead poisoning if I ever showed any symptons of it. Or, for hearing loss.

However, asking about pure ownership is a no-no in my book. There's no reason they need to know that. They're are a myriad of things you can do in your personal life that put you more at risk than others and all of that data can be gleaned from other sources. If there is no benefit to you in providing accurate data, which there isn't in this case, then they have to assume that the population they're insuring is identical to the population as a whole.

Heck, unless there's the chance you could be denied coverage I'd mess with them. Say you're a 600 lb. meth head that drinks a fifth of Jack D. every night. Encourage others to do so. That'll jack the state's premiums up and maybe some bean counter will switch to a plan that doesn't probe you on such a personal level.

 

[jerkin]

Funny this came up, I had almost forgot about a similar experience about 7 years ago when I went in for a check-up. It was the first time I had been to my PCP in a few years and I had my then 2 year old daughter with me who fell asleep in my arms in the waiting room. When my turn came they asked me to put down my daughter and I politely refused telling them if she wakes up she will freak out because she is afraid of doctors and hospitals.

I was only there to get my blood pressure and cholesterol checked so I didn't think it was a big deal to just hold her in one arm while they did the tests. They started going through the normal questions, allergic to any medications?, etc. and then popped the "do you have guns in your household?" I was a bit taken back and asked why that was any of their business to which the lady replied it's just an insurance form. I told her I didn't think that pertained to my health and refused to answer. She asked a few more questions while writing on the form.

When she left the room I went over and read what she had written. It was something to the affect of "patient showed signs of strange behavior, refused to put down sleeping child and refused to answer question of firearm ownership. I do not see any evidence of him being harmful to himself or others at this time"

They were lucky I did have my daughter there because I would have hit the ceiling. Instead I just walked out and made my copay at the register and told the lady I nor anyone in my family would ever be back. The next day we switched our pcp's and started looking over our insurance options. We ended up changing insurance companies about a month later.

I'm sorry but I don't see this the same as drinking or smoking which probably kill hundreds of thousands of people yearly. How many people die of accidental firearm discharge in the home every year?

 

[Mojo-jo-jo]

Either I don't answer the question, or I answer "no ownership." It's none of their business. They just want an excuse to raise your insurance rates.

 

[Jeffreii]

What is the company's name and contact info?

 

[Eric F]

you know I was once asked on my boat insurance if I where diebetic what? diabetic what does that have to do with boat ownership? On a car insurance deal there was a question about rideing hourses where do these things come from?

 

[30 cal slob]

That's just what actuaries do. Having a firearm in the home makes it more likely there will be a firearm accident in the home than if there isn't one. It's just like when they ask you how far your house is from a fire hydrant or how far you commute.

Agreed, but they can still KMA because it's NOTFB.

 

[geekWithA.45]

The point that everyone's missing is that firearms have gotten actuary's attention thanks to the efforts of Rebecca Peters and IANSA, who pioneered the concept of using insurance policies as one of the ways to put pressure on gun owners, and The Joyce Foundation, who has funded studies in "actuarial science" to support the idea that gun ownership has a negative economic impact.

 

[Ash]

What ever you do, DON'T LIE ON THE FORM!!! Yeah, refuse to answer, but don't lie about anything. If you lie and are issued insurance, they can revoke it if you lied on the form. States differ on the actions that can be taken, but for instance if you smoke but say you didn't, they can refuse cancer treatment. If you lie about firearms ownership and then have guns, you can lose your insurance. Just don't answer the question.

Ash

 

[SSN Vet]

Information....we need information!

that's supposed to be a funny quote from some song lyric or movie line that's stuck in the back of my head. Say it slowly and ominously like Dr. Frankenstein and you might get it.

My employer has switched health plan providers at least 7 times in the last 9 years. This last one included a wellness program with weekly visits by "fake nurses" who offer measurement of your blood pressure and body fat, disease risk screaning and counceling on such dynamic subjects as "the food pyramid".

So guess who never, ever participates? The HR manager! (whose wife is an RN btw).

I ask him why and he says that "they're just trying to log your private personal health information so they can use it against you to raise premiums or deny coverage at a future date should you become to much of a risk"

This from the HR guy who brought in this insurance provider and the wellness program.

Big brother IS watching.....and it's not the government, it's the health care system.

 

[armoredman]

My last doctor was a gun owner, too. Just moved, not looking forward to looking around- maybe I should give them a questionaire...
1) Do you allow quasi-official politically oriented organizations/boards to instruct you to ask questions of your patients not related to the practice of medicine? Y/N
2) D you allow a political agenda to influence your behaviors or actions in your office, or allow others in your staff to do so? Y/N
3) Do you dislike certain Constitutional rights? Y/N
4) Will your medical malpractice insurance cover any harm coming to me directly caused by my following any non-medical reccomendations/requests made by you or your staff, in or out of this office, particularly those of a politically driven nature?

Wonder how many docs would fill that out...

 

[Foosinho]

Actuaries eat obscure data for breakfast. If it's statistically relevant to the probability or amount the insurance company may have to pay out, they want to know about it. Actuaries are an odd bunch of math-obsessed statisticians.

Oh, and insurance companies are evil. I used to work for one, my wife used to work for one, and my brother and his wife both work for one. They've already got your money - paying out on claims is a business liability, and they'll do everything they can to avoid providing the service you paid for.

 

[NG VI]

that's bizzare!!! leave it blank like someone said, no sense in lying to them. although if they ask and you reply that it isn't relevant or any of their business, you'll get the 'subject behaving strangely when firearms brought up' nonsense. people don't accept that there are questions they don't need to ask anymore

 

[K-Romulus]

I dunno, I used two different home liability companies (American Express and currently Erie), and neither asked about gun ownership. Erie even has a "pro self-defense clause"!

I have fed .gov health insurance, and this "gun issue" only seems to come up at the pediatrician's office due to her personal office form. I've been to three different PCP's and only one had that question on their office form.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

Information....we need information! .

From the great paranoid Brit series "The Prisoner".

 

[Zundfolge]

Having a firearm in the home makes it more likely there will be a firearm accident in the home than if there isn't one.

So they use fraudulent studies like Kellerman to build their actuary tables?

So if I have a CHL then I should get a LOWER rate because I'm more likely to survive an encounter with a criminal (that and CHL holders have been found over and over to be the most law abiding segment of society ... law abiding usually translates into lower death rates).

Big brother IS watching.....and it's not the government, it's the health care system.

Now you know why so many in government want to take control of health care.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

One of the antis' current ploys is to try to get society to regard "firearms safety" as an epidemiological problem rather than a criminal problem. Epidemiology is the study of infections. Holes made by bullets may become infected, but they are not inherently an infection, or a medical problem (other than needing medical treatment after the fact).

This is what I believe to be a boundary violation. Such a question in regard to health insurance is appropriate only if they also ask about ALL other ways in which we might injure ourselves through our hobbies and pass-times: Do you ski? Do you climb mountains? Are you a pilot? Are you a race car driver? Are you a snowmobiler? Are you a sky diver? Are you a scuba diver? If they want to raise premiums or limit coverage to people who engage in risky activities, well that's what insruance ratings and actuaries are all about. But to single out ONE activity, that's statistically less dangerous than most of the others I mentioned, is a sideways attempt to impose restrictions on legitimate firearms ownership.

 

[Owen Sparks]

You would think that they would ask about other dangers first. Like how many miles you travel in a car each day, do you own a swimming pool, do you ride a motorcycle, own a boat, live within walking distance of public housing, or work the night shift in a convenience store? Things like these are statistically much more likely to get you killed than simply owning a gun. There is a political agenda at work here that has singled out firearms ownership.