Near-Universal Contraception Coverage Approved

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-18-2008
Near-Universal Contraception Coverage Approved
253
Fri, 01-20-2012 - 2:14pm

Seems like this would be a good thing. More contraception = less abortion, less people who can't afford - or don't want - babies actually having them.

"Today, in a huge victory for women’s health, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that most employers will be required to cover contraception in their health plans, along with other preventive services, with no cost-sharing such as co-pays or deductibles. This means that after years of trying to get birth control covered to the same extent that health plans cover Viagra, our country will finally have nearly universal coverage of contraception."

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/01/20/407994/obama-administration-approves-rule-that-guarantees-near-universal-contraceptive-coverage/?mobile=nc

Photobucket

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2011
Sun, 01-22-2012 - 1:11pm

Regarding the father... a father has an opinion, but a woman has the absolute right to consider, discard, or otherwise decide the weighted level of that opinion.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011
Sun, 01-22-2012 - 1:13pm
This makes insurance companies provide contraception coverage.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2011
Sun, 01-22-2012 - 1:15pm

Since insurance pretty much leaped to offer coverage for viagra prescriptions, it would seem we can handle contraceptives. Funnny, I don't see any employers clamouring to knock off viagra coverage.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Sun, 01-22-2012 - 3:15pm

They don't have to offer health insurance at all. It's a part of the compensation package for that job. I don't know what business

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011
Sun, 01-22-2012 - 3:21pm
When companies are discriminating against a group of people based on their gender, the government has every right to step in. All women have the right to health care and access to contraception from their insurance companies.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2011
Sun, 01-22-2012 - 3:23pm

You are aware that insurance coverage is generally regulated, as well as exists in an environment of case law, right?

Yes, government gets involved. What happens when it isn't involved? See housing market, credit default swaps.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Sun, 01-22-2012 - 4:37pm
I can't believe what I'm reading... The man is only allowed to offer up an opinion but the woman makes the final call? If we're talking about the same man who gets the woman pregnant then he should have equal rights in what direction the pregnancy takes. And don't forget the double standard that sounds like then too, isn't it all about the man owning up and taking responsibility if she keeps the child then? This is such a sad, unfair issue all around!

 


 


iVillage Member
Registered: 04-02-2009
Sun, 01-22-2012 - 4:55pm

Why?

 

****************************************************


"Of
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011
Sun, 01-22-2012 - 4:58pm
<>

Well, yes, that's correct. It's not like the man can carry a pregnancy. Some may not like that a man doesn't have equal say, but he simply can't because it's not his body to make the choice for.

As I stated to someone else not too long ago, a man should be very sure about what decision the woman he has sex with would make in the case of an accidental pregnancy before he has sex with her.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sun, 01-22-2012 - 5:17pm
Being pro-choice does not mean that one believes a pregnant woman should abort. The woman is the one who makes the decision because her body is affected so intimately.

So you became pregnant and decided that life begins with a heartbeat (how about before the heartbeat can be detected?). What about that would give you the right to foist your beliefs on others who don't share those convictions? Did they tell you that you should abort your pregnancy? And if they had, wouldn't you have been outraged?

I think that's the most appalling thing about the right-to-lifers. They don't know the particulars and don't share the burden of pregnancy or new motherhood but they wish to restrict what a woman may do.

Jabberwocka

Pages