Where do you draw the line?

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-28-2005
Where do you draw the line?
Mon, 08-01-2011 - 12:48pm
Insurers must cover birth control with no copays

WASHINGTON (AP) — Health insurance plans must cover birth control as preventive care for women, with no copays, the Obama administration said Monday in a decision with far-reaching implications for health care as well as social mores.

The requirement is part of a broad expansion of coverage for women's preventive care under President Barack Obama's health care law. Also to be covered without copays are breast pumps for nursing mothers, an annual "well-woman" physical, screening for the virus that causes cervical cancer and for diabetes during pregnancy, counseling on domestic violence, and other services.

"These historic guidelines are based on science and existing (medical) literature and will help ensure women get the preventive health benefits they need," said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

Read more here: http://news.yahoo.com/insurers-must-cover-birth-control-no-copays-140750830.html

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-11-2005
Tue, 08-02-2011 - 2:50am

Abortion no {when I was a state employee, my insurance company would cover 1 abortion per yr} birth control to me would be the pill, tubal, the shots & vast.

When I had my 3 dd's the x's

~~Sam stitches well with others, runs with scissors in her pocket. Cheerful and stupid.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-29-2005
Tue, 08-02-2011 - 11:42am
Well, I know for sure that abortion coverage isn't going to mandated ;)

I find it really interesting that many of the people who are adamant about not covering abortions also don't want to cover birth control. Really? In what world does that make sense? Let's make it more difficult for women to prevent pregnancy, then make it near impossible to abort a pregnancy ... and then let's do whatever we can to be sure she gets no assistance in supporting her child @@

I think sterilization, iuds, diaphragms, etc should be included as covered birth control. And plan B as well.

It's a slightly different debate, but I think L&D should be covered as well, though not sure about the copay. Most OB is billed as a package deal, so I paid one copay at the beginning of pg which covered the rest of prenatal care and L&D.


Powered by
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-02-2004
Sun, 08-07-2011 - 1:13am
Well, a few years ago when I lived in Montana, my health insurance would cover a vasectomy for men, and viagra. But it did not cover birth control for women. To have a baby I had to pay something like 80%. It did not cover fertility treatments, but would cover a reversal of a vasectomy. Maybe I had a crappy plan at my work. But the gender differences, not even counting abortion (which in no way would have been allowed and Planned Parenthood was run out of town) just seemed too Victorian for me.

Then I started using a diaphragm. Worked great until I moved to CA, to a largely Hispanic town, and couldn't find the jelly in any of the stores because Catholics think that the use of the jelly was akin to abortion. So back to good old condoms it was. Even those are expensive though. Do I need to say that unplanned number 3 came along then? I love him dearly, but switched to a different (and then covered) method after him.

Once you go without a condom it is really hard going back. As a woman from a family of very fertile woman (once they have had one) birth control is needed, or I would have about 15 kids by now. (If I survived.) Even tube tying can fail.

There need to be options, especially when the health of the mother is dependent. As a society, we have invested a lot of money in the mother - education, religious upbringing, medically....she is the one who is more important. She is the one we have invested in. Not the one whom may not be born alive at all due to some issue in the womb.

In short, I think that it all should be covered. Sometimes pregnancy is not a choice. Sometimes it is inflicted. Sometimes it is a simple failure. Sometimes not all women are ready to be mothers. Adoption is not always an option. How exactly, does the mother explain to older children that she is giving up the youngest for adoption? (Yes, I have known that to happen - but I couldn't have done it.)

The one fear that I have if all is covered, if a woman miscarries that she will be held liable for that stillbirth/death. Our country seems to feel when it comes to children that no bad can happen accidentally, that it is always on purpose or due to neglect. Having miscarried myself, and known several women who have admitted to miscarrying one or more times, I would say that is the ultimate hurt to be considered at blame for something that we tried so hard to prevent from happening.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-24-2009
Tue, 08-09-2011 - 11:41am

I don't draw the line.

Organizations of health care providers are the ones qualified to do that, and from their collective experience, education and knowledge of their patients, make recommendations about what is and is not basic, preventative health care.

From there individual health care providers (who are licensed and regulated by groups of medical proffessionals) consult with their patients on what the best care is for the patient, within the patient's wishes, beliefs and health status.

The goverment is tasked with making sure that health insurance providers are covering basic preventative care, as defined by medical organizations who are tasked with doing so.

For a politician to step in and interfere with that process is stepping over the line - and they only seem to feel free to do so with women.