• Nene's SAA nemesis

    No political figure seems to have the guts to speak out against Dudu Myeni, says Solly Moeng.

  • The mp3 revolution

    Ian Mann takes a look at the war between digital music and the compact disc.

  • Don't take us for fools

    It's time for businesses to stop thinking consumers are gullible, says Mandi Smallhorne.

All data is delayed
See More

Commission: Medical schemes discriminate

Jul 15 2012 14:09

Johannesburg - The National Consumer Commission wants "discriminatory" rules in medical aid schemes to be declared unconstitutional, The Sunday Independent reported.

According to the report medical aid schemes are sexist towards pregnant women and discriminates against foreigners.

The commission has turned to the Equality Court, where it is challenging four of South Africa's top medical aids and the Council for Medical Schemes.

The commission pointed to certain "discriminatory" clauses that technically exclude women who fall pregnant before they join the schemes from benefiting from the medical aid.

The respondents in the case were the council, Medscheme, which is an administrator of Bonitas and Fedhealth, Momentum Health and Medshield. Bonitas and Fedhealth were also respondents.

Director of legal services at the commission, Oatlhotse Thupayatlase, told the newspaper that when the Council for Medical Schemes was asked about the clauses it said they protected the schemes from "free riders" or people who took out medical aid schemes when they knew that they were pregnant and wanted to benefit.

Last June, the commission asked random medical aid schemes to submit their rules for investigation to see if they complied with the Consumer Protection Act.

It found that each medical aid had clauses stipulating a three-month general waiting period when someone joined and a "condition specified" waiting period of up to 12 months.

In its court papers the commission said: "The commission submitted to the schemes that the waiting period of three months and exclusion of 12 months for a condition that was there within three months of taking the cover, refers to 'pregnancy'.

"That being the case, it meant that the said clauses are discriminatory based on gender."

Medscheme argued on behalf of Fedhealth and Bonitas that the reason for the waiting period is to protect the scheme from people who join with the aim of undergoing an expensive procedure and then resign afterwards.

medical schemes



Read Fin24’s Comments Policy

24.com publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Comment on this story
Comments have been closed for this article.

Company Snapshot

We're talking about:


Marketing is a big concern in SA's small business community, followed by a lack of confidence and partnering with the wrong people, according to a survey.

Money Clinic

Money Clinic
Do you have a question about your finances? We'll get an expert opinion.
Click here...

Voting Booth

The 25 basis points interest rate increase is:

Previous results · Suggest a vote