prev next front |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10 |11 |12 |13 |14 |15 |16 |17 |18 |19 |20 |21 |22 |23 |24 |25 |26 |27 |28 |29 |30 |31 |32 |33 |34 |review
Although this prevented rejecting consumers based on preexisting conditions, it did permit dropping patients or increasing their premiums because they became high-risk clients. An inequitable scenario could arise, with government being forced to provide the premium subsidy for mandatory insurance if the employer chose not to bear the cost and dismissed the high-risk employee.