Colorado Proposing Changes in Medicaid Coverage

Avatar for Cmmelissa
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-13-2008
Colorado Proposing Changes in Medicaid Coverage
Fri, 01-27-2012 - 5:28pm

A proposal has been introduced by Colorado lawmakers to once again allow Medicaid to pay for circumcisions, which is the opposite of how other states have been heading:

The bill would allow Medicaid to again cover circumcisions. The procedure was dropped from Medicaid last year as a money-saving move. Several states have stopped covering circumcisions amid concerns that they're not medically necessary. Colorado projected that it would save about $186,500 a year if it stopped covering circumcisions.

Read the article at:

I wish the article would have stated why they are moving for this change.

Avatar for geedee99
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-07-2003
Mon, 01-30-2012 - 6:26am

This has to be good news!

Given that infant circumcision is a very polarised issue with opinion deeply divided on its value - despite masses of recent evidence supporting it - the discontinuation of support on medicaid was always unfair and discriminatory.

From time to time the AAP (American Academy of Pediatricans) do make policy pronouncements on this procedure and the latest is long overdue. Why? Because, they recruit all shades of opinion to the considering committee and this means they can never agree. Last time in 1990s they sat on the fence, admitting there were benefits to circumcision, but in their view, these were not sufficient for them to come out and recommend all parents to have it done routinely. Thus they supported both; those who want to circumcise their boys and those who don't, consigning it to personal parental choice.

The whole point of Medicaid is to ensure that poor people are not disadvantaged in healthcare. Delisting circumcision denies these parents any choice in the matter. They have the will and opinion of opponents imposed on their boys if they have the misfortune to live in a state in which Medicaid have delisted it. Given that the APP considers the beliefs of parents to circumcise or leave intact are equally valid, this is blatantly mean and unfair.

There is little doubt that the delisting of circumcision was brought about by lobbying from intactivists. Many will have crowed over their success and will lament if this reverse goes through. They are control freaks. How would they feel if circumcision was made compulsory? Not that it should be! - but that is the mirror of the situation they imposed on many poor parents