The child’s HSA is used to pay for her/his birth expenses. An HSA can be established for a child as soon as conception is confirmed–there will have to be some mid-year, pro-rated rules yadda, yadda–you’ll be good at asking the right, “how are we going to do that” question$. That HSA gets re-confirmed at birth (so if a pregnancy is terminated, that unborn child’s HSA monies return to the NHSA). As soon as conception is confirmed, the parents (we’ll get into the "what if"s on dads at a later time) perhaps make a one-time payment from their HSA to the hospital where they intend to have the baby delivered, and the child starts making his/her monthly contributions to the hospital system (or “other”) where mom intends to deliver. This is just like all other cooperatives between potential patients and their medical providers. The child, and mom, get whatever care they require at that time of birth. There are no astronomical preemie bills or whatever. The patients’ payments are coming in all the time, the hospital exists (and uses that constant revenue stream) to take care of patients, whatever their needs are.
“…the idea the father will use his HSA benefits to pay for a mother’s pregnancy” I thought this one might get your attention. Good questions. As far as paying for the mother’s pregnancy goes, her own, and the child’s HSA pays for that. It would be good if the father’s cooperative agreement with the hospital of his choice (for himself) were the same one his partner in creation of another human being were using, I suppose, but I don’t have a gut feeling about this one way or the other. What’s a man’s point of view on this?
My mention of parents making an effort to be sure there was adequate money in their HSA for a planned-for child was thinking along the lines of we should make carve-outs in the HSA system for parental leave and eventual early-years child care (RIGHT TO MATERNAL/FETAL HEALTHCARE & EDUCATION to stabilize the abortion issue has some specific ideas on details of “what” is needed, for example). I am suggesting the lost work time be compensated out of the HSA, that that be an allowable deduction with specified limits, etc. (not by forcing the employer to pay for maternity, and sometimes paternity leave–as well as whomever fills in for the missing employee). Daycare could be paid by the child’s own HSA?
Do you plan on requiring paternity testing to ensure we’re taking from the right father’s HSA? short answer, No. But that’s because I’m talking about a wanted child who is being acknowledged by a father who wants to be one. And no one is “taking” anything from a father’s HSA. He is directing what medical providers are allowed to debit his HSA. OR in what we’re discussing here, he has notified the NHSA he is going to be a dad, and he will be filing paternity leave with appropriate timing when that becomes something he is going to do for his health and that of his child.
Mandated paternity testing is a legal matter. It may become an issue at some point in some court somewhere, but it isn’t a part of this proposal (this proposal, as I’m sure you recall from our earlier exchanges is all about getting the legal system OUT of healthcare as much as possible). Elective paternity testing would always be an option for a dad, or dad and mom, of course. That is a private matter between them that, yes, would become an allowable expense under an HSA, just as many other elective procedures are (presumably already covered under whatever their monthly payment is to their chosen medical system. I need to keep emphasizing this, we need to strike a balance in this country such that we are automatically putting enough into the NHSA system every year such that the hospital/lab that’s receiving a steady income from the system just does whatever needs to be done in an appropriately timely manner, as the work comes in. There is no billing at time of service anymore. No catastrophic medical bills for anyone, ever. No insurance denials, ever; no waste of anyone’s time deciding “if” about any of it…or making a massive profit on someone else’s tragedy…
“Can anyone just step in and say “put the bill for those healthcare services on my HSA for that other person”?” Again, short answer, No. Anyone, can make a contribution to someone else’s HSA, however (or an individual can add money to their own HSA if they want to–though I can only imagine doing that if the HSA interest rate were more than what could be gained elsewhere—will be interesting to see where that works out with the state banks–unless it’s just a self-discipline thing that a person wants to put something away toward a potential health thing (or toward retirement?–as this system slowly replaces Social Security???)
In the case of a very unusual situation–sudden mass unemployment because of a natural disaster (such as the storms in the southeast not long ago) there should certainly be an option for people, or groups (churches, relief agencies, the government?) to put non-HSA money they are choosing to donate into other people’s HSAs. And then victims so-affected would have a special dispensation to take specific deductions from their HSA–we’re talking a “health” emergency after all–at their time of need. The HSA accounts would be a very expedient way of getting appropriate help to people when they really need it (note, no HSA holder is identified as an R or D or any other party affiliate–politics needs to be booted out of HEALTHcare permanently, too)
Great questions! I don’t think they’re rhetorical, at all. I think we/WE are going to get this done…soon.