I'm with you. We're looking at it and waiting for now. The deductible is, I think the same as the Medicare Part B deductible, $185. The problem is that premiums will continue to rise, and probably at a faster rate, because no new people will be allowed to buy the F plan. For now, we're staying on the F. But yes, we're thinking about it. Who knows what will be happening in the ear future?

Plan F has been so good for me, I hate to leave it but it seems to make sense. The monthly premiums for F are getting very high, but not exorbitant -- yet.

Have you priced the G plan yet?

I have not but a friend told me the monthly payments are lower than F and the savings would quickly make up for the deductible. I'm not sure how/where to look into it. My friend spoke to an insurance broker.

All these plans are offered at different prices depending on the company and some other (not personal) factors. I'm paying a little less than $22/person this year over last year, with the Humana/AARP F plan.

I have United Healthcare/AARP F. I have to be honest and say I am on auto-pay, so I haven't paid as close attention to increases as I should. I know between my supplemental and rx, I am paying well over $300 for just me.

Im so tempted to switch to an advantage plan. The premiums on my supplemental and part D are killing me. I also have plan F and not having a deductible is nice but I need to find out what plan G will cost. We are past the deadline to change, correct?

I’m not sure if you have to wait for open enrollment. One more thing to find out.

My insurance broker has told me that you may change your supplement any time during the year. I am unsure if that means changing plan or changing provider. I have plan F also.

Changing outside the enrollment period may require medical underwriting. An honest broker should mention that as the first priority to consider.

I guess I'm a little jaded where insurance is concerned because my first thought was, What's in it for them? Somehow I can't believe out of the goodness of their hearts we're offered a plan that will save us some money.

Brushworks, are you saying that medical underwriting isn't required during the yearly enrollment period. I attempted to change to plan G during the enrollment period, but was denied due to a pre existing condition that I've been diagnosed with, but never treated for. I lost out on saving about $300 per yr,

Plan G has been around awhile and it's the one we signed up for when pricing the 2, F & G. The way it was explained to me was that, for "G", you had a Part B deductible of $166, everything else was the same. So, if you had at least one medical visit in a year (thinking it would be at least $166) "G" premiums + that deductible, would be lower than if you'd gone with "F".

In other words, your "G" premiums + the deductible are less than "F" premiums with no deductible. You do have the inconvenience of paying that deductible amount but it's no big deal.

No, I'm saying if medical underwriting is required to switch, stay where you are.

As I understand it, you cannot go "up" in plans (coverage, with F being the top) without underwriting, but you can go down to a less comprehensive plan. Here is more information about the nuts and bolts of switching.

https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/medicare/supplement-all/should-i-switch-medicare-supplement-policies

We've had BCBS Plan F High Deductible for several years at under $80/mo. each. The deductible has been about $2400. Plans/Prices change in April for us. I have no idea what I can get now that I have Multiple Myeloma.

Medicare is paying for almost *everything* for me. The value of the supplemental has been *minor*. My healthy DH has had out-of-pocket of about $200 per year for many years; obviously paid much more for coverage.

I switched from F to N not long ago. It's a bit cheaper and not much different.

Curious if there were any updates on the subject. We met with a broker today and he's pushing Plan F. I can't help but feel a bit uneasy about possible rate increases once it's no longer available.

You can switch "down" to a lower coverage plan but never up to a more inclusive plan. If the rate increases become a problem for you, you can switch at that time.

Unfortunately, I wouldn't have the option of switching to a lower plan since I have a pre-existing condition and that could result in higher premiums or denial. I need to call and price Plan G. Do I understand it correctly that the only difference between F & G is the $185 deductible with G?

You can go from F to G, but not from G to F. Current Medicare Part B deductible is $185/yr.

You're right. I misspoke. It's looking like G will be a better option for us.

I have SCAN supplement insurance from UCLA, and it costs me $32 a month. I believe it is equivalent to Plan F, but it is more like an HMO, I think. I have no co-pays, and drugs cost me nothing, plus I get free rides to doctors' offices, if I need them. The main hitch is that I have to see a UCLA doctor, but that is not a problem because there seem to be thousands of them that are affiliated with UCLA. Also the UCLA hospital is ranked at #1 in Los Angeles and #2 in the state of California. I am very happy with seeing the UCLA doctors, except sometimes there is bad traffic between here and Brentwood. The last time I went, it took me an hour to get home, and it should be a 20 minute drive. I always allow myself an hour to get there, and so I generally get there half an hour too early. Some of the doctors I see are in Santa Monica, and that is easier to get to. It was even easier when I lived in Venice, as I did not have to take I-405 to get there. The other problem is that parking is $13 at UCLA and about $15 in Santa Monica. Of course if I get a free ride from SCAN, I don't have to pay for parking. I also get free membership to L.A. Fitness through Silver Sneakers, but I have not taken advantage of that yet.

Lars, my sister lives in CA and has an HMO with Kaiser. Is that the same as UCLA?

Haha, I'll limit my comment in deference to a few here who have said they use Kaiser. But no, Andie, they're not the same, they're not similar, and the differences are significant.

Haha?

Yes, sorry. Your question wasn't the chuckle trigger, it was Kaiser.

UCLA is a world renown medical school/research facility which, as lars said, is considered perhaps #2 in California (and there are several other world class medical schools to compete with here). It has many national Top 10 or so rated departments. Top doctors, top departments, top reputation.

Kaiser Permanente is an unusual system in that it is an insurance company and a comprehensive medical practice combined into one. Complete with an untold number of hospitals and clinics in the geographic areas it offers services. Unless you're out of the area, you care is provided at a Kaiser owned facility.

It started around WW2 to provide comprehensive medical care for employees of the Kaiser shipyards and other businesses. Today, it is perhaps one of the lowest cost providers in the country of complete coverage to its members. I've heard it said that over the years Kaiser has provided more coverage to more people at a lower per capita cost than, I believe, any other system in the US.

Part of the cost control is that it is like an HMO on a diet. It can be difficult to see specialists, there can be waits involved for services. Its reputation is mixed, its history is mixed, and I think many would describe it as "if that's all you can afford, it's acceptable care and better than nothing".

Interesting. Although she could afford pretty much anything she wanted, her frugality won't allow it. Her son will be a rich man when she dies.

I always read these medicare threads with interest as my husband and I will be eligible in a few years. While I don't want to wish my life away, I am very much looking forward to the day I can stop paying $1600/month (as of 10/19) for our health insurance. That is with $1,000 annual deductibles for both of us and my former employer paying an additional $200/month towards our premium. I'd be absolutely thrilled to be paying $300 a month.

Back in 1990 or 1991 I had an emergency appendectomy at a Kaiser hospital in northern California, near Sonoma (I don't remember the exact location). Kaiser told me that they did not take my insurance, which I think was Blue Cross at the time, and so I wanted to go to a different hospital, but they would not let me. They did end up taking my insurance, but because it was Kaiser, Blue Cross only paid for 60% instead of the 80% they normally paid. So Kaiser sent me a bill for the balance, and I started paying $100 a month until I got a new Blue Cross insurance card, which I submitted to Kaiser. Because Blue Cross and mistakenly given me a new ID number, they paid Kaiser 60% again, and so Kaiser actually got overpaid and still sent me bills. I sent them evidence that Blue Cross paid 120% of the bill, and then Kaiser stopped sending me bills, at least for a year, and then they tried to bill me again.

Kaiser is bad news, if you ask me. If you have Kaiser insurance, you have to go to a Kaiser hospital or clinic, and they are not the best.

Sigh. And then you have the many, many thousands who are very happy with Kaiser. It is not substandard care.

People are happy with Kaiser until they get seriously ill with a condition that requires a lot of diagnostics. Kaiser has some good doctors and surgeons. Break a leg or get a common easy to treat cancer and you will be fine. Need a hysterectomy or appendectomy you will be fine. But getting tests and treatment plans going for more complicated or hard to diagnose illness is an entirely different story. Getting special labs ok-ed by admin can be a nightmare.

I see my doctor or an associate the same or next day when I call for an appointment. If I need a specialist maybe a week or two if the condition is benign and not serious. My doctor tells me I need an MRI I go the next day under my health plan.If contrast is needed it's done I go for blood work to approved lab as a walk in during any business hours.

A Kaiser patient needs an appointment. Then they nit pick every little line item. We won't do this test until you do that test etc. I have a friend who went for two years to determine she had a cerebral vascular disorder. First a CT scan . Then a CT scan with contrast, then an MRI. Then finally an MRI with contrast which identified the problem. Then there are the co pays for every time you go out into the hall for every single department.

Don't know if they still do it that way it was a few back but she had to undergo a sigmoidoscopy to rule out problems. Never got a colonoscopy because the former didn't show "signs' of anything to worry about. Maybe the rules have changed under new health insurance rules. I hope so. Yes she was post 55 years old at the time. Crazy. Those type of delays are what make Kaiser the lowest choice. If you are healthy and got time they are fine. But if you have an illness that is ticking away like a time bomb, then good luck to you.

People either love Kaiser or they hate it. When I was still working for the State, there were many, many, many employees who chose Kaiser simply because the monthly premium was covered entirely by the State's monthly contribution for health benefits. Then, as they retired, they would switch to a better plan/company.

As has been stated, if you have Kaiser, you must go to a Kaiser facility, unless it is an emergency and the closest hospital is not Kaiser. But, as soon as you are stabilized, you will be transferred to a Kaiser facility. And if you don't have Kaiser but go to a Kaiser hospital, they will only treat you if it is an emergency, then they'll ship you out to a different hospital as soon as you're stabilized. But, Kaiser does have agreements with other hospitals for specific procedures.

When my brother converted to full-blown AIDS, he was hospitalized in St. Mary's in San Francisco (this was back in 1993, and he had Blue Cross insurance). He was an in-patient for over nine weeks, the first six and a half weeks of which he was in ICU. The waiting room for the Medical ICU was the same as the waiting room for Cardiac ICU, even though the units were separate. As it turned out, Kaiser did not have a decent cardiac surgery program, so the Kaiser patients in the Bay Area who needed open heart surgery were sent to St. Mary's.

" you have the many, many thousands who are very happy with Kaiser. "

There's an old joke - a guy is with a group of male friends at a bar he says "You know, I have a wedding anniversary coming up - my wife and I have had 20 happy years together".

One friend says "20? I thought you'd been married longer than that?"

He responds - 'Yes, that's right. It's our 50th wedding anniversary. But we've had 20 happy years together."

Kaiser has tens and tens of thousands of "members". And yes, there are many, many thousands who are very happy with Kaiser.

I have lived my entire life in "Kaiser territory" but have never had Kaiser coverage. In this time, there have been more horror stories, problems and medical care issues with people I know and stories in the paper that have involved Kaiser than any other single source. Second place is I'm not sure where or what. Maybe - small town doctors and hospitals.

Kaiser entered into some sort of 'merger' with Maui Memorial Hospital several years ago. At least as recently as last year, the two 'work forces' still had different pay scales. Not good.

Last year I gave up trying to arrange out-patient care there for our Jan. - Mar. stay on island. Nobody answered the phones at the cancer center. (Yes, I was calling on Pacific Time.) Nobody called back. Nobody answered faxes from my oncologist. All I required was lab + injection monthly. Medicare pays 100% of this -- very profitable for the hospital. (My hospital here gets over $10K for just shot of Velcade.) I presume they are understaffed.