You can't get blood from a turnip BM
First of all, please don't bash my DH for what I am about to post. He opened his own business 3 years ago, I lost my job a 1 1/2 years ago, just closed a 3 1/2 year court battle with BM over custody change, and we are still trying to recover. Be gentle.
When CS was first court-ordered 4 years ago, DH was ordered to carry insurance on SD IF INSURANCE WAS AVAILABLE TO HIM (standard wording in our state - yep, it's all on the dad, BM's are apparently exempt from provided insurance for their own kids). It was not available at the time through his employer. However, SD was already being carried on BM's insurance for $160/month so DH was instead ordered to pay $80/mth on top of CS. This was all written into the CS order. About 3-4 months after CS was set, BM was fired from her job with the insurance. At the time, DH did not bother to have CS modified to reflect the insurance change (we were not married then). He figured she would get another job and they would figure it out when she got new insurance. Instead, BM remained unemployed/part-time for the next 2 years and signed SD up for state (free) insurance. DH did get estimates at the time for covering SD on his own and they ran about $400/mth. Neither BM nor DH could afford that so she opted for the state program.
A couple of weeks ago, BM emailed DH that SD was losing her state coverage. BM could add her to her employer's plan (yes, she finally got a job and managed to keep it for the last 2 years) for a total of $300/mth. But she keeps insisting to DH that he was ORDERED to carry insurance on SD. She conveniently leaves out the "if insurance is available to him" part. She also seems to think that if DH carries insurance on SD, that the cost of it will be completely his responsibility. But it's not - our state divides it in half. So BM's half would be deducted from DH's CS payments. DH's CS payments are about to be reduced dramatically due to a CS review INITIATED BY BM. So, in effect, BM could owe DH for insurance when it is all said and done.
So, what DH decided to do was go down to the state insurance office and see if he could get SD signed up for the free insurance under his name instead of BM's. He does not have health insurance and neither do I, so adding her to a family plan is not an option. We cannot afford to insure her on an individual plan right now. We simply do not have the money. The case worker told DH that BM failed to submit her most recent income statement and that is why SD is being dropped. BM told us she no longer qualified. I'm not sure how BM knew she didn't qualify if she never submitted the paperwork required to keep her covered. Also, BM has always made it seem like she is the only one who can apply for the state insurance because she is CP. But, they told DH that he has enough overnights to more than qualify. Also, his income is so low, he qualifies financially as well.
Well, we emailed this info to BM last night. Asked her to either submit her income statement to the state agency to keep SD covered under her name OR to cancel her coverage so that DH could sign her up under his name. Wouldn't you know it, she emailed back fuming mad. She is furious that the state agency spoke to DH about HER personal information (umm, it's about his daughter, not you), furious that he is trying to "get out of his obligations" (like she did for the last 4 years when she couldn't afford insurance), furious that he is trying to insinuate that she will be partially responsible the cost of insuring SD under HIS insurance if he has to pay for coverage, furious that he is "waiting until the last minute" (even though we had a snow and ice storm that shut our entire city down for a week).
This bitch will never be happy until she has bled DH completely dry. Even if she isn't the one getting his money, she wants him to PAY. Even though this does not affect her in any way, in fact benefits her because it will be free for her as well, benefits SD because it is great health, dental and eye care insurance AND SD gets to keep all the same providers, she is mad because DH is not getting punished financially. Even though she signs SD up for anything she can get that is free - school lunches, childcare - it is not ok for DH to do so. And, truth be told, it hurts DH's pride immensely that he is having to do this. He would never do this if we could afford insurance.
I'm not sure what BM's motive was here. Obviously, her goal in life is to make sure DH ends up single, broke and miserable (like her), but in general it's not like her to let SD's health related stuff lapse. She is usually a huge control freak about all things medical (she used to work in the medical field, she now works in the health insurance field, ironically) so she thinks she is practically a doctor. So, I am thinking she purposely did not send her info in so that DH would be forced to find coverage for SD. She has harped for years that he is "in contempt" for not carrying insurance on SD. Also, maybe she realizes that she made a mistake in pushing the CS issue and her CS is going to go down? So she wants to make sure DH takes a hit financially from some other source? Also, there hasn't been much drama lately with no holidays or anything. So maybe she just needed an excuse to crawl out of her hole and cause some drama so that she'd have a reason to interact (read: argue) with DH? Either way, I can't wait for this to all be over!!!!
- asgoodasitgets's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
Maybe, but she is going to
Maybe, but she is going to have to soon. They are having a CS review in a few weeks.
No, I have no idea. But,
No, I have no idea. But, while she could look it up, the case worker specifically told DH that SD was being dropped because BM did not submit her income statement.
We can't afford it so we will
We can't afford it so we will be sending a version of your last email. I already drafted and sent it to DH for his approval/edit
The main issue is that BM is insisting that DH has to cover SD per the CO. She conveniently leaves out the "if insurance is available" part of the clause. In her mind this means that if DH covers SD, he is 100% responsible for the cost of coverage. However, if she covers her, he is 50% responsible. Yeah, yeah, I know, it makes no sense, but what does in BM's world? Therefore, in her version, if DH covers SD, he takes the entire financial hit, still pays full CS to BM, ends up in in jail or the poorhouse and our lives suck while BM sits back and has a jolly old time. She can't stand that SD will still have the same coverage that she had before (which was perfectly fine when that is all BM could afford) but DH won't have to suffer financially to obtain it. That's the REAL problem in her eyes. I told DH to not respond to any more of her texts until she notifies him that she has cancelled her stated coverage.
Review hasn't happened yet. I
Review hasn't happened yet. I am not even sure that BM has received the paperwork for the court date.
Is it possible that she's
Is it possible that she's actually trying to get your DH to pay HER medical? In other words $300 / month covers BOTH her and SD?
Right. Ours didn't pull that
Right. Ours didn't pull that one (we provided insurance) but she DID try to sneak in some of her medical expenses every so often when she'd send us her twice a year packet of thousands upon thousands of medical bills for two healthy skids.
I thought about that. $300
I thought about that. $300 just to add a child to an employer's family plan seemed like a lot to me as well. Or maybe that is not just health but dental and vision too? And BM works for an insurance company! I mean, DH got a quote for a family plan and it was a little over $300 for all 3 of us!
DH can request a break down
DH can request a break down of coverage. It should have the employee cost and the dependent itemized.
I wouldn't even bother,
I wouldn't even bother, honestly. CO says DH "should" cover SD "if possible". It's possible, and it's free. *shrug* If BM chooses to insure her then she can pay for it. Or at least, that's the tack I'd take.
What I'm wondering though is
What I'm wondering though is how the Ky Medicaid system works on the 'family' part of the program. If it is coming down to BM/SD and be on it as 'family' (BM getting coverage because of the minor kid) or OP's DH/SD being on it together as 'family (DH in this scenario qualifying for the coverage himself as 'family' because of the minor kid), which one ends up with it. BM and DH can't both be on the 'family' circumstances because they are not together and they only have the one minor child.
BM doesn't have insurance. OP's DH doesn't have insurance. Kid doesn't have insurance for long (due to lack of paperwork necessities). Both households claim to not be able to afford healthcare. Either one of the households supposedly qualifies for the Medicaid but only one of them with the kiddo. Obama Care, I think, KY participates in (along with Federal subsidy to offset premiums). So I'm not sure with the changes in the new mandatory HC act now in force if either parent can claim 'healthcare isn't available or offered'. There's been a lot of changes in the HC scene since the OP's DH's CO of four yrs ago.
BM does have insurance now
BM does have insurance now through her employer. She is saying is it $300 to add SD to her plan (change from individual to family coverage). In our state, there is a healthcare program set up just for kids, like Medicaid, but only available to minors, not the entire family. That is the program I am talking about.
You are right about the Obamacare. I wanted to get a family plan set up through that and include SD but we would still have to pay for it even with our economic status because they only look at income, not expenses. So, for now that's a no-go. I am claiming financial hardship on my taxes this year (we file separately due to DH's business) so that I don't have to pay the penalty. I hope that our situation will change by the next open enrollment session.
I feel your pain, however I
I feel your pain, however I do beleive your interpreting the CO the wrong way. Our CO also said this and we tried to drop ss from dh coverage because it was exspensive and Bm could receive insureance for him for free. The phrase "if coverage is available" does not mean if you can afford it, it means if coverage is offered from your employer. The courts don't care if you can afford it, they will expect you to find a way to pay for it, suggesting to work another job. If insurance is not available through work then the courts will suggest that you purchase private insurance, again not caring if you can afford it.
We went through this and this is how it was explained to us. Dh pays the coverage and then Bm and dh split any outstanding bills 50/50.
If insurance is available does not equate to affordability.
Yeah, insurance is not
Yeah, insurance is not available as DH is self-employed. He does qualify personally for free insurance on SD so that would be the insurance available to him. The courts had no problem with BM covering SD on state insurance so they shouldn't have a problem with DH doing so either. If the courts didn't care if parents could afford it, Medicaid would not exist and a lot of people would be in jail for contempt.