Yikes. Alabama told its obese state workers that if they aren’t fit by 2010, they will have to pay $25 per month for insurance that is normally free. It’s a chubby tax!
From the article:
…research shows someone with a body mass index of 35 to 39 generates $1,748 more in annual medical expenses than someone with a BMI of less than 25, which is considered normal.
Oh my. On one hand, these government workers have it good with the cheapie insurance. The $25 fee stinks, but it’s not like their insurance charges. On the other hand, it seems a little mean to make the pudgy pay. Alabama has the second highest rate of obesity in the United States, after Mississippi. Thirty percent of Alabamans are obese, so the state will have a lot of people paying.
What do you think about Alabama’s approach to keeping medical costs low? Is it mean? Big Brotherish? Or is the $25 fee a way to get people motivated to lose weight? Anyone from the fat acceptance movement willing to chime in on the discussion?
No related posts.
{ 19 comments… read them below or add one }
I don’t see what the problem is. Obesity is often the result of lifestyle choices like overeating and lack of exercise, and it puts you at risk for costly, chronic health problems.
Insurers have always tacked on fees and surcharges for habits and conditions that could lead to expensive medical care. Smoker? You’ll pay more. Drinker? You’ll pay more. Dangerous occupation? You’ll pay more.
They charge those fees to keep the rest of us from paying higher premiums to cover the tabs of surgery for the person who chose to be a chain-smoking, drinking-like-a-fish, sewer worker. Not that that guy, or the fat guy, doesn’t deserve health care, but when I eat healthy and workout daily, why should I pay for his self-induced health problems?
Hey! Take that picture of my feet off there!
OK, those are not my feet at all. I agree that people who are overweight like me should do something. However, people like me have a gym membership paid in full but haven’t gone in a month!
So yeah, I guess it’s reasonable.
$: My mom read this post, too. She agrees with you.
GLM: Girl, those could be my feet. If I were in Alabama, I would be on fat-fee watch. That’s going to change, though. Operation exercise!
I don’t think it’s right and I work out about four times a week. People need insurance when they are sick. If you don’t get sick you don’t need insurance. You are already paying for it, by getting up and goign to work every day – so you should be able to use it. Period.
I don’t think it’s mean – it’s motivation. But I do think it’s a little big brotherish. Plus if I had to pay a fat tax, I’d really resent the smokers gathered at the entrance to my office building.
My Dr. said my blood pressure and cholesterol were impressive – I would love it if I could get cash back rewards or something.
Wow! As a clinical psychologist who has for the past 25 years specialized in treating people who have eating disorders and other weight and body image issues, I cannot help but find this policy offensive. It takes only a little bit of research to learn that obesity is due to a myriad of factors, only one of which is eating and lifestyle. Genetics, dieting history (the more a person diets the HEAVIER he or she is likely to become!!), as well as a whole host of other biological factors impact a person’s weight.
I cannot help but think that this policy is yet another reflection of our culture’s denegration of and disgust with those who are overweight. It has been said that bias toward large people is the last SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE prejudice, based solely on appearance, left. [Yes, of course there is still a lot of racism, however, it is generally not tolerated in "polite company" while comments about someone's weight are commonplace and not viewed as socially inappropriate at all.]
I wonder if the state of Alabama plans to impose a surcharge on those who smoke? Now there’s a heath behavior that is TRULY a choice! But let’s see, they grow tobacco in Alabama don’t they?!!!
One more thought –
If shame and punishment could “motivate” people to lose weight then the whole world would be skinny! Large people have generally been exposed to about as much shaming (both from others and from themselves) as one can imagine. Shame and punishment does not now, nor has it ever, led to enduring change!
Actually the article mentioned that smokers pay an extra $24/month. While I agree that it’s a bit ‘big brother’-ish, why should corporations or employees be forced to subsidize other people’s poor choices?
The insurance algorithm has always been that higher risk people pay higher premiums. It’s done for life insurance, auto insurance, homeowners insurance, etc. Why is it acceptable in those cases but not for health insurance?
Japan started the trend, and now it’s here! I think it’s great!
They should charge people for smoking also.
I’m sorry, Dr. Ornstein, but I can’t agree with you. Understood, sure, that there are genetic and other factors that contribute to obesity, but let’s be real: this is America. Obesity is largely a lifestyle epidemic in this country. Americans EAT ourselves to death, or at least to sick. This is the fattest nation on earth and that lends to our national epidemics of heart and respiratory disease, diabetes and other chronic ailments. If I choose not to sicken myself that way and lead a healthier lifestyle, should I subsidize others who stuff themselves with triple whoppers every day?
I can’t agree with your “discrimination against fat people” argument either. I don’t care what someone looks like; that’s their business. I just don’t want their medical bills when I have my own to pay.
Lastly, it doesn’t — and shouldn’t — matter to an insurance company whether your obesity is genetic or self-induced. I’m a black male over 30 years old, and although I’m in good shape, that bumps me into several risk factors that I’m sure raise my risk profile among insurers. Black folk, genetically, have higher risks of diabetes, stroke, heart attack, et al. I’m not getting a break from my insurance company because those things aren’t my fault. It’s all based on a risk profile, and in this case, if you choose an unhealthy lifestyle, you’re choosing risk.
About time. Nothing big brother about this at all. I am a taxpayer and really don’t think my taxes should be used wisely. If that means fat people, smokers, etc pay more for health insurance, then super, someone is trying to save my tax $$$.
Glad to see the psychologist chip in also. Glad to see the victimization of the problem mentality. I don’t have a problem with obesity, I am victim of obesity. With that type of mentality our forefathers would have been victims of British oppression and never attitude to solve the problem.
How is this fair, unless smokers, drinkers, and users of “recreational drugs” are also charged?
To quote Dr. Ornstein above:
“It takes only a little bit of research to learn that obesity is due to a myriad of factors, only one of which is eating and lifestyle. Genetics, dieting history (the more a person diets the HEAVIER he or she is likely to become!!), as well as a whole host of other biological factors impact a person’s weight.”
Are you SURE that dieting more makes you heavier? Instead, the fatter you get, the more diets you try, not the other way around. if you’re happy with your weight why would you ever diet and MAKE YOURSELF FATTER?!
You can’t blame the majority of obesity on genetics or non-lifestyle related health problems. 50 years ago, obesity was rare. Are you telling us that the fat gene suddenly kicked in and caused a pandemic? I’d say it was a Mac Donald’s pandemic instead of a major shift in our genetics.
The fee will cause some to react but not enough to make a significant impact. $25.00 is still a small price to pay for what they will be treated for if obesity causes health issues for the individual. I think it is a good idea, but it is just a way for business to save some money. Speaking for myself I would do something about it, I am technically obese but still have the drive to work-out. Taking money out of my check to pay a fee is all the motivation I need to be consistant.
IF MY FAT FRIENDS HAD TO PAY FOR THEIR INSURANCE, THEY WOULD EXERCISE AND LOSE THE FAT.
SADLY, STATISTICS DO NOT LIE-OVERWEIGHT PEOPLE ARE AT A HUGE DISADVANTAGE WHEN IT COMES TO HEART DISEASE PROPENSITY AND OTHER WEIGHT RELATED CONDITIONS.
IF I WERE OVERWEIGHT, I WOULD USE IT AS A CHALLENGE–YOU HAVE TIL 2010. START NOW !!!
If a certain percentage of overweight people are so because of genetics, because, say their parents are grossly overweight, I’m not sure that percentage should be punished. And the fact of the matter is, a good portion of overweight people are that way due to genetics. And no amount of dieting or exercise will ever make them slender. In good shape physically, yes. But thin, no. It’s hard to punish people for something they have no control over.
I would say no to the obesity tax simply becuase it will open the way for charging other groups in the future. Obese people taxed today and those with other health related conditions taxed tomorrow. There has to be a better way.
This is all about money, folks. No one in the government gives a damn whether or not they “motivate” ppl to lose weight … it’s a simple plan to take advantage of a big problem in Alabama — obesity.
So what’s considered obese? Simple BMI index? Just how accurate is that when considering family history, income (ever notice how it costs more to eat healthier?) or work cycle (’cause depending on the job, it’s not easy to prepare gourmet, healthy foods)?
Also I ask (mostly because I don’t know), how much is the state of Alabama putting towards programs to encourage weight loss initiatives? Are there any health clubs in the state — and more importantly within some of the cities or suburbs where the workers actually live?
I haven’t read all the posts but I’m sure someone has probably said this. It’s not just about losing weight it’s about a healthier lifestyle. Why should Alabama taxpayers have to pay for the health insurance of state employees who aren’t doing anything to maintain their own health?
{ 2 trackbacks }