General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsi'm with republicans on this one: employers should not be required to fund employee birth control.
in fact, employers should be out of the health care / health insurance business entirely.
the federal government should provide medicare for all, so that no one's health is dependent on their employment situation.
then businesses can just be about business, employment can just be about employment, and health can be just about health.
and if someone wants birth control or not, it has nothing to do with their employer.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)So you'd have no coverage from your employer's health insurance, and none from the government. Way to go.
silverweb
(16,402 posts)[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]But we're nowhere near there yet, so we have to do what we can.
liberal N proud
(60,338 posts)I would think that any insurer would be all about covering birth control. The cost is well below that of pregnancy and adding another dependant to the insurance bill.
The bean counters are not doing their job on this one.
Alameda
(1,895 posts)What an absurd situation.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)get per month on most insurance plans.
There are all sorts of snarky things I could say here, but it really just speaks for itself, doesn't it?
liberal N proud
(60,338 posts)Every insurance company will cover Viagra
Thav
(946 posts)that is expensive, time consuming and resource intensive for many many years.
Whereas not being able to get it up for 30 seconds of way hey hey is downright embarrassing!
I do not understand it either, it's one of those paradoxes that will cause your head to cave in should you try to understand the logic behind it.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)LOL! Is that like Vo-Di-Oh-Do (from "Laverne & Shirley" .
Uncle Joe
(58,369 posts)Thanks for the thread, unblock.
indykatie1955
(63 posts)The change is that they will now be available without cost sharing to the member as are all other services deemed Preventive under ACA guidelines. I'm glad Obama stepped forward sooner rather than later with an accommodation for the religious organizations. PP and NOW support his recommended approach. The conversation can now shift to what this is really about, Repubs don't want any women having access to contraceptives at no cost and Santorum doesn't want access even with a cost associated. This is an argument that Dems will win and get women out to vote at higher levels hopefully. Interestingly enough many of the large Catholic hospital systems and educational facilities already cover contraceptives. The Bishops must not be aware of that.
CAPHAVOC
(1,138 posts)Get all the Insurance Companies, Corporations, Lawyers, and the rest of them out of it. For one thing Health Care is no longer "insurable". It has become something the Government should run. But I am for the original Medicare Part A and B. Not all the later changes. Back in the 60's and 70's it worked great. But it only covered Hospital and Dr and Outpatient bills for accidents and illness. I will take it. We could afford it.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)pnwest
(3,266 posts)...as medicine? For dysmenorrhea (so?) Menopause?
unblock
(52,257 posts)why on earth should your employer be involved in any way in such matters?
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)Because paying for pregnancy and childbirth benefits is really expensive.
BlueToTheBone
(3,747 posts)I'm excited that soon I too will have insurance that covers medical needs. I have a plan right now that allows 6 doctor visits per 12 months. Even though I'm grateful for the 6 visits, that is definitely rationed medical care. I have a problem that needs more help, but I'll be waiting until I can afford to go to a doctor, I hope my problem can wait too.