“My employer says that since my daughter is now employed and has coverage with her employer available she can no longer be enrolled in my plan; true or not?”
Not true‼️
While it seems odd, the fact is that any child under age 26 can be enrolled in a parents plan even if they are not dependent, employed with other coverage available (effective January 2014), married or not living at home.
This will shift costs to the lower cost (for employee) and perhaps more generous plan. To me this is one of the flaws of Obamacare. A child that is not a dependent, not living at home, married or has other coverage should not be the burden of the parent’s employer and fellow employees. They are adults and should be treated like every other adult to obtain their own coverage.
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
Don’t be so sure. If the plan is grandfathered, and if the plan year is not a calendar year plan year, the employer plan may still be able to exclude children who have access to other employer-sponsored coverage. The same is true about applying pre-existing conditions to individuals age 19 or older.
The transition rule allowing exclusion of adult children with access to other coverage does not expire until the 1st of the plan year starting on or after January 1, 2014.
Health Reform is complicated and phased in over a 10 year period of time.
LikeLike
Obamacare changed the old rules which had dependency restrictions.
.
LikeLike
Actually, there were no uniform rules. Employers could allow children only up to 18, to 22, 23 or more and could require them to be full time students.
LikeLike
.
As I said… the old rules [ie, the health care contract] had dependency restrictions.
I never said those rules were uniform… they varied by contract. But there were
health care industry contract norms some of which were dictated by state laws.
.
LikeLike
True, I was referring to employer plans and my frame of reference was self-insured plans.
LikeLike