Yeah I get your point. At 21 I was married, going to college, and providing health insurance for both myself, my new husband, and my sd. I do think an effort needs to be made to ensure everyone in this country-but this seems like a strange way to do it-only extending adolescence even longer.

Under 26 you have to cover them even if they are married and have their own family!! It's absurd. I'm 26 and haven't been on my parents insurance since I was 20.

Gotta love this healthcare plan. None of it works. All this does is encourage these kids to not grow up and be responsible for themselves. There is so much in it that no one realizes. I don't want to get political, but this is absolutely encouraging people to not get jobs and be productive members of society...

Look at the support groups that are in the plan for senior citizens and accepting that they have lived a full life and should stop trying to extend it. That one is sick. They have barely touched on that part of the plan.

We go through the insurance issue every time SD19 gets the sniffles - DH is on my insurance and he keeps asking if we can put SD19 on there too. No way!! Let her BM add her to BM's insurance. S19 was one who ran to the ER for every little ache or pain and since she doesn't have insurance, that's pretty much stopped. I'm wondering how she's on the cheerleading squad with no insurance - I can't believe the college would allow it unless maybe they cover her for school related accidents only. I know the university where I work requires the students & employees to have insurance either through them or proof of insurance through a private provider.

I was 19 when I covered myself by getting f/t job after a year of college. Then I used same co. to pay for my college. Nice pkge - but I had to work, and it was night shift. Tough goings for a really tough gal (me). Whereas DD: 24 and finishing up Today (hurrah) her last class, took her SIX years for b.s. And I paid for everything, even weekly allowance of $150. Why?? Because I got divorced from her dad I got $$$$ & saved it for her college. So I sacrificed for her not to have a life like mine. However, skids will be off my health insurance at 18, per CO. I hate paying for them to be covered & seeing how negligent/accident prone they are and getting benefits under my name makes me angry. DH or BM should be covering them imo they should both be working and parenting their twins vs. sleeping & watching TV all day, or motorcycle riding (her) or golfing (him).

As a T-1 diabetic I can not qualify for private insurance. I have to be covered in a group and the surest way of making that happen is for me to work for companies with quality benefits.

Back in the day if you were not a full time student you were not covered under a parent’s policy after you turned 18. When I left school at 21, I was no longer covered on my parent’s policy.

I had to start a business in order to get health insurance when I was in my early 20's.

When I sold my business to go back to school full time the only coverage I had was hospitalization coverage through the school. That was a decision I made and risk that I felt was worth it in order to finish my degree.

This is just another governmental interference policy. Though the Senate attempt to overturn Obama Care failed this week I am hopeful that the Supreme Court will rule that this crap is unconstitutional and scrap the whole thing. With a conservative controlled House of Representatives President Obama will not get another shot at taking over 1/6th of our economy and to bankrupt our country through his communist policies.

Everyone in the US can receive care. All they have to do is walk in to an ER and the ER must treat them whether they have insurance or not. Illegal aliens have known this the whole time.

As a T-1 diabetic I have worked for companies that I did not care to work for just to insure that I had coverage. I sacrificed to make sure I had coverage. The taxpayer does not owe people who make poor decisions medical coverage. My wife and I agreed long ago that we would never work for the same company just to insure that we would have access to health coverage if either one of us lost our job and to reduce the risk that we would both be unemployed at the same time.

I lost my job on 9/20/2001. We had to shift to my wife’s coverage through her employer. Our costs went from $200/mo to $700/mo. My maintenance meds cost ~$1400/mo so we were glad to have coverage even at a higher cost. We retained coverage because we made viable plans and followed them.

This is not rocket science and people who do not make viable decisions in their lives concerning medical insurance are not owed coverage by those who do.

Considering my medical condition I should be a pro Bam-Care person I suppose. But wrong is wrong and I will not get on board this bandwagon that saddles the tax payer with an extra $Trillion or so in give-away grab bag costs.

Over the course of human history gov’t has been found to be completely ineffective in doing anything but a few specific functions. Gov’t should be limited to the following IMHO.

1) Law Enforcement. This is the matrix to insure that large numbers of people can form and sustain a society.
2) Basic Infrastructure. Roads, harbors, etc…. This is the foundation of national growth and prosperity.
3) The Common Defense. This protects the nation and its citizens from aggression by other nations or groups of people.
4) Protection and Advancement of National Interests in the International Community. This is the structure under which long term prosperity for a nation is developed and the medium under which a prosperous nation can help develop prosperity in less developed nations.

And a last and small governmental plank;

5) Basic sustenance, housing and protection of citizens not physically or mentally capable of providing for themselves.

Govt should protect those who are providing for themselves from those who are capable but choose not to. This is provided under gov’t responsibility #1. Those who choose not to provide for themselves should receive nothing from gov’t or from those who do unless voluntarily given at the individual level.

We became a great nation on self reliance, benefiting from our own work and on the right to protect our selves, our families and our property from seizure by those who refuse to earn these things for themselves. That works, so let's stick with it.

Sorry for my political rant.

All IMHO of course.

If the child/adult had some illness that needed to be treated with daily medications then I would understand to a point of their disability but knowing you personally iloveit your SO's daughters have no illness or disability so this is BS. I was cut off my parents insurance right after graduation from high school as well and after my divorce had no insurance for 2 years and survived so I think the young adults including myself can do just fine without parents help. One of my friends is 26 and still has her parents pay for her insurance so I guess some people are more lazy than others. I just know my parents have a life of their own and are wanting to enjoy their finances to themselves instead of having me or my brother mooch off of them. Which has made me a very responsible adult!

I like the new rules. I don't want my kids to worry about whether or not they can afford to see a doctor when they need it. My kids used to be on my ex-husband's policy, but when my daughter turned 18, he cancelled her policy immediately (he was no longer obligated by our divorce decree to carry her on his insurance). Nice daddy, no? And the man is a multi-millionaire! Just a POS, makes me so mad!
Anyway, I said, screw it, I just put all the kids on my insurance, and I'll keep them on it. Having a quality health care is not a luxury, or "spoiling" them, or anything else. Everybody should have access to it, and shouldn't go broke every time they need to see a doctor!