It’s unconscionable that insurers would refuse to cover sick children — well it sounds unconscionable, but it does make logical sense. The whole point of “insurance” is to insure against risks. If people could buy insurance for disasters after the disaster occurred, people wouldn’t buy insurance until they were sick.
It’s reminiscent of the fellow in Tennessee who didn’t pay for fire protection, and then watched his house burn down while firefighters watched. If he could have paid the $75 fire protection fee while the house was burning, then it would have been logical for everyone not to pay the $75 fee until their homes were burning down, too. Had the homeowner been permitted to pay the full cost of putting out the fire on the spot, he would have at least been in the same position as people who choose not to carry health insurance and have to pay the full bill when illness occurs.
Some people look at the Tennessee former-homeowner and say it is unconscionable that society let the home burn down. We can say the same thing about health insurance for sick children. The solution in the case of the homeowner is to require all homeowners to pay the fire protection fee; in other words, they pay a tax. And if we want sick children to be covered by insurance, then we’ll need to mandate that everyone be covered, too. In other words, pay a tax.
There’s just no free lunch.