Ricky G.
I enrolled in a Mutual of Omaha /…
I enrolled in a Mutual of Omaha / United of Omaha employer-sponsored voluntary hospital indemnity policy during the first year it was offered by my employer. The enrollment materials stated, “Is hospitalization due to childbirth covered? Yes, maternity is covered under this policy.” After my wife delivered our son, the hospital indemnity claim for her admission and confinement was denied because Mutual of Omaha treated routine prenatal OB/GYN care before the policy effective date as a pre-existing condition. In practice, this means an employee who was already pregnant when the plan was first offered could see “maternity is covered” in the enrollment materials, enroll at the first opportunity, pay premiums, and still have the childbirth hospitalization denied. They did pay the limited newborn nursery benefit, but denied the mother’s hospital admission/confinement benefit. In my opinion, the way the maternity coverage was presented was misleading compared with how the pre-existing condition limitation was applied. I would strongly caution anyone considering this type of policy to ask specifically whether an already-existing pregnancy will be denied, even if the marketing materials say maternity or childbirth hospitalization is covered.