Need input regarding health insurance for out of state child

[dihahey]

NCP -Wisconsin/Child and CP -Washington
Sons father was released from prison in June. We have a child support review at the end of October. The current order states that we both must provide health insurance and then anything not covered is split. I moved to Washington while he was in prison.
We have been taking about the best options for medical coverage. We felt that it was useless for the father to cover the child since everything would be out of network. He declined the coverage. I guess he thought that meant that I would just cover him and he would not have to pitch in on the cost.
Now he wants to add my son in January instead of splitting the cost to have him on my insurance.
My insurance includes medical, dental, and vision and there is no deductible for outpatient visits. His half would be about $70/month. His insurance is only medical, has a $4000 deductible, and all the doctors are out of network. It would cost him $50/month to cover my son.
It seems like the only reason he does not want to use only my insurance is the extra monthly cost. However in the long run it would cost more.
I want to add the decision of healthcare to our current motion for court in October. I am clueless as to how this works and what the results may be. Anyone experience a similar situation?

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

It seems a little strange that the order would require both of you to have insurance coverage on the same child. Because every health insurance policy I've ever seen has a coordination of benefits clause so that the insurance companies don't double pay for for a service. The best you are going to get covered is whatever the better insurance of the two pays. This sounds like it would be yours.

You may want to go reread the order. It may say something along the lines that both parents are responsible to provide insurance. That doesn't mean there should be two policies.

 

[LdiJ]

It seems a little strange that the order would require both of you to have insurance coverage on the same child. Because every health insurance policy I've ever seen has a coordination of benefits clause so that the insurance companies don't double pay for for a service. The best you are going to get covered is whatever the better insurance of the two pays. This sounds like it would be yours.

You may want to go reread the order. It may say something along the lines that both parents are responsible to provide insurance. That doesn't mean there should be two policies.

That isn't how it works.

The primary insurance picks up whatever they would normally pick up (and that would not necessarily be the better insurance) and then the secondary insurance would pick up the difference.

 

[Zigner]

If we're talking about $20 per month difference - perhaps the OP could agree to the dad simply paying her $50/month instead of $70/month...

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

That isn't how it works.

The primary insurance picks up whatever they would normally pick up (and that would not necessarily be the better insurance) and then the secondary insurance would pick up the difference.

You are just wrong LdiJ.

https://www.anthem.com/wps/portal/ahpemployer?content_path=employer/va/f5/s1/t0/pw_034763.htm&state=va&label=Coordination of Benefits (COB)

This is Anthem the Blue Cross Blue Shield carrier in WI. But state doesn't really matter and neither does carrier.

 

[stealth2]

Our order required Dad to insure the kids, but we were also in different states. Everything in my (and the kids') state was OON for his insurance and required a referral (a real pain when the kid's sick). I just covered them myself. According to the judge, that was my choice, Dad was meeting the requirements of the order and was not required to contribute to my premiums. Whatevs. And it wasn't worth the aggravation of getting him to pay his portion of what insurance didn't pay.

 

[dihahey]

The order states that both patents must provide health insurance if available and at a reasonable cost. It just seems silly for him to waste money on a plan that would be of no help. Thanks for the input so far. Hopefully more people can weigh in.

 

[Zigner]

The order states that both patents must provide health insurance if available and at a reasonable cost. It just seems silly for him to waste money on a plan that would be of no help. Thanks for the input so far. Hopefully more people can weigh in.

Instead of requiring him to pay $70 per month, offer to allow him to pay $50 per month so that he doesn't need to get another policy...

 

[Ohiogal]

NCP -Wisconsin/Child and CP -Washington
Sons father was released from prison in June. We have a child support review at the end of October. The current order states that we both must provide health insurance and then anything not covered is split. I moved to Washington while he was in prison.
We have been taking about the best options for medical coverage. We felt that it was useless for the father to cover the child since everything would be out of network. He declined the coverage. I guess he thought that meant that I would just cover him and he would not have to pitch in on the cost.
Now he wants to add my son in January instead of splitting the cost to have him on my insurance.
My insurance includes medical, dental, and vision and there is no deductible for outpatient visits. His half would be about $70/month. His insurance is only medical, has a $4000 deductible, and all the doctors are out of network. It would cost him $50/month to cover my son.
It seems like the only reason he does not want to use only my insurance is the extra monthly cost. However in the long run it would cost more.
I want to add the decision of healthcare to our current motion for court in October. I am clueless as to how this works and what the results may be. Anyone experience a similar situation?

How much is parent and child coverage? How much is parent coverage? How many children do you have? Are you looking at family coverage? If so, then how much is how parent coverage? How many would be covered under family coverage?