The Health Care Law.

[Matthew3590]

What would be a reason for an insurance company not providing birth control coverage? Should companies also then pick and choose coverage for other things? Like the viagra? Or mental heath services? What kinds of things should insurance companies have to cover and what sorts of things should they not? We have already pointed out that birth control or lack of access to birth control affects a womans health and well being, so it isn't cosmetic and it is relevant to a woman's reproductive health, so why should there be an exclusion?

It doesn't even have to be birth control. Our dental insurance doesn't cover two fluorides in a year only 1. If I wanted them to cover 2 I would switch insurance. An insurance company shouldn't be forced to cover anything like wal mart should not be forced to sell Lays potato chips. Being an insurance company is risky business and costs a lot to start to be able to cover when people get sick. That is why everyone pays a different rate on the same insurance. If you want to know who is going to statistically die first or get sick more just compare your insurance rate with someone else on the same insurance company.

 

[chickened]

For Chickened, the government contractor:

Are you enjoying your tax payer funded lifestyle? Perhaps you should provide a detailed explanation of your role, as well as your bodily fluids for testing and your medical records to ensure our taxes should be given to you

I have no issue with doing so, the people are paying me they are the boss.

 

[chickened]

Really, no one uses them? So they just keep stocking the shelves because....? You tried to make the argument that men pay for their birth control out of pocket (condoms), and that woman expect people to pay for everything for them. There are paid-from-pocket female counterparts to condoms, just as there are insurance covered male procedures and sexual activity related pills (ie. Viagra). Again, nice try.

When a woman buys condoms it is usually for hope and change. I am not sure what century you are living in, those BC products are the exception more than the rule. Actually women do make the argument for BC as an insurance coverage item which is mind boggling to me when it is virtually free in other venues. You do realize that in the insurance world the healthy offset the cost of insurance for the poor and the high risk groups by virtue of premium cost sharing.

 

[chickened]

Here are some actual facts about contraception...who uses it, what methods are used, what the failure rates are, how many employer based insurance companies cover it (9 out of 10), etc...

These numbers tell the real story. Most sterilizations are still done on women rather than men, at a rate of almost 3 to 1. More woman use the pill than any other method. Younger women and teens are the most likely to rely on condoms, but the majority still rely on the pill. Pulling out works better than natural family planning.

Enlighten yourselves. Preventing pregnancy is probably the number one health concern of any woman of childbearing age. For most women that is in the neighborhood of 40+ years. For myself, in 25 years of marriage, only nine months of it, discounting time pregnant, was spent without some form of birth control. Based on my fertility, without birth control my insurance company would have paid for approximately 15 live births, 7 miscarriages and all the health risks associated with over 20 pregnancies.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_contr_use.html

Tubal ligation= 500.00

 

[chickened]

Yep, I get pregnant real easy, but only two out of three made it. For us, trying consisted of going off birth control. It took no date checking, no working out when I might be fertile. All it took was NOT using contraception.

Insurance companies aren't making the arguments about not covering birth control. They are expert at playing the numbers. It is middle aged white guys trying to control women's options.

Oh this is getting better all the time, somehow I knew it was my fault.

 

[mom'sfolly]

I'm not quite sure why birth control has become the topic of choice. Why should it be excluded? What makes it different from any other preventitive health care?

The argument that it only works for half the population makes no sense at all. Only 50% of the population is at risk for testicular cancer, but most insurance policies will cover the treatment of it. Is it because it is a women's health issue or is it because it relates to sexual activity? I don't really get any of the arguments that have been put forward on why it should not be covered.

 

[dainerra]

where can you get a tubal for $500??? My friend's cost $45,000 and included a night in the hospital and wasn't covered by her insurance. She's still making payments on it - they took out a personal loan to pay for it.
My husband's vasectomy cost us a $5 copay on our insurance. The bill itself was $3000 and the procedure took less than 15 minutes.

 

[mom'sfolly]

No way a tubal could ever be cheaper than a vasectomy. A tubal is done in a hospital, by a surgeon, and generally involves at least on night in a hospital. A clip is done out patient and the guy is cleared to work as soon as the pain is controlled. Yet the tubals are done at 3X the rate of vasectomies.

 

[chickened]

What would be a reason for an insurance company not providing birth control coverage? Should companies also then pick and choose coverage for other things? Like the viagra? Or mental heath services? What kinds of things should insurance companies have to cover and what sorts of things should they not? We have already pointed out that birth control or lack of access to birth control affects a womans health and well being, so it isn't cosmetic and it is relevant to a woman's reproductive health, so why should there be an exclusion?

Like I said earlier health care is not a warranty on health for anyone it is a product that you buy and gamble on the pay out. It sounds as if what you want is security in your health that whatever you may do it is treatable and covered. That is not what insurance is about. That is like asking for permanent unemployment insurance it just is not possible. (which we are finding out has an end)

 

[chickened]

I'm not quite sure why birth control has become the topic of choice. Why should it be excluded? What makes it different from any other preventitive health care?

The argument that it only works for half the population makes no sense at all. Only 50% of the population is at risk for testicular cancer, but most insurance policies will cover the treatment of it. Is it because it is a women's health issue or is it because it relates to sexual activity? I don't really get any of the arguments that have been put forward on why it should not be covered.

BINGO!!

Married couple, husband gets fixed, wife gets pregnant, wife says husbands tubes grew back together, now wife wants insurance to pay for cheating. This is just one reason I can think of at the moment.