I was reading somewhere that many insurance companies no longer cover circumcision because it's not medically necessary. I didn't let them do it to my son so I'm wondering if this is the case with most insurance companies.

It used to be covered here in Ontario but I think it changed about 5-10 yrs ago:scratch: my gf had to pay for her son's circumcision.

My son's was covered in 2003.

My insurance hasnt changed, and it was covered in 2003.

Liam's was covered in 2002, but having no need for it anymore I don't know if that's changed. :dunno:

Ours was covered, and Jeremy was circumsized this year. Then again, my entire pregnancy (dr's appointments, lab tests, hospital stay, epi, all that stuff) we only had to pay $20.

All three of my son's have been covered :nod:

Yep, both boys were covered.

Brayden isn't circumsized, but I'm pretty sure it was covered by our insurance had we chosen to do it.

They cover all pregnancy visits/test/us, my c-section/hospital stay, infant care/tests & circumcision... we only had to pay $15 for each of the kids.
We joke that we don't want to get a dog because it would cost us more to neuter the dog than it cost us to have both of our kiddos :lol:

Hmm, something else I need to look into. I don't know if it's covered or not, I really hadn't thought about it until now.

Brayden isn't circumsized, but I'm pretty sure it was covered by our insurance had we chosen to do it. Same here. Pretty sure it's covered.

It was covered in 95 and my friends son was just done 3 weeks ago (when he was born) and it was covered by theirs

My insurance covers it as well (I asked before the baby was born).

Daniel's was covered by our insurance last October.

No, it isn't covered here. Hospitals won't even do them. If people choose to circumsize they have to go to a private clinic.

:nod:

Yep mine did!

It would be interesting to see what would happen if insurance companies in the U.S. stopped covering it. In Britain, the circumcision rate dropped to less than 1% after the National Health Service stopped covering it - http://www.circumcisionquotes.com/index14.html

(I am not taking a position on either side of whether it should be covered or whether it should be done, just saying it would be interesting to see if the U.S. would still have such a high rate if people had to pay for it out of pocket.)

Krishan's was covered in 2004.

(I am not taking a position on either side of whether it should be covered or whether it should be done, just saying it would be interesting to see if the U.S. would still have such a high rate if people had to pay for it out of pocket.)

Sure you are. We all know you're against circ'ing. ;) I think you've established your feelings on that in past threads. But ITA with you.. would be interesting to know if people felt as strongly for circ'ing if they had to pay out of pocket. I bet the rates would drop drastically!

Alexander's circumsicion was covered in 2005. :nod:

And, DH and I made the decision to do it before we had confirmation from our insurance company that it would be covered; so we would have had it done regardless.

Sure you are. We all know you're against circ'ing. ;) I think you've established your feelings on that in past threads. But ITA with you.. would be interesting to know if people felt as strongly for circ'ing if they had to pay out of pocket. I bet the rates would drop drastically!

No, if I was taking a position I'd say something like "I don't think insurance should cover it unless it a doctor says it's medically necessary." But I don't think this thread was intended to debate the issue, so I'm not taking a position in this thread.

But I don't think this thread was intended to debate the issue, so I'm not taking a position in this thread.

We can start a new thread in the kitchen! :awink:

I read somewhere that many insurance companies were dropping coverage for the procedure since it's becoming more known that it's not medically necessary and therefore less people were getting it done because they had to pay out of pocket. That doesn't seem to be the case here. I guess it's mostly in other countries and the US will follow in several years :dunno:

My insurance covers it.

I'm actually pretty surprised that the insurance companies haven't dropped this coverage. They usually seem to want to pay for as little as possible.

I assume our insurance would have covered it, but I'm not absolutely sure.

Our insurance covered Ty's in 2002. We now have different (read: better) insurance now and I'm assuming they will cover it for this one. If they don't, we'll still have it done anyway and just pay for it out of pocket.

Owen's was covered.

Brady's was covered in 2004. It was somehow billed wrong though and didn't get paid at first... I think it was added to the ped rather than OB bill.

Nikita's was covered. Well, let me give you more details: they tried to stick us with the $550 circumcision bill for about 2 months, then snet a statement showing where supposedly, the price between the ins. co and the hospital was negotiated down to $240, and Unicare paid it. Taking cheap shots. We had SO many of them like that! UGH! (if we really want a good kitchen thread, let's start one with the title "Unicare" :awink: )

It was covered for all of my boys in 2001, 2003 and most recently in 2005. I had a different insurance carrier each time.

Lora

Nathaniel had a bris so we paid for his circumcision but it would have been covered. As far as I know, most insurances still cover circumcision as long as it's done during the initial newborn hospitalization. It's more of a problem when parents decide later that they want it done. Then it becomes an "unnecessary procedure," unless there is a medical diagnosis. One of my colleagues published a fairly recent paper (maybe a year or 2 ago) which showed that the rate of newborn circumcision is actually increasing in this country. The Northeast has the highest rates of circumcision and the West has the lowest. The biggest increase comes from the South, where rates of circumcision have risen (possibly from Northerners moving South). Again, I'm not arguing for or against but I was surprised by the results of this paper. (The paper was in the Journal of Urology and I can see if I can find it if anyone's interseted).

Amanda

Amanda, Does the paper talk about why the number of circs is increasing?

I am sure it would have been covered. I wish I could get some sort of discount for saving the insurance the $$ for 2 procedures.

It wasn't covered when I had my last child two years ago. Had it been a boy we would have had to pay $200 out of pocket for it.