When Judges Decide Healthcare
I was appalled at the recent decision by the judges in the Union Pacific case. They decided that the two women who sought to have contraception included as part of their insurance coverage weren't entitled to it. Here's what they said:
"Union Pacific’s health plans do not cover any contraception used by women such as birth control, sponges, diaphragms, intrauterine devices or tubal ligations or any contraception used by men such as condoms and vasectomies. Therefore, the coverage provided to women is not less favorable than that provided to men.”
Somebody should get the two judges who came to this decision into a sex education course pronto! Men cannot get pregnant, so the importance of contraception for them is hardly the same. Does it surprise anyone that these two judges were appointed by republican presidents, while the lone dissenting opinion was appointed by a democrat?
This shouldn't be a turf war between conservatives and liberals. It's a common sense issue. Unfortunately, many employers don't want birth control included in health plans due to religious convictions and/or the extra cost involved. Sadly, if mistakes are made and contraception is not used, it is the woman who potentially bears the brunt of the decision.
Of course, Union Pacific had no objection to Viagra and Rogaine being included as part of their healthcare plan. After all, when it comes to contraception, looking good and being able to perform are far more important. What are your thoughts?
posted by Anne @ 11:39 PM
23 comments
23 Comments:
Its employment at will. Know your employer and their benefits before saying ok, I would love to work for you.
This is not an issue of politics! Quit bringing politics into every thing, just because somebody doesn't get their way, they sue and then blame one party (or George Bush). The judge did not have any legal justification to change the way the employer is handling its affairs. Stare' Decisis in legal forums is that unless there is legal reason to change something, let it be. Its not political, its not mean, its the way it is.
As a woman, I am getting tired of the "puts back of hand to forehead - poor women we have to bear the brunt of pregnancy" blah, blah, blah. Is a Vasectomy not birth control? You made it sound like men dont care if they cause a pregnancy. I truly feel that is a 50/50 issue. Just as much as a woman needs to used protection - be it birth control or STD prevention - so does a man.
Where did Bush bashing or any other politics come into this?
As for the Viagra and Rogaine, I can only assume that since this industry is predominantly male, and there is a lot of psychological stigma associated with poor performance and hair loss, that is their reasoning.
But let's not blame this on Bush or any other politician. If you dont like UP's health plan, dont work for them.
I have to agree with these two folks. And I am a woman as well. The judges do not and can not dictate the benefits of any given plan. The issue of contraception as it regards this plan is treated equally between women and men. I have known women who used Rogaine, so I would have to say that baldness and/or alopecia is also treated equally. As for ED treatments - I don't personally care one way or the other about whether it is covered, although most companies who are looking to save money wouldn't have this as a covered benefit. Maybe the CEO at UP needs it!
I agree that birth control should be covered. Preventing pregnancy is the same as preventing high cholesterol, or heart disease. You are preventing a situation from happening. It is the employer's responsibility. IF they don't pay for these things then take all you can get in other ways. THEY owe you, not the other way around.
Hmmm...seems to me like Rogaine and Viagra actually treat an existing medical illness or condition.
What do contraceptives treat? Nothing!
To make a comparison between these and contraceptives is like comparing apples to oranges.
So, let me understand...pregnancy is a disease like cholestrol and heart disease....hmmmm.
It is interesting that you state that this issue should not be a political "turf war", but you don't hesitate to take a shot at the Republican Administration? Your argument loses its credibility when you choose to base it on your party affiliation.
Anne,
As far as I'm concerned, you have lost any credibility you may have had. I disagree with your "entitlement" mentality. Just because some believe in personal responsibility, does not necessarily make them a democrat or a republican. I am an independent in all respects, but also believe that the government, my employer, or whomever should pay for everything I want or need. Please remove me from your email list. I have more important things to do than read your drivel.
I must be one of the fortunate ones. While the health plan provided by my employer does not cover birth control (which now runs as high as $58/month if paid out of pocket), they do make a mail order prescription service available that will give me a three month supply for the equivalent of two co-pays (about $16).
While I agree it would be a nice benefit, I don't feel it should be mandatory that a health plan provide birth control to subscribers. Bottom line...preventing pregnancy is the responsibility of the partners who decide to engage in sexual activity. There are many other affordable options on the market besides that prescribed by your doctor.
This article has not place on your blog. You are a medcial office manager? Stick to issues related to medical practices. This article has no place here.
*Sadly, if mistakes are made and contraception is not used,
*Preventing pregnancy is the same as preventing high cholesterol, or heart disease.
*You are preventing a situation from happening
Is anybody else amazed by these statements???
How did we ever get to the point in our culture where sex is refered to as a (Sadly) "Mistake"
(preventing) "a disease" or a "situation" and the courts/President/Employer is responsible? GOD help us.
To the person who feels birth control should be covered: Your employer only owes you an honest days pay for an honest days work. If you wish to negotiate birth control coverage as part of your compensation package, more power to you. But the idea that your employer automatically OWES you is rediculous.
I feel it is very discrimnatory for employers health insurance plans to cover the cost of impotency drugs, and not cover the cost of birth control. Impotency is NOT a disease, anymore than pregnancy is a disease. Sex discrimination is alive and well in corporate America.
Is contraception unimportant to men? I think not. We've reached an era in which paternity can be definitively proven. A woman has absolute discretion with respect to termination of pregnancy. If a woman wants a child AND child support, she need only select a suitable candidate and lie about her own use of contraception. The choiceless "father" has no vote in whether or not the pregnancy is carried to term. If the woman decides to have the child, the man is tied to 18+ years of child support.
My view is that 15-year-old boys should have vasectomies after freezing enough sperm for 10-12 children. That way, they will never be trapped into child support without fully intending to become a father.
unbelievable
Yes, a little bit.
I'm a free-marketer and a libertarian at heart. If the employer wants
to include or exclude contraception, or ED meds, or whatever, from their
formulary, so be it. They should lose good employees as a result and
some employer more generous/reasonable should gain from it.
From a practical perspective, it is pretty unwise to save on
contraception only to pay for pregnancy, maternity leave, etc., unless
the employer just doesn't want to employ women of child-bearing age and
is intentionally trying to discourage them from employment.
Then you're getting into a legal problem area where you are
discriminating on the basis of gender and age.
Thank you, Anne.
Male dominance in the decision-making?
I am an OB/GYN physician and President of Lifeline Medical Associates,
New Jerseys largest provider of women's healthcare. Obviously this topic
is dear to me and Lifeline. I have a few comments. First, I completely
agree that women almost always suffer more from contraceptive failures.
I do believe however that both men and women should be equally afforded
effective contraceptive coverage. If not, we set up a double standard
and send a message to young men that they are not equally responsible.
Second, in today's world of sexually transmitted diseases that kill,
such as HIV, HPV, and Herpes for newborns infected, pregnancy is only
one reason to use contraception and condoms are the only thing effective
against both. All reasonable contraception, especially condoms, should
be covered 100% for men and women. Not only is this the right thing to
do but will save the insurance companies and the government millions, if
not billions, of dollars long term. How short sighted.
Regards,
Jack
FOOLISH employers, penny wise and pound foolish. Pay for birth control, it costs much less than pregnancy, birth, and neonatal problems such as prematurity, and other problems in newborns. Cover all forms of birth control including condoms, as they prevent pregnancy and disease. We are a BACKWARD country.
I've seen birth control given to help in situations other than contraception. There are indications (maybe off label) where hormone therapy is used for actual medical conditions outside of pregnancy prevention, ie, dysmenorrhea. Wouldn't that count just the same as a "medical condition" treated by Viagra or Rogaine? Funny that you can't get coverage for severe pain associated with menstruation.
I just had to reply to your message to ask you to consider this point of view:
Healthcare should provide TREATMENT to any bodily system that is not functioning properly in order to regain function.
Keeping that in mind, reread the decisions and your argument and see if you still hold your same opinion.
Kathryn
As a victim of the system, I need government to pass laws to take care of me. Those dastardly Republicans expect me to fend for myself. I find it unconscionable that someone would expect me to pay for birth control or find an employer who offers it. I have a right to birth control, it is in the Constitution. Why should I as a victim accept any responsibility? If George Bush and his evil Republicans would tax the rich fairly, say 80% for those making over $100,000 per year all would be good in the world.
It is not fair that some people make more than others. We need to all stand up and do what is right. Vote Democrat and let’s take what we have a right to.
Remember: From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need.
I work for an OB/GYN and see daily the results of sex without contraception. Females between the ages of 16-28 are the bulk of the practice and 50% are on Medicaid. The Medicaid system is overburdened with unplanned pregnancies and who pays for that...we all do. So which way is better, lets be REALISTS, people have unprotected sex everyday...we all pay now or pay later.
Post a Comment
<< Home