insurance coverage for HAs and CIs

I used to live NH, moved down here to SC 6 years ago.....maybe I should move back!!!
 
Wirelessly posted

Nope. I'm in Calif. Not covered. I have always had to pay out of pocket.
 
Wyoming's not on that list. I do know Wyoming EqualityCare (Medicaid) will cover hearing aids every 5 years (they will pay for new ones when the old ones are at least 5 years old and no longer under warranty). I was glad to hear that as my previous hearing aid was 6 years, so they fully covered my Naida. But as for private insurance, no clue. Not sure if Medicare provides coverage for hearing aids either. Most insurance generally will cover a CI as long as the patient meet their criteria.
 
My insurance, Aetna, has a discount program for aids and fully covers BAHA and CI.
 
I have insurance Hearing Aid I am lucky I have already 5 year warranty reason I already!
 
In Ontario-Cochlear Implants are covered for the first 3 years under Assistive Devices programme.
 
nope, not on that list, i live in ohio... why is it that insurance covers for CIs but not for HAs? i think its completely BS.. i mean HAs are just as expensive as a CI and an important device to daily life. I mean i understand a CI is more expensive than an HA but i still see HAs and CIs equally expensive. But really, sometimes i think insurances needs to just bite their tongue and understand that HAs can't afford to be broken and how we can't really pay for it as much and have insurance on it in case something happens. AGH
 
coolgirlspyer90 said:
nope, not on that list, i live in ohio... why is it that insurance covers for CIs but not for HAs? i think its completely BS.. i mean HAs are just as expensive as a CI and an important device to daily life. I mean i understand a CI is more expensive than an HA but i still see HAs and CIs equally expensive. But really, sometimes i think insurances needs to just bite their tongue and understand that HAs can't afford to be broken and how we can't really pay for it as much and have insurance on it in case something happens. AGH
Click to expand...

I agree!! But here's what I think, not what I know mind you, but what I think their line of thinking is. They (insurance companies) do not view hearing aids as "medically necessary", being HoH will not hurt us. But to qualify for a CI, hearing aids have to be to little or no benefit, so then you(general you) moved over into the area of being disabled. Which I guess means, to them, that a CI could be considered medically necessary, to make a person not disabled. You see as long as a persons hearing is good enough that with the assistance of hearing aid, you are considered an able bodied worker and fit to join the work force, therefore not disabled. Well, whether or not you can afford one, well that's just your problem I guess. I'm not justifying they're reasoning, I'm just trying to figure out their reasoning, and that makes the most sense to me.

also I don't want to get into a debate about the whole disabled not disabled thing, I'm just demonstrating the possible view of it by the insurance companies and SSD.
 
I think the best comparison is to braces that are used long term not just while an injury is healing and need to be replaced over time. Does anyone known what the usual coverage of those is?
 
ambrosia said:
I agree!! But here's what I think, not what I know mind you, but what I think their line of thinking is. They (insurance companies) do not view hearing aids as "medically necessary", being HoH will not hurt us. But to qualify for a CI, hearing aids have to be to little or no benefit, so then you(general you) moved over into the area of being disabled. Which I guess means, to them, that a CI could be considered medically necessary, to make a person not disabled.
Click to expand...

The problem with implanting babies and very young children is that we don't know how much HAs can benefit them until their speech reception skills could be evaluated and they can offer input on what they hear. This takes years.

A hearing aid, if very beneficial, would also make a person not disabled, to use your words. Also, this line of thinking has been used as an excuse by some companies to not offer accomodations if the person is supposedly not disabled anymore. So, that's why I say once a disability, always a disability (not counting short term disabilities, though).
 
Another thing to look into is the Voc Rehab. I don't know about all States, but NH VR does help with payments (usually partial) depending on the person's income.
 
kristy2078 said:
Another thing to look into is the Voc Rehab. I don't know about all States, but NH VR does help with payments (usually partial) depending on the person's income.
Click to expand...

I know, but thank you, just in case I didn't ;) I got my first set of aids from NH VRC, when I moved down here to SC I started school for massage therapy, and they paid for a another set of better ones. They felt I might do better with in school with better HAs, but I didn't get them until I was almost done with school lol. But here it 4 years later and my loss has gone beyond the aids capabilities and need new one(s) my left ear is actually CI qualified now I think. I have discovered though that the VR won't pay, or even help pay, for replacement HAs :( I can get an assistive technology loan through them though with really low interest and longer terms, so that's good anyway.

i hear you also about the disbality question too. I do have my new aids, got them about 3 weeks, and everybody at work is all surprised that I still miss stuff. They thought I was going to be able to hear everything fine. No.....it's not aids give you back your hearing, it's better than nothing absolutely, but it's not like having regular hearing for sure.
 
I just got new aids, also. But I remind people they are NOT "Star Trek," LOL! :P People just don't realize because often the media in articles and such make it sound like aids or implants *REPLACE* the hearing we've lost. Ain't so, but the media misrepresents this all the time to the general public. UGH! :|
 
Back
Top