This petition represents a significant portion of the college's diverse student body. It has come to our attention that as international students, we are being subjected to an unfair policy that mandates enrollment in the Aetna Student Health Insurance Plan, without the option to waive it. We hereby submit this petition to voice our strong opposition to this policy and request its reconsideration.

First and foremost, we believe in the value and importance of having access to comprehensive health insurance. We acknowledge that healthcare costs in the United States can be substantial and having appropriate coverage is crucial. However, many of us, as international students, already possess access to valid and comparable health insurance plans that provide adequate coverage for our needs. Forcing us to enroll in the expensive Aetna Student Health Insurance Plan against our will is burdensome and financially unjust.

Furthermore, the requirement to enroll in the Aetna plan disproportionately affects international students, as it exacerbates the financial strain already imposed upon us. Unlike domestic students, international students are ineligible for various scholarships, fellowships, and financial aid programs offered by the college after admission. This places an unfair burden on us, as we are already responsible for the payment of higher tuition fees and additional expenses associated with studying abroad. The imposition of the Aetna Student Health Insurance Plan further limits our financial resources, making it even more challenging for us to pursue our education without unnecessary financial strain.

We strongly believe that the policy discriminates against international students, as it specifically targets and singles out our group without justifiable cause. We understand that the college has a vested interest in ensuring the health and well-being of its students, but we urge you to recognize that international students should be granted the same autonomy and respect as their domestic counterparts. The policy violates principles of fairness and equality by denying international students the right to waive the insurance plan.

Previously, Mary Joan Murphy, the Executive Director of Student Health and Wellness Programs, responded to my fellow international schoolmate saying that “Most international students and their families are unfamiliar with how health insurance in the United States works and in the past have signed up for plans with some areas that could, in the end, be very costly for them including having very high deductibles (where they have to pay up to $10,000 US) before their insurance starts to cover costs, a cap where the insurance will only pay up to a certain amount, plans where they are not compliant with the Affordable Care Act-not covering mental health care, certain medical procedures, etc.”

However, some of our international students had been using other insurance plans such as the NY essential plan, which went better than Aetna SHIP: This plan also covers dental services and all visits with 0 copay compared to the $60 copay for Aetna’s plan. United Healthcare was responsive to appeals and complaints, while Aetna took an indefinitely long time to get back on just a simple case. Such instances disapprove Ms Murphy’s assumption that international students are susceptible to using problematic insurance plans. Besides, even if her assumption is right, it should be the school’s responsibility to guide international students towards familiarizing themselves with the United States health insurance procedure, rather than paternalistically subordinating us to a passive position in which the rules and decisions around enrollment in SHIP are completely dependent on the caucus at Primary Care Health Service and Student Health and Wellness Programs.

Meanwhile, Ms Murphy mentioned that all Ivy League schools “protect” international students in the same manner. Yet most schools in the IVY league allow ALL students, regardless of their nationalities, to waive health insurance following a list of protocols. For example, Cornell does not allow their international students to waive health insurance in general, but makes exceptions for international students who are covered by a "US-based employer health insurance plan or US government insurance plan which also meets the requirements of coverage (https://studenthealthbenefits.cornell.edu/waive-or-cancel-shp". This seems like a much more reasonable plan to me rather than disallowing international students to waive health insurance under any circumstances.

Moreover, Ms Murphy responded by casting doubt on international students’ integrity: “We try to audit every student's plans, but sometimes students get through by not answering our waiver questions honestly.” In light of this claim, she furthers that “The policy was put in place to make sure students have access to comprehensive and financially sound health insurance. The policy is protective not discriminatory.” By implying that students intentionally provide dishonest answers to bypass the waiver questions, the executive indirectly accuses some students are trying to exploit the system. 

This generalization can be seen as discriminatory because it assumes that a significant number of students are being deceitful. We take our responsibilities as students seriously and understand the importance of comprehensive and financially sound health insurance. Such an insinuating, broad generalization not only unwarrantedly undermines the integrity of the international student community, but also shifts the blame for the discriminatory insurance policy onto the students themselves. In doing so, it fails to address the real issue of the policy's discrimination and unfairly places the burden on the affected groups.

Even if the generalization is to some degree true, the claim that some students may bypass the waiver questions dishonestly does not justify a policy that denies all international students the ability to choose their own insurance coverage. It would be more appropriate to address instances of dishonesty on an individual basis rather than implementing a policy that penalizes all international students.

We believe that the current policy not only fails to address the specific needs of international students but also undermines their autonomy and decision-making abilities. We are fully capable of assessing our own insurance needs and making informed choices about the plans that best suit us. We request that the college recognizes our autonomy and respects our ability to make responsible decisions regarding our health insurance coverage.

We also urge the college to consider alternative options that allow international students to waive the Aetna Student Health Insurance Plan if they can demonstrate equivalent or superior coverage through other insurance plans. This approach is fair and aligns with the practices of many other prestigious institutions.

We propose that the college establishes a transparent and efficient waiver process that enables international students to provide necessary documentation demonstrating their existing insurance coverage. This process should be guided by clear and well-defined criteria to ensure consistency and fairness in evaluating the adequacy of alternative insurance plans. By implementing a comprehensive waiver process, the college can both safeguard the interests of international students and ensure that they have appropriate health insurance coverage.

In conclusion, we respectfully request the reconsideration of the policy mandating enrollment in the Aetna Student Health Insurance Plan for international students at Barnard College. We believe that this policy unfairly targets and discriminates against us, placing unnecessary financial burdens on our already challenging academic journeys. We kindly request that you review our concerns and work towards a more inclusive and equitable policy that respects the autonomy and financial well-being of international students. As a school acclaimed for its support for diversity and inclusion, it is becoming increasingly ironic that policies like these are creating more adversity and exploitation. Thank you for your attention to this matter.