Family Law & Cour Ordered Health Insurance

[Maggie82]

Here's a question for ya...

How does the court decide who should provide health insurance?

My fiance was ordered to:
- Provide medical and dental coverage for his son.
- Name his son as the sole beneficiary of his life insurance.

As a wife-to-be, I do not think naming the child as the sole beneficiary is fair to me, or any kids that we may have together. Is this "primary practice" in family court?

Also, I find it odd that my fiance has to provide health coverage for his son, if his son is already covered under the bio-mom's plan.

When we get married, I plan on enrolling my husband under my benefit plan, as I have one of the best health benefits in the country, and its premiums are covered by my employer. (We'd save $150/month simply by terminating my fiance's plan... which he only pays into for his son, as per the court order.) However, will the court order stating that my husband-to-be has to provide coverage for his son prevent me from doing so?

Also, if any of you have any experience in Health Insurance Coverage, could you please tell me if I would be able to enrol my stepson under my plan, if my husband has joint legal custody (but not primary residence during the school yer?) [The wording in my benefits package states: "Dependent children are also eligible for coverage under your plan. This may include an unmarried, natural, adopted, or step child of you or your spouse providing your spouse is living with you and has custody of the child."]

Thanks,
Maggie

[standing on the sidelines]

ask you insurance plan if they allow you to cover your stepson.

As for your husband covering him I can see why she would want that. I take it her plan has limits for coverage for the year and maybe only pays 80% of the costs. SHe is probably looking at getting the other 20% covered so there are no out of pocket expenses. I can understand that totally.

[Maggie82]

As for your husband covering him I can see why she would want that. I take it her plan has limits for coverage for the year and maybe only pays 80% of the costs. SHe is probably looking at getting the other 20% covered so there are no out of pocket expenses. I can understand that totally.

I can see that too, and that IS the reason that the court ordered that my husband provide full coverage even if his son is already covered. The way the judge explained it was: "If you can't decide on how you will split the coverage costs, then you will both be responsible for ensuring the child has medical coverage provided by the both of you." It just seems like such an unnecessary expense... $150/month... when covering even 100% of the additional costs that are not covered by the plan wouldn't amount to that amount in a year!

I guess I just wish the family court would order things that made sense, and that didn't just "look good on paper." You know what I mean?

[littleman]

I can see your point Maggie however I can the other side of the coin also. Not to be a rain on your parade but what happens in the instance if your fiance takes his son off his insurance, adds him to yours then (God forbid) you two split ways........then the child is without insurance at all.......think of it in that realm.......the child is the focus of this and should remain that way.......then again what if you lose your job then the child is without again.......trust me it happens.....my ex removed my child from his insurance (without my knowledge) and I lost my job.........now my child has no insurance coverage and I pay for everything from my pocket........it really hits home when it happens......regardless of how much it will save (which the cost can be claimed on income tax anyways) it is worth having it.......wish I had some coverage for my child...........
I dont want to sound harsh however you cannot change an order set by the courts........a court order might as well be in stone (for the most part)......again sorry for sounding harsh but this is between the biological parents not step parents...........biological parents have to sort this out.........my partner does not get involved with stuff between the ex and I unless it comes to hurting my child then he will step in......just food for thought

[Maggie82]

I don't disagree that the child should not be covered... heck, I'm all for it. Don't get me wrong. I just find it odd that BOTH parents need to provide coverage. I think that the child should be covered, regardless on whose plan, no matter what, and if that parent loses their job, the other parent should then provide coverage. It just seems like double coverage, paying two family premiums for one child, is a little bit of overkill. It would be much less expensive for ALL involved, to only split the one premium and any additional expenses not covered by the plan. Does that make better sense?

I guess my point is... that in most family situations (and by all means, I very much understand that a stepfamily situation is different from a nuclear family's) one parent enrolls in family coverage to ensure the family (i.e. children) have benefits. It would just make more sense to split the premium between the parents, than for them both to pay into their separate plans, at $100+/month (each).

[standing on the sidelines]

It would be much less expensive for ALL involved, to only split the one premium and any additional expenses not covered by the plan. Does that make better sense?

That makes the most sense. I take it when the plan was drawn up at the start the bio parents could not agree on things so the judge made them both keep coverage on the child. Maybe now that cooler heads prevail, the bio parents can talk about this and reach a mutual agreement.

[FL_Needs_To_Change]

This is my experience with coverage for step children.
My husband, he has an ex that resulted in a child together that he pays CS for.

He was ordered to have the child under his coverage as well, but it clearly indicated "as long as he had coverage through his place of employ". Which went on to clearly indicate that if he was unemployed or employed without benefits the child would be covered solely by the custodial parent.

So that's self explanatory.
I have a couple of children from a first marriage as well, which he was more then able to put under his plan as dependants, and once I started to work, even thought I am not legally or otherwise responsible to do, did add my husband's bio child to my coverage in the even there is something that is not covered by his insurance, we can re-submit under mine to cover any remaining balance.

No one questioned the inclusion of my children on his insurance, nor his child on mine.
Just my experience.

[Maggie82]

No one questioned the inclusion of my children on his insurance, nor his child on mine.
Just my experience.

Thanks for sharing, FL. I guess I'm just a little confused by what they mean by having "custody of the children" ... does it mean primary physical custody, or joint legal custody? People tell me to call and find out, but I don't want to red flag my benefits package.

Maybe now that cooler heads prevail, the bio parents can talk about this and reach a mutual agreement.

Yes, if only that were the case. Unfortunately, we deal with a bio-mom who acts on whims, without thinking things through, only because at first it seems to be to her benefit. Thankfully, four years ago, when I started to take matters into my own hands, things have drastically calmed down and are much better now. Even when we went to court, the judge ruled that in this situation, my fiance and I are a parenting unit together, and the bio-mom needs to respect that and if she ever found a partner, and he was as involved as I am, then we'd accept his position as a fourth parent to the child too, if that is what the bio-mom wished in her family relationship. Needless to say, bio-mom was floored... but the judge simply spoke the truth... other than initial conception, I have been there alongside my fiance since before the child was born. Back to my point... perhaps this will be something I'll need to re-evaluate when we file a motion to change next year.

Thanks again for sharing!

[paris]

Here's how we handled it. She had custody. He continued to insure her and the kids on his health insurance (through work). I also added him and his kids to mine. Anything his didn't cover, mine paid the difference. Neither of our insurance companies ever question our arrangement.

We only had an issue once when both companies sent us cheques for 80% of the cost of dental work. I called mine and told them I thought they had made a mistake. The 2 companies worked together and told us the breakdown for which insurance pays the initial fees is ... custodial parent first, non-custodial parent 2nd, custodial step-parent 3rd, non-custodial step-parent 4th.

When he lost his job, he notified his ex (with lots of notice) that she had to get her own coverage. The kids were still covered under mine.

Mind you, there was never written anything in their separation agreement about health coverage.

[Maggie82]

Here's how we handled it. She had custody. He continued to insure her and the kids on his health insurance (through work). I also added him and his kids to mine. Anything his didn't cover, mine paid the difference. Neither of our insurance companies ever question our arrangement. ...When he lost his job, he notified his ex (with lots of notice) that she had to get her own coverage. The kids were still covered under mine.

That makes sense. I guess what I'm trying to get at is...

Is it okay if my stepson is covered under MY insurance, and therefore still covered by "his dad" as per the court order?

The problem is that my fiance's benefits suck. He pays through the roof for 'average' benefits. I have amazing benefits, and I don't pay a cent in premiums (they are paid for by my employer). When we get married in a few months, we were hoping to change my benefits to a family plan to include my husband and stepson, and cancel his benefits.

The issue we're facing is that the court order states that both parties (my fiance and the bio-mom) will provide coverage for the child through their work benefits.

If I add my stepson to MY benefits, can it still be seen as my fiance providing coverage for him?

Does that make sense?

In either case, the bio-mom will always have the primary coverage, and whether it's my fiance or I, our coverage will always be secondary.

[blindsided]

Hi, was wondering if my ex is allowed to just take me and our kids off his work health ins.?
He his being really dirty to me. He said he would sign house over to me but wont give, me nothing else (ss). And he also said hes going to cancel health ins. so he could get an extra dollar a hour, my one son is in college.
Ex has been gone for 5 months now.

[FL_Needs_To_Change]

Is it okay if my stepson is covered under MY insurance, and therefore still covered by "his dad" as per the court order?

I'd say yes.
You and I are in similar boats. My husband's coverage is not as good as mine. So I added his bio child from his previous relationship to my coverage. No one questioned it, and the ex does snot even know and it was never ordered other then to say that if/when bio dad has coverage his bio child is to be added. I think it is ok to add your step son. It's great that you care so much for him, if only the ex could wrap her head around that.

The reason I have not mentioned it to the ex is that she tends to be very selfish, and I could see her abusing the situation with needless expenses. Medical is never needless, but when we're talking dental things can get out of hand and become very expensive

[Maggie82]

I'd say yes.
You and I are in similar boats. My husband's coverage is not as good as mine. So I added his bio child from his previous relationship to my coverage. No one questioned it, and the ex does snot even know and it was never ordered other then to say that if/when bio dad has coverage his bio child is to be added. I think it is ok to add your step son. It's great that you care so much for him, if only the ex could wrap her head around that.

Okay, that makes sense. I think our court order reads the same..."As soon as medical coverage plans are available to each party through his or her place of employment, each shall name the child a dependant of all coverage on such plans." It says the same for life insurance, making my stepson the sole beneficiary. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll be able to keep it secret from the bio-mom, as we'd have to provide her with my carrier information so that she can inform her carrier to set up coordination of benefits.

The reason I have not mentioned it to the ex is that she tends to be very selfish, and I could see her abusing the situation with needless expenses. Medical is never needless, but when we're talking dental things can get out of hand and become very expensive

I know what you mean. We often see the same, on our end. Thankfully, we only cover what is not already covered by her insurance... so it doesn't affect us that much. :-)

[Maggie82]

Hi, was wondering if my ex is allowed to just take me and our kids off his work health ins.?
He his being really dirty to me. He said he would sign house over to me but wont give, me nothing else (ss). And he also said hes going to cancel health ins. so he could get an extra dollar a hour, my one son is in college.
Ex has been gone for 5 months now.

If he left you... and you haven't come to an agreement (written and signed by the both of you), and if you don't have a court order, he can pretty much do whatever he pleases.

If you truly believe that you cannot reconcile with him, and thinks are fairly amicable right now, I suggest you try mediation to come to an agreement regarding your kids and his financial obligation to support them. If you feel mediation won't work, I strongly urge you to file court papers and get the ball rolling, get your kids what they deserve.

Good luck to you!