U.S. says insurers must fully cover birth control - Polidicks

[URL]http://www.latimes.com/health/sns-rt-us-usa-health-prevetre7703c4-20110801,0,2881215.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Ffeatures%2Fhealth+(L.A.+Times+-+Health)[/URL] [QUOTE]WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. health insurance companies must fully cover women's birth control and other preventive health care services under Obama administration rules released on Monday. The mandate from the Health and Human Services Department represents a landmark decision in a decades-long debate on women's health issues that has pitted family planning groups against conservative organizations. [B]"Under the law, we're making it illegal to charge women more just because of their gender," HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said on Monday.[/B] The guidelines, a product of last year's healthcare overhaul, go into effect on Monday, and require insurers to do away with co-payments on coverage of preventive care services for women in all new plans beginning in August 2012. The rules largely follow recommendations from a scientific advisory group released last month. [B]The U.S. Institute of Medicine (IOM) said in a July report that all government-approved birth control methods -- including the "morning-after pill," taken shortly after sexual intercourse to stop a pregnancy -- should be included in the U.S. list of preventive health services.[/B] [B]The newly required coverage also includes free screenings for gestational diabetes, testing for human papillomavirus in women over 30, counseling for HIV and sexually transmitted infections, and screening for domestic violence.[/B] "Today is a historic victory for women's health and women across the country," said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "The decision by HHS is monumental for millions of women." Conservative groups balked at the decision to force private insurers to fully cover birth control. "HHS says the intent of its 'preventive services' mandate is to help 'stop health problems before they start,'" said Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, chairman of the pro-life activities committee at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "But pregnancy is not a disease, and children are not a 'health problem.'" [B]In a nod to conservative groups, the HHS included an amendment to its final rules that would allow religious employees and institutions to choose whether to cover contraception services in their insurance.[/B] MORAL DEBATE For at least 50 years, religious objections to birth control have made the topic a hot-button social issue in the United States. In 1965, a Supreme Court ruling ended an era when states could ban the use of contraceptives, arguing that such power violated "the right to marital privacy." In 1972, another case upheld unmarried couples' rights to the use of contraceptives. Monday's rules mark another turn in the debate and could help put birth control in financial reach for some women. Many of the bigger employers must include birth control among the services covered by their insurance, but require women to pay part of the price. The HHS guidelines would get rid of the co-pay. "(Contraception) is not controversial in the lives of women... To an extent, this is not really new, but it's filling in the gaps," said Judy Waxman, vice president for health and reproductive rights at the National Women's Law Center, a non-profit pro-choice education center. There is some question about how much impact the rule will have on coverage of the "morning-after pill." The HHS rule requires coverage of contraceptives "as prescribed." Two most commonly used government-approved emergency contraceptives -- "Plan B" from Teva Pharmaceuticals and "Next Choice" from Watson Pharmaceuticals -- are sold over the counter. The only prescription emergency pill is Watson's "ella," approved in 2010. "It's regulatory sleight of hand on the part of HHS," said Dr. Michele Curtis, an obstetrician and gynecologist at the University of Texas-Houston Medical School. Still, some women said the government's mandate for full coverage of birth control is a welcome step. "I'm not on it now, but I took it in my twenties, and it cost a small fortune back then," said 47-year-old Carole Murphy, who was shopping at a local CVS on Monday. [B]"It's good to have the option if you need it."[/B][/QUOTE] Good job America, I just wish we had done this sooner.

It... wasn't?

[QUOTE=Miskav;31511917]It... wasn't?[/QUOTE] I thought it was, too.

[QUOTE=Miskav;31511917]It... wasn't?[/QUOTE] Nope, the conservatives fought forever because.... I can't even think of a logical reason for them to argue against it, but at least now it is covered. Obama used the cover of the debt ceiling to pass legislation that otherwise would never have passed. Like the mileage for cars, and this. He is a true politician.

[Quote]"Under the law, we're making it illegal to charge women more just because of their gender," HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said on Monday[/quote] I support the ruling but this statement is stupid: it completely portrays the insurers as something they are not. [editline]3rd August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=valkery;31512000]Nope, the conservatives fought forever because.... I can't even think of a logical reason for them to argue against it, but at least now it is covered. Obama used the cover of the debt ceiling to pass legislation that otherwise would never have passed. Like the mileage for cars, and this. He is a true politician.[/QUOTE] Because some believe abortion is immoral, which has some reasonable basis, but they extend that to "Aborting a two-day-old ball of cells is MURDER!" which is stupid. And they just generally think promiscuity is bad.

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;31512023]I support the ruling but this statement is stupid: it completely portrays the insurers as something they are not. [editline]3rd August 2011[/editline] Because some believe abortion is immoral, which has some reasonable basis, but they extend that to "Aborting a two-day-old ball of cells is MURDER!" which is stupid. And they just generally think promiscuity is bad.[/QUOTE] *Only if it's a filthy wench being promiscuous she deserves to get pregnant that'll teach her.

[QUOTE=Miskav;31511917]It... wasn't?[/QUOTE] The reason of wonder is basicly because we've had this for ages here in The Netherlands.

[QUOTE=Miskav;31511917]It... wasn't?[/QUOTE] it wasnt required to be. i think most plans cover birth control anyways unless you are really poor

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;31512023]I support the ruling but this statement is stupid: it completely portrays the insurers as something they are not. [editline]3rd August 2011[/editline] Because some believe abortion is immoral, which has some reasonable basis, but they extend that to "Aborting a two-day-old ball of cells is MURDER!" which is stupid. And they just generally think promiscuity is bad.[/QUOTE] I even read on wikipedia that the day-after pill basically won't abort the fetus, so there's even less reasoning. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_after_pill[/url] My mom always told me there was a chance it might, if memory serves, so I finally got curious and researched it for myself. Glad this finally happened. Like others, I had no idea it wasn't covered. EDIT: Or, required to be covered.

[QUOTE=Penultimate;31515457]I even read on wikipedia that the day-after pill basically won't abort the fetus, so there's even less reasoning. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_after_pill[/url] My mom always told me there was a chance it might, if memory serves, so I finally got curious and researched it for myself. Glad this finally happened. Like others, I had no idea it wasn't covered. EDIT: Or, required to be covered.[/QUOTE] It won't technically be an abortion but in many people's minds it is.

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;31515928]It won't technically be an abortion but in many people's minds it is.[/QUOTE] The only people I've seen that don't use birth control are the hispanic people around here. No that's not a racist comment about how they typically have large families but I've talked to some and they all say that they don't believe in it.

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;31512023] Because some believe abortion is immoral, which has some reasonable basis, but they extend that to "Aborting a two-day-old ball of cells is MURDER!" which is stupid. And they just generally think promiscuity is bad.[/QUOTE] It's because women who get unwanted pregnancies are whores who need to be punished and so does the child, for being born to such a whore, of course.

I love how the conservatives think that the pill is used only as a contraceptive. It's used for a variety of other things, including as a medication for ovarian cysts, to help regulate periods, and numerous other methods.

[QUOTE=Raptor_Girl;31526918]I love how the conservatives think that the pill is used only as a contraceptive. It's used for a variety of other things, including as a medication for ovarian cysts, to help regulate periods, and numerous other methods.[/QUOTE]You wouldn't need to for contraceptive anyway, I doubt anyone outside the dragon megathread would fuck a raptor.

[quote] In a nod to conservative groups, the HHS included an amendment to its final rules that would allow religious employees and institutions to choose whether to cover contraception services in their insurance. [/quote] I don't understand why the government "gives in" to religion. People who blindly base their lives around old books full of fairy-tales [i]should [b]not[/b] have [b]any[/b][/i] say in government.

[QUOTE=Stren;31527043]You wouldn't need to for contraceptive anyway, I doubt anyone outside the dragon megathread would fuck a raptor.[/QUOTE] That implies that I'm interested in sex.

[QUOTE=Raptor_Girl;31527245]That implies that I'm interested in sex.[/QUOTE]It also implies that you're a raptor in real life, which implies I was making a joke.

[QUOTE=Stren;31527345]It also implies that you're a raptor in real life, which implies I was making a joke.[/QUOTE] Well, I dunno. I can do some damage with my big toe nail.

A hallmark position of conservatives is the subjugation of women, women are second to men. Giving women control over their reproductive systems undermines men's control. This is why conservatives cannot tolerate things like the day after pill, or any form of birth control. Cultures, such as the Hispanic culture, may have religious based reasons for not using birth control. If you were raised to believe God is in charge of everything, you aren't really going to sweat birth control. If God wants you to have a kid, you will. If you do have a kid, God will provide. See? God has it covered. Then you have certain people saying "I don't want my tax money paying for..." against government mandated birth control support. These people might not have any moral or other problem with birth control, but they have a major problem with being taxed in general. So pretty much any government push for anything that involves tax money being spent for something they don't feel they personally need is going to piss them off.

[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;31530637]A hallmark position of conservatives is the subjugation of women, women are second to men. Giving women control over their reproductive systems undermines men's control. This is why conservatives cannot tolerate things like the day after pill, or any form of birth control.[/quote] Fucking really? Do we have to fucking transform everything a conservative does to "GRR I HaTE WOMEN" I swear, they don't like abortion? No, it's not out of concern for the fetus! IT'S BECAUSE THEY HATE WOMEN, obviously. Fucking always.

Even if you leave abortion out of the debate, name one conservative position that only empowers women without also doing anything for men. You can't because that goes against their core beliefs. By the way, it's not about hating women. It's about believing they are second class. There is a difference. Consider 'family values', a core conservative belief if ever there was one I think you'd agree. What does that mean? A 'family' consisting of DAD, the head of the family, the wife who is also mom in charge of raising the kids, and the kids. That's what they push, that's their dream scenario. Who gets shortchanged though? Whose options are the ones limited in that setup?

Their reason for supporting the family is not to keep women second class, however. It's because they like the idea, and because the churches tell them it's good. Sure it may tend to leave women second class but that is not the intention.

[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;31520360]The only people I've seen that don't use birth control are the hispanic people around here. No that's not a racist comment about how they typically have large families but I've talked to some and they all say that they don't believe in it.[/QUOTE] This is true. My fucking relatives don't know that condoms aren't just for smuggling drugs

[QUOTE=Dr.C;31539847]This is true. My fucking relatives don't know that condoms aren't just for smuggling drugs[/QUOTE] Into smuggling drugs, are they?

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;31532492]Fucking really? Do we have to fucking transform everything a conservative does to "GRR I HaTE WOMEN" I swear, they don't like abortion? No, it's not out of concern for the fetus! IT'S BECAUSE THEY HATE WOMEN, obviously. Fucking always.[/QUOTE] Yep, even conservative women are against women's rights, comparing birth control and abuse counseling to getting a pedicure: [url]http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/08/02/285620/fox-expert-blasts-expanding-access-to-birth-control-are-we-going-to-do-pedicures-and-manicures-as-well/[/url] [quote]Fox’s anti-birth control “expert,” Family PAC Federal Vice President Sandy Rios, however, found her own reasons to lambast the policy as “ridiculous.” Telling Greene that she lives in “la la land,” Rios offered the following “arguments” against the new policy and a woman’s right to use birth control, which are so ludicrous they’re worth listing: – “Is the White House out of their mind? Does the West Wing not know what the left wing is doing? We’re $14 trillion in debt and now we’re going to cover birth control, breast pumps, counseling for abuse? Are we going to do pedicures and manicures as well?” – “Why in the world would you encourage your daughters, and your granddaughters, and whoever else comes behind you to have unrestricted, unlimited sex anytime, anywhere and that, somehow if you prevent pregnancy, that somehow you’ve helped them. I would submit to you that uncontrolled sexual behavior is what is harming our girls, not our lack of birth control — which by the way they don’t seem interested in taking anyway. Having a baby is not the worst thing. I think having multiple sex partners without any kind of restraint or responsibility is much more damning, why would you support that?” – “In Red China, they have this down to a science. The local health care centers make women come in every month to be examined to see if they’ve had their cycle to make sure they are taking their medication and if they have a baby they are roundly punished, if they have an extra baby that baby is aborted. That is the control we’re moving toward.” – “I’d like to say that the morning-after pill has other detrimental affects. In Great Britain where it was legalized first, there was an outbreak of older men taking young girls in for the morning-after pill so they wouldn’t get caught and so there are no consequences.” [/quote]

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;31538420]Their reason for supporting the family is not to keep women second class, however. It's because they like the idea, and because the churches tell them it's good. Sure it may tend to leave women second class but that is not the intention.[/QUOTE] you'd be surprised how many conservatives think that women should be subservient to men i've seen it preached in plenty of churches and i've just given up arguing with anyone i know that thinks traditional gender roles are desirable

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;31538420]Their reason for supporting the family is not to keep women second class, however. It's because they like the idea, and because the churches tell them it's good. Sure it may tend to leave women second class but that is not the intention.[/QUOTE] That just sounds like they're too ignorant to consider the consequences of their actions then. Like they can't link traditional family and gender roles to the fact that women get the short straw.

[QUOTE=Mlisen14;31540324]That just sounds like they're too ignorant to consider the consequences of their actions then. Like they can't link traditional family and gender roles to the fact that women get the short straw.[/QUOTE] Perhaps they believe it is for the greater good. Perhaps they recognize the position it puts women in but value the family model as it is more.

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;31532492]Fucking really? Do we have to fucking transform everything a conservative does to "GRR I HaTE WOMEN" I swear, they don't like abortion? No, it's not out of concern for the fetus! IT'S BECAUSE THEY HATE WOMEN, obviously. Fucking always.[/QUOTE] I have no problem if people personally don't like abortion or think it's evil, I can see where they're coming from. I can even see where they're coming from with their morning after pill argument (to a much lesser extent) However when they try to force this shit on other people is when problems arise. They literally try to take away abortion for other people who don't share their views. Edit: wait I see you're replying to the other guy my bad. Conservatives who want to take away women's rights to their own bodies are against women's rights.

[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;31520360]The only people I've seen that don't use birth control are the hispanic people around here. No that's not a racist comment about how they typically have large families but I've talked to some and they all say that they don't believe in it.[/QUOTE] Yeah and as a result my Grandma has 10 children :v: