Advocates say it is discrimination and are arguing for “insurance fairness” on the grounds that people who have joints surgically replaced typically don’t face the same kinds of coverage challenges.
If you read the article though, it appears as though a more basic prosthetic would be covered, but the one with electronics to provide greatly enhanced stability will not be.
I’m in no way siding with the insurance company, but they’re not flat out refusing to cover the prosthetic.
If you read the article though, it appears as though a more basic prosthetic would be covered, but the one with electronics to provide greatly enhanced stability will not be.
I’m in no way siding with the insurance company, but they’re not flat out refusing to cover the prosthetic.