A couple of recent threads highlight the confusion over health coverage for persons wishing to enter Thailand.   In your opinion, which option best describes your opinion on health insurance requirements for people entering the Kingdom?  For the purpose of the poll medical insurance would be comprehensive plan with at least $50,000 coverage.

 

Please feel free to leave a comment.

 

 

For further reading:

https://aseannow.com/topic/1238210-elderly-expats-dazed-and-confused-over-insurance-‘retirement-visas’-and-covid/#comments

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1238210-elderly-expats-dazed-and-confused-over-insurance-‘retirement-visas’-and-covid/#comments

 

 

As a 67 year old long term resident here with a home, partner, cars etc......paying outrageous taxes on cars but getting nothing back. I would go back to Europe if I hadn't invested so much on this racist country.

The government should allow all longer term (one year plus) resident to access the Thai government healthcare system for a reasonable fee instead of forcing us into the claws of these morally bankrupt private hospitals and insurance companies that charge foreigners much more than Thais.

I chose Number 2 only as an alternative to the others, I agree with all of the above, the sticking point, as pointed out by "Thanks for Nothing ((Bangkok Post letter)),  is Thai Insurance companies will not insure older folks above (??)55 years old.   Expats on long term Visa's, own property, have a business, pay taxes should be able to be covered under the Govt Plan, or at least the be treated as local residents...............I have health insurance, always have, and have spent a good amount of money in past 10-15 years in hospitals here..........my insurance covers 80% of everything and 100% of anything Covid related - will Thai Immigration or any Thai Consulate accept that??  Remains to be seen.

3 minutes ago, TunnelRat69 said:

will Thai Immigration or any Thai Consulate accept that?

Yes (depending on the policy obviously, but foreign policy now OK).

Edited November 7, 20214 yr by Salerno

12 minutes ago, TunnelRat69 said:

I chose Number 2 only as an alternative to the others, I agree with all of the above, the sticking point, as pointed out by "Thanks for Nothing ((Bangkok Post letter)),  is Thai Insurance companies will not insure older folks above (??)55 years old.   Expats on long term Visa's, own property, have a business, pay taxes should be able to be covered under the Govt Plan, or at least the be treated as local residents...............I have health insurance, always have, and have spent a good amount of money in past 10-15 years in hospitals here..........my insurance covers 80% of everything and 100% of anything Covid related - will Thai Immigration or any Thai Consulate accept that??  Remains to be seen.

till 75 yo, but only one policy "visa friendly" and not cheap.

below 70yo some other insurers.

https://misterprakan.com/th/health/plans?gender=Male&age=75&lg=en&ipd=1&opdf=0&leadid=348157

 

at 65 there is choice of 4 insurers, can be carried with them to 90 or longer

https://misterprakan.com/th/health/plans?gender=Male&age=65&lg=en&ipd=1&opdf=0&leadid=348157

I went for number one, for those entering as it wouldn't be fair forcing those expats that have been here for years and those that are a lot older who cannot get insurance to take up insurance.

 

The above said I am a firm believer of having private health insurance, but that is my choice, others here who choose not to have insurance leave them selves wide open in my opinion, and those to old to get insured have to accept that it is what it is, risk vs benefits, that is the problem with growing old, i.e. if you didn't insure yourself before 60 years of age and continue to insure yourself with a reputable insurer, you are where you are.

 

Before we go on the attack, there are insurers who do cover you till you croak if you get in before 60 albeit the policies do increase with age and may force a few out because of the cost of the new policy renewals, that's when life's a B.

 

Edited November 7, 20214 yr by 4MyEgo

As I see it, the requirement to have health insurance coverage by the Thai government for O-A visa holders (and those on extensions of stay) does not provide health security for older visa holders. One, all pre-existing conditions are excluded. Two, the requirement for out patient coverage is meaningless. Three, most retirees have to opt for policies with large deductibles to make the insurance affordable. Four, the rates charged would far exceed that if a Thai seeking similar private insurance. Double pricing at its best. Five, all policies are rated and adjusted based on the individuals use and experience.

 

If the Thai government was really interested in providing health security for its long term retirees, there would be a method to enroll the retirees into the existing Thai universal health insurance scheme. I have seen some posts that say such on effort would be onerous and unrealistic.  All you need is an actuary worth his/her salt to come up with age related premiums with a realistic annual premium and surcharge for expats.  I would not object a dual pricing system if there was insurance that covered the 'Thai' portion of health plan price. Reasonable? Probably too logical and reasonable.

 

As things stand now, older retirees who had to insure/enroll as a result of the new regulations have no expectation of health security. It is a measure that only benefits the insurance industry and their predatory practices.

Edited November 7, 20214 yr by pookiki
Revise

Open letter to the Government,

It is no rocket science to know that an insurance company is a company that calculate his risks and is in no way a social company to benefit anyone else than themselves.

Forcing a health insurance in people, specially people over 50 with already underlying diseases, will benefit NOBODY.

If someone in this age bracket would endup in a hospital with a severe disease, the insurance comaony will claim that this disease was "underlaying" and will not pay for the hospital costs.
Thus leaving the hospitals and Thailand with huge unpaid bills, despite of paying huge soms for that insurance.

A better and more effective system would be:
1. Appoint a GOVERMENT run health care to handle the health care for every foreigner who enter Thailand or who stays already in Thailand on a long term visa.
2. EVERY foreigner who enter Thailand or remain in Thailand would have to pay for health care insurance.
3. Foreigners living in Thailand on a Retirement Visa or a Thai spouse Visa are required to put the require 800,000/400,000 Baht into that helath care system instead of putting the funds in a Thai Bank.
This sum will gain interests which will be used for the foreigner health care system.
4. On leaving Thailand, the foreigner will receive part or the whole paid insurance, depending on the case if he/she used the health care and how much has beem spend.

This is only a guidance on how a better health care system for foreigners/tourists could be setup.

 

people who can show enough cash in or out of the country, to cover medical emergencies, should not have to carry insurance... 

All insurance is a scam. Insurance companies generate enormous profits as a consequence and are constantly preying on the gullible public through cold calling and officials greedy for their share. They employ wiley loss adjustors on a share to avoid claims. If you add up all the insurance premiums you pay each year and deduct the real  uninflated cost of reimbursement if any you would be better off by 100000bht + annually.

No one who has experienced the blank checkbook effect of interested parties when they discover your insurance will doubt the corrupting and insidious effect of this is gross profiteering industry.

Insurance is the bane of modern life and brings out the greed in everybody involved in this monsterous con

Edited November 7, 20214 yr by chilly07

9 minutes ago, Confuscious said:

Open letter to the Government,

It is no rocket science to know that an insurance company is a company that calculate his risks and is in no way a social company to benefit anyone else than themselves.

Forcing a health insurance in people, specially people over 50 with already underlying diseases, will benefit NOBODY.

If someone in this age bracket would endup in a hospital with a severe disease, the insurance comaony will claim that this disease was "underlaying" and will not pay for the hospital costs.
Thus leaving the hospitals and Thailand with huge unpaid bills, despite of paying huge soms for that insurance.

A better and more effective system would be:
1. Appoint a GOVERMENT run health care to handle the health care for every foreigner who enter Thailand or who stays already in Thailand on a long term visa.
2. EVERY foreigner who enter Thailand or remain in Thailand would have to pay for health care insurance.
3. Foreigners living in Thailand on a Retirement Visa or a Thai spouse Visa are required to put the require 800,000/400,000 Baht into that helath care system instead of putting the funds in a Thai Bank.
This sum will gain interests which will be used for the foreigner health care system.
4. On leaving Thailand, the foreigner will receive part or the whole paid insurance, depending on the case if he/she used the health care and how much has beem spend.

This is only a guidance on how a better health care system for foreigners/tourists could be setup.

 

Unfortunately won't work as many long-term expats rely on certified mthly income and those that don't rely on agents or funds recycled annually. Nice try though

I voted for #3. I'm convinced that I can cover any eventuality by self insuring, I've paid cash for the few minor treatments I've had over the 15 years I've been here.  However, I'm 77 and even if I could find someone to insure me, my savings wouldn't last too long if I had to part with premiums of 100000+ every year.  Unless they make mandatory insurance a requirement of the non o retirement visa, the only way I'll be leaving here is as smoke up the wat chimney.

Since the preferred choice is not available, I did nto vote.

 

I.e. "mandatory insurance is good idea in principle but the regulations in place now are not feasible, needs to be better designed".

Does your comment include any of these:  “should be”, “need to”, “l have”, etc?  I’m not getting the same guarantees of “forever” here at my 90 day or retirement visits as some are.  You own a condo here?  You’re a vet from your home country?  You have a wife/family here?  So.  What makes you think you’re a Thai or deserve to be a permanent resident?  You’re a farang in a foreign country. Get over yourself and come back to reality.  Geez. 

I voted for the latter - no insurance, simply because I am a 77 year old insulin dependent Type 2 diabetic who cannot get medical/Covid-19 insurance being constantly refused. I was able to purchase car and personal accident insurance. 

55 minutes ago, 1FinickyOne said:

people who can show enough cash in or out of the country, to cover medical emergencies, should not have to carry insurance... 

Yes, agree 100%

 

Self-insurance is the ONLY true security. 

 

We already keep 800,000 baht in an account for our extensions, recognition of that and perhaps something. more would be fair and equitable and available to the elderly. 

 

Instead useless paid insurance will automatically deny claims, and and promptly cancel with any new condition 

 

 

Most people would agree to paying affordable insurance premiums .

 

However , as you get older the premiums are only going to get higher and the curve steeper.  

You pay for years , when you probably don't need it , then eventually have to give it up just when its likely you will need it.

 

Might as well not bother in the first place but make sure you have sufficient funds set aside to self insure.

I have a million USD international health insurance for myself and my family. It doesn't just cover Thailand but most countries. Have had that since my children were born. Sure insurance is betting against yourself but medical insurance is a must surely? 

  I come from Australia where we obviously have universal health care but even there I have private coverage separate from the international coverage I have for my family. It is my opinion that people living in a foreign country should certainly have private cover so as not to be a burden on the system and I am slightly amused by people who live here, choose to live here and yet think they "deserve" certain things. Who would want to be treated in the public hospital system here anyway?

   I understand it must be difficult for those who are not eligible for any sort of insurance at all and it would be fair to make allowances for those who have already been here. However for new applicants I think it is only fair that they have some basic health insurance for me it is a no brainer.

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

I went for number one, for those entering as it wouldn't be fair forcing those expats that have been here for years and those that are a lot older who cannot get insurance to take up insurance.

 

The above said I am a firm believer of having private health insurance, but that is my choice, others here who choose not to have insurance leave them selves wide open in my opinion, and those to old to get insured have to accept that it is what it is, risk vs benefits, that is the problem with growing old, i.e. if you didn't insure yourself before 60 years of age and continue to insure yourself with a reputable insurer, you are where you are.

 

Before we go on the attack, there are insurers who do cover you till you croak if you get in before 60 albeit the policies do increase with age and may force a few out because of the cost of the new policy renewals, that's when life's a B.

 

Since I owned my own small consulting company I had no health insurance until age 55. At that point I sold the company and chose to work for a larger company untill I retired at 66. It provided excellent insurance and then I got Medicare and a supplemental policy and drug plan as well. I still have and pay fir them as Plan B, but have never used either for the last 6 years. I got Pacific Cross two years ago to continue my OA extensions but mainly because it's simply prudent ; that's Plan A.

My annual premium is reasonable and I can continue to be insured by them past age 75, with increasing premiums, as you say.

So, in short, I fit into none of your categories, yet have a viable situation. You overstated the difficulties.

In my personal opinion, somebody living in another country, aging and becoming more vulnerable by the day, made a serious mistake if they can't afford a few thousand a year for good coverage outside their home country. If they can't afford decent insurance they certainly can't afford medical care and they depend unfairly on a Healthcare system they didn't pay into from a government that provides only a barely useful system for its own citizens.

This may force some out, and on that we agree. Poor planning often leads to bad outcomes.

All of that said, it does seem like their could be some way to grandfather in (sorry) expats who have been here a while, own property, etc so they can use the government hospitals at rates comparable to nationals. To say that it's unfair for this to not be the case is a stretch though. Being adult means being responsible for one's self, not dependent on the largesse of your host country and its citizens. In fact, it just gives xenophobes and bigots legitimate reason to want you gone.

 

Should be a very simple policy, not any different than lodging, food, gasoline, or electric.  You don't pay for healthcare, you don't get any. 

Mandating insurance only guarantees a monopoly or oligopoly for insurance carriers.  

If you want to lower health care costs, let patients act like consumers and bargain for their healthcare.  Hospitals and doctors would soon have to lower prices to compete knowing they can not just pass whatever bill they choose to charge on to an insurance company. 

Is that a perfect solution.  No, but the alternative is worse. 

my comments as above via "pedrogaz"

37 minutes ago, starky said:

I think it is only fair that they have some basic health insurance for me it is a no brainer.

what about people who have money - - 

26 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

If you want to lower health care costs, let patients act like consumers and bargain for their healthcare.

how and when does that bargaining occur... you go to the hospital w/an actively dangerous condition or in tremendous pain - do you want to bargain under those circumstances? 

 

"i'll give you everything I have for one shot of morphine!! Now!!"
 

16 minutes ago, 1FinickyOne said:

what about people who have money - - 

What about them?

Edited November 7, 20214 yr by starky

Having Health Insurance cannot be a requirement. Being able to pay for ones own medical cost is the requirement.

 

Insurance is only one means to achieve that. You may have the possibility to conclude one but this should not exclude the elderly and people with preconditions then.

 

The easy remedy to that: Introduce a fixed account of health purposes in addition to health insurance solutions. Think a little bit how many problems this would solve. And it would even be safer (insurances sometimes do not pay out) and better for the country (more money in their banks).

My visa card has a huge available credit that i never use. I think if you can show you have a say $15-20,000 spare on your card then you should not need insurance. I also have enough money in the bank combined with this credit excess to cover $50,000 - so exactly why do i need insurance to cover an amount i already have access to ?

 

 

19 minutes ago, 1FinickyOne said:

what about people who have money - - 

For people who have money, insurance premiums come out of petty cash.

2 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

My visa card has a huge available credit that i never use. I think if you can show you have a say $15-20,000 spare on your card then you should not need insurance. I also have enough money in the bank combined with this credit excess to cover $50,000 - so exactly why do i need insurance to cover an amount i already have access to ?

In an emergency situation, how is the hospital supposed to know all that?

29 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

For people who have money, insurance premiums come out of petty cash.

All the money in the world is not helping when you cannot conclude an insurance (because of preconditions) in case that INSURANCE is the requirement. See my post above. But the real requirement should be the ability to be able to pay for your medical cost. THEN only money helps. Elon Musk with diabetes would not get an Insurance contract and therefore no visa. Something wrong here isn't it ?

Edited November 7, 20214 yr by moogradod

2 hours ago, chilly07 said:

Unfortunately won't work as many long-term expats rely on certified mthly income and those that don't rely on agents or funds recycled annually. Nice try though

For this category of foreigners, a monthly/yearly payment for health care could be levied.

But it should be a fair amount.