Could i apply for medicaid?

[MoonfaceGal21 1]

I've gotten a lot of mixed views on this but i'm not sure. I dont have any insurance currently and i'm waiting to get my ead card so i can work. Could i get medicaid for my pregnancy?

[jkminney 30]

I've gotten a lot of mixed views on this but i'm not sure. I dont have any insurance currently and i'm waiting to get my ead card so i can work. Could i get medicaid for my pregnancy?

I wouldn't think so as that would qualify as aid.

[aguilayserpiente 2]

I've gotten a lot of mixed views on this but i'm not sure. I dont have any insurance currently and i'm waiting to get my ead card so i can work. Could i get medicaid for my pregnancy?

A K1 beneficiary or applicant for other types of immigration benefit will not be liable as a public charge for receipt of State Medi-Cal benefits derived from Medicaid. According to the USCIS/INS preamble explaining its own regulations:

According to HHS and other benefit-granting agencies consulted by the Service, non-cash benefits generally provide supplementary support in the form of vouchers or direct services to support nutrition, health, and living condition needs. (See HHS Letter.) These benefits are often provided to low-income working families to sustain and improve their ability to remain self-sufficient. A few examples of these non-cash benefits

that do not directly provide subsistence

are

Medicaid

, Food Stamps, CHIP, and their related State analogues, WIC, housing benefits, transportation vouchers, and certain kinds of special-purpose non-cash benefits provided under the TANF program.

These forms of benefits, and others discussed below and in the proposed regulation, will not be considered for public charge purposes

."

Federal Register, FR Doc. 99-13188, Vol. 64, No. 101, Wednesday, May 26, 1999, page 28678, Column 1 (Clarifying and citing to proposed 8 CFR Parts 212 and 237).

Both Medi-Cal (which is the Medicaid program administered by the states) and public emergency medical treatment are exempt from benefits supporting liability for/as a "public charge."

Edited May 15, 2011 by aguilayserpiente

[Mrstate 1]

Emergency Medicaid is excempted as a Tested Public Means Benefits so yes you can apply and dont have to repay read the I-864 instruction it says there on Page 1 then check I-864P its says on the buttom which is excempt

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

A K1 beneficiary or applicant for other types of immigration benefit will not be liable as a public charge for receipt of State Medi-Cal benefits derived from Medicaid. According to the USCIS/INS preamble explaining its own regulations:

According to HHS and other benefit-granting agencies consulted by the Service, non-cash benefits generally provide supplementary support in the form of vouchers or direct services to support nutrition, health, and living condition needs. (See HHS Letter.) These benefits are often provided to low-income working families to sustain and improve their ability to remain self-sufficient. A few examples of these non-cash benefits

that do not directly provide subsistence

are

Medicaid

, Food Stamps, CHIP, and their related State analogues, WIC, housing benefits, transportation vouchers, and certain kinds of special-purpose non-cash benefits provided under the TANF program.

These forms of benefits, and others discussed below and in the proposed regulation, will not be considered for public charge purposes

."

Federal Register, FR Doc. 99-13188, Vol. 64, No. 101, Wednesday, May 26, 1999, page 28678, Column 1 (Clarifying and citing to proposed 8 CFR Parts 212 and 237).

Both Medi-Cal (which is the Medicaid program administered by the states) and public emergency medical treatment are exempt from benefits supporting liability for/as a "public charge."

As you've discovered, an immigrant who receives temporary Medicaid will not be considered a "public charge". The net effect is that they are not deportable under the "public charge" section of INA 212. However, when a sponsored immigrant receives any means-tested benefits during the time that the affidavit of support is enforceable then the government can take collection action against the sponsor.

Using Medicaid will not get the OP in any trouble with immigration. However, it can put her sponsor deeply in debt to the government.

[aguilayserpiente 2]

As you've discovered, an immigrant who receives temporary Medicaid will not be considered a "public charge". The net effect is that they are not deportable under the "public charge" section of INA 212. However, when a sponsored immigrant receives any means-tested benefits during the time that the affidavit of support is enforceable then the government can take collection action against the sponsor.

Using Medicaid will not get the OP in any trouble with immigration. However, it can put her sponsor deeply in debt to the government.

The OP asked if she could obtain her pregnancy care via Medicaid/Medi-cal. She can. While there is the remote possibility that the sponsor may incur a debt upon a civil action for reimbursement under 5 CFR section 213a.4, the sound public policy approach is for the mother and child to receive quality prenatal, hospital, and post-partum care. If reimbursement is to occur at all without the opportunity for waiver, they may make payments.

[aguilayserpiente 2]

Sorry about the typos.

Edited July 3, 2011 by aguilayserpiente

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

The OP asked if she could obtain her pregnancy care via Medicaid/Medi-cal. She can. While there is the remote possibility that the sponsor may incur a debt upon a civil action for reimbursement under 5 CFR section 213a.4, the sound public policy approach is for the mother and child to receive quality prenatal, hospital, and post-partum care. If reimbursement is to occur at all without the opportunity for waiver, they may make payments.

Deciding whether or not she should get medical care has nothing to do with public policy. The "public charge" determination is not the only factor that should be considered when deciding whether or not to apply for medicaid.

A sponsor can be compelled to reimburse the state if a sponsored immigrant collects means tested benefits. It's a relevant factor that should be considered by an immigrant before they apply for medicaid. There might be other options available that would have much less financial impact on the sponsor while still providing quality medical care for the immigrant. For example, if the OP is married to the sponsor then private medical insurance might be available at substantially lower cost than would be required to reimburse the state for medicaid payments. If they are recently divorced then an extension of benefits through COBRA might be available.

BTW, title 8 of the CFR covers the affidavit of support. Title 5 relates to administrative personnel for federal agencies.

[aguilayserpiente 2]

Deciding whether or not she should get medical care has nothing to do with public policy. The "public charge" determination is not the only factor that should be considered when deciding whether or not to apply for medicaid.

A sponsor can be compelled to reimburse the state if a sponsored immigrant collects means tested benefits. It's a relevant factor that should be considered by an immigrant before they apply for medicaid. There might be other options available that would have much less financial impact on the sponsor while still providing quality medical care for the immigrant. For example, if the OP is married to the sponsor then private medical insurance might be available at substantially lower cost than would be required to reimburse the state for medicaid payments. If they are recently divorced then an extension of benefits through COBRA might be available.

BTW, title 8 of the CFR covers the affidavit of support. Title 5 relates to administrative personnel for federal agencies.

Having access to affordable prenatal care is a matter of public policy per se http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/9/4/91.full.pdf. If you have evidence to the contrary, cite it.

The OP appears to be afraid to seek Medicaid/Medi-Cal for prenatal care. The lack of affordable healthcare continues to prevent access to prenatal care and contributes to increasing infant mortality.

Your response is for the OP is to purchase private insurance or forgo treatment. Both options are contrary to public policy and a humane response. Why? Persons who are eligible for Medicaid/Medi-Cal must have incomes at most 133% of the poverty line or below. http://www.cms.gov/MedicaidEligibility/03_MandatoryEligibilityGroups.asp#TopOfPage

The poverty line for a family of two is $19,564.30 or $1,630 per month (most likely the OP's bracket since she is considering Medicaid/Medi-cal). http://www.cms.gov/MedicaidEligibility/Downloads/ POV11Combo.pdf . HUD's fair market rents in my area are $1200 for a 1 bedroom apartment in the ghetto, www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html. After rent, transportation $100, utilities $50, auto insurance $50, FOOD $200, that leaves about $30. My paycheck stubs indicate that my share of Kaiser Permanente for me alone was $200 per month. After separation from the employer the COBRA, continuing benefits, was $387.

My county's Alameda Alliance has some "affordable" health insurance at $75 per month wherein a person buys the policy and can use it AFTER A YEAR and after paying a deductible of $1,500 in treatment, http://alamedaalliance.org/ . We can see that private health insurance is not an option for the vast majority of working Americans like the OP, leaving them financially vulnerable if one or more family members becomes seriously ill.

I'm sure you want to be helpful. So, please indicate what insurance company can provide health insurance for around $30 per month, with IMMEDIATE eligiblity for benefits, without excluding her pre-existing condition for pregnancy, and a nominal co-pay.

Otherwise, the sole reasonable option for the OP is Medicaid/Medi-Cal, wherein they can even enter into a voluntary repayment plan based on their ability to pay, if no waiver is eligible.

Moonfacegal, stay strong and make the best choices you can for your family.

[aguilayserpiente 2]

BTW, title 8 of the CFR covers the affidavit of support. Title 5 relates to administrative personnel for federal agencies.

Typos

Edited July 4, 2011 by aguilayserpiente

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

I see you like to read between the lines to try to infer statements that weren't made, don't you?

Having access to affordable prenatal care is a matter of public policy per se http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/9/4/91.full.pdf. If you have evidence to the contrary, cite it.

I said that deciding whether or not she should get medical care wasn't a matter of public policy. How many people think to themselves "I'm pregnant. I wonder what the public policy is regarding whether or not I should get healthcare?". Obviously, any pregnant woman should seek health care, irregardless of public policy.

The OP appears to be afraid to seek Medicaid/Medi-Cal for prenatal care. The lack of affordable healthcare continues to prevent access to prenatal care and contributes to increasing infant mortality.

Her concern was probably whether it would affect her immigration status. You answered that question. I added that an additional consideration was the potential affect on the sponsor. Immigration status shouldn't be the only consideration when deciding how to pay for the healthcare.

Your response is for the OP is to purchase private insurance or forgo treatment. Both options are contrary to public policy and a humane response. Why? Persons who are eligible for Medicaid/Medi-Cal must have incomes at most 133% of the poverty line or below. http://www.cms.gov/MedicaidEligibility/03_MandatoryEligibilityGroups.asp#TopOfPage

Your comments are irrelevant because I never made the bolded statement. You incorrectly inferred it.

The poverty line for a family of two is $19,564.30 or $1,630 per month (most likely the OP's bracket since she is considering Medicaid/Medi-cal). http://www.cms.gov/MedicaidEligibility/Downloads/ POV11Combo.pdf . HUD's fair market rents in my area are $1200 for a 1 bedroom apartment in the ghetto, www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html. After rent, transportation $100, utilities $50, auto insurance $50, FOOD $200, that leaves about $30. My paycheck stubs indicate that my share of Kaiser Permanente for me alone was $200 per month. After separation from the employer the COBRA, continuing benefits, was $387.

The 2001 poverty guideliness from HHS for a family of two are actually $14,710. I have no idea where you plucked your numbers from. Your links are broken. Your information, while apparently well thought out, is also irrelevant to the statement I made. My statement was regarding the sponsor - not the OP. For all we know, the sponsor has income far above the poverty guidelines, and could much more easily afford private health insurance than having to reimburse the state for the full costs of prenatal, delivery, and post partum care entirely out-of-pocket. This is something the sponsor should be given an opportunity to do, if they are financially able. After all, they signed a contract with the US government promising to do exactly that. Dropping a debt of tens of thousands of dollars onto their lap without even consulting with them is beyond inconsiderate.

My county's Alameda Alliance has some "affordable" health insurance at $75 per month wherein a person buys the policy and can use it AFTER A YEAR and after paying a deductible of $1,500 in treatment, http://alamedaalliance.org/ . We can see that private health insurance is not an option for the vast majority of working Americans like the OP, leaving them financially vulnerable if one or more family members becomes seriously ill.

I'm sure you want to be helpful. So, please indicate what insurance company can provide health insurance for around $30 per month, with IMMEDIATE eligiblity for benefits, without excluding her pre-existing condition for pregnancy, and a nominal co-pay.

Again, irrelevant. You don't know if any of this applies to the OP's sponsor, and it doesn't change the fact that alternatives should be considered when you're potentially incurring a debt on someone else's behalf.

[aguilayserpiente 2]

I see you like to read between the lines to try to infer statements that weren't made, don't you?

I said that deciding whether or not she should get medical care wasn't a matter of public policy. How many people think to themselves "I'm pregnant. I wonder what the public policy is regarding whether or not I should get healthcare?". Obviously, any pregnant woman should seek health care, irregardless of public policy.

Your comments are irrelevant because I never made the bolded statement. You incorrectly inferred it.

The 2001 poverty guideliness from HHS for a family of two are actually $14,710. I have no idea where you plucked your numbers from.

Again, irrelevant. You don't know if any of this applies to the OP's sponsor, and it doesn't change the fact that alternatives should be considered when you're potentially incurring a debt on someone else's behalf.

Your response strains credulity. Your suggestion that the OP forgo Medicaid treatment to instead seek out private insurance is contrary to public policy. Why? You wittingly or unwittingly discouraged a low income person from seeking medical treatment by stating that the state will take adverse action for reimbursement of Medicaid against a low income family. However, you fail to appreciate what private insurance costs. Like I said KP took a $200 bite out of my check every month, with a 6 month waiting period.

So far, your sole response to the OP is get private insurance without offering any guidance as to where to get affordable health insurance. At least with Medicaid, if her household is made to repay any benefits at all without a waiver, they can have a repayment plan which they CAN afford. It appears that Medicaid employs the Medicare Financial Managment Manual, with regard to recovering benefits, including repayment plans at Section 110.8:

The FI or carrier shall exercise care in distinguishing between a request for repayment in installments, and a request for waiver. Where a beneficiary states that they cannot afford an installment of at least $10 per month, or that they can afford installments of $10 to $50 per month but the overpayment is so large that recovery would take substantially more than 3 years, the FI or carrier shall treat such statement as a request for waiver. (See §110.9)

The 2011 guidelines for Medicaid are published by the Centers for Medicaid

www.cms.gov

www.cms.gov/MedicaidEligibility/Downloads/POV11Combo.pdf opr00F7B.pdf

The guidance at cms.gov reveals:

Children under age 6 and pregnant women whose family income is at or below 133% of the Federal poverty level. (The minimum mandatory income level for

pregnant women

and infants in certain States may be higher than

133% percent

, if as of certain dates the State had established a higher percentage for covering those groups.)

133% of the poverty guideline for a family of 2 is $19,564.30. No doubt you want to be helpful. Please quote some premiums from a private insurance company where a) the insured is immediately eligible for coverage, b) without a co-pay or payment threshold exceeding 10% of one month's income for a family of 2 at the 133% eligiblity level for Medicaid, c) without exclusion for the pre-existing condition of pregnancy, and d) whose monthly premium is affordable according to numbers you find pallatable for a family of 2 in that 133% bracket. The cost of insurance may not be relevant to you but it is to any low income person like the OP.

Edited July 6, 2011 by aguilayserpiente

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Your response strains credulity. Your suggestion that the OP forgo Medicaid treatment to instead seek out private insurance is contrary to public policy. Why? You wittingly or unwittingly discouraged a low income person from seeking medical treatment by stating that the state will take adverse action for reimbursement of Medicaid against a low income family. However, you fail to appreciate what private insurance costs. Like I said KP took a $200 bite out of my check every month, with a 6 month waiting period.

For pete's sake, did you even read my response. At no time did I EVER insinuate that the OP should forgo medical treatement - EVER! I stated ONLY that the decision to apply for medicaid will affect more than just the OP, and they should consider whether the sponsor was able to provide medical insurance instead.

We don't know the OP's situation or relationship to the sponsor. It may be possible for the sponsor to extend medical insurance coverage to the OP through their employer at little or no cost, and without pre-existing condition limitations, such as through COBRA. $200 per month is insignificant compared to the total costs of obstetrics care throughout the term of the pregnancy. If I were the sponsor, and I was given the opportunity to pay triple that amount or risk having to reimburse medicare for the full costs I would jump at the chance to pay for the insurance.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

I'm going to jump in here a sec and point out that Jim is not saying that the OP shouldn't do Medicaid, or that they should do private, what he IS saying is that it ISN'T just her decision. The OP has a sponsor and MAY have a co-sponsor (I couldn't see where she said whether she did or not) and she should have a conversation with her sponsor and co-sponsor (if applicable) about this as her decision may affect them.

Jim was/is saying that the sponsor MAY be sued by the government (as afforded by the I-864) to recoup the costs of her Medicaid treatment. He was saying that she should consider a private policy paid for by her sponsor as it would most likely be significantly cheaper than if the sponsor/s were forced to pay it back after being sued by the US government and applicable court costs etc.

Jim was/is saying this isn't just a "what health care is best" or "what health care can I use?" discussion but also what is the best financial decision for the sponsor/s.

---

OP - Have you looked into WIC? I know for sure that isn't a means tested benefit and that your USC baby makes you eligible for that (status is irrelevant) and it also helps you with food etc after the birth and up to an age that I can't remember right now.

.

[Darnell 8,478]

Jim is straining credulity? Wow - my credulity meter is hydraulic, not spring-derived. Maybe I busted a seal?

oh well.