September 2009 Weddings
Stand up for something you believe in.
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
WDYT? Mandatory Coverage for Birth Control
Stand up for something you believe in.
Re: WDYT? Mandatory Coverage for Birth Control
I think it's great, anything to save me some money. But, I'm sure I'll end up paying for it in some kind of tax anyways so I'm not sure it's that big of a benefit. I think where it will do the most good is the coverage/assistance it will give to people who will be covered under this insurance reform who would have difficulty obtaining birth control since Planned Parenthood has taken such a huge hit recently.
I'm not exceedingly knowledgeable on the ins-and-outs of healthcare reform so I don't want to speak to how helpful it will really be. But anything that makes taking control of your reproductive health easier for women is ok in my book.
Yup. I agree with law. I think it's a great idea. Even if we have to "make up for it" in taxes somewhere, I'd rather pay extra taxes to help prevent pregnancies than pay extra taxes to pay for all of the services related to healthily maintaining unplanned pregnancies (even though that comment makes me sound kind of ignorant....)
I mean really, in some insurance agreements pregnancy is considered a "pre-existing condition," so why aren't contraceptives considered preventative care?
I think it is a good idea to cover birth control. I'm fine with requiring insurance to include it in your drug formulary.
However, I don't think it is a great idea to require coverage for copays. Why should this medicine be free when all other meds (including preventative meds) have to be paid for? And how can the White House order this specific thing? What about cancer drugs or asthma meds that are life and death things? I don't see why birth control is being elevated in this situation.
Also, this is only for insured people, so the people who are not working, who do not have insurance, etc.- aka the people who this would most benefit- are not covered.
To me, this is an instance of activism from the wrong branch. I also think that this will result in more taxes to cover this, and higher premiums to insure "women of child bearing age"- the people who pay the most to begin with.
So, good idea, poor actual execution.
Stand up for something you believe in.
I see the copay thing. At least make all the copays equal. Like with $4 generics. Some people I've spoken to pay a $50 copay for Nuva Ring, while others pay the $4 generic, and I pay $10 a month for generics. I think all forms should have some sort of equality.
I'm going to sound completely wrong here, but when I was uninsured (between my parent's coverage and having a job of my own) I bought my own insurance from BCBS ($100/month) and ALL prescriptions were covered except BC...I had to pay $120/month for my pills...I think this BC change would benefit people who were in my situation. So some of the people who would most benefit would actually benefit. KWIM?
I can see this happening as well. So I do agree with your last sentence about execution. I do also believe that our health care program isn't the best, but I'm not smart enough to figure out a way to fix it.
As someone who was recently self insured, I couldn't get coverage for less than $425/mo. because I was a woman of child bearing age. It covered my birth control and such, but not well. It was actually really crappy insurance, and it was all I could get.
The issue with making everything the same cost is that it is very expensive to develop drugs and go through the very rigorous safety and approvals process. So, while a drug invented in the 60s can afford to be $4, something that is newer and treats more specific symptoms shouldn't have to be, otherwise they'll never recoup r&d costs.
Stand up for something you believe in.
Then I consider myself lucky. My uninsured period was from 2007-2009, so not sure if the premiums have raised on the insurance I purchased since then (I'm sure they have) or not. But mine was primitive; it covered preventative care (one annual physical, annual gyn appt--that's it, no tests or anything) and extreme hospital stays, and prescriptions.
I understand this--which is why I said, I'm sure I sound stupid--but to me a pill is a pill. If the doctor thinks it's fine for me to be on a generic b/c it has the same ingredients as the name brand, then the insurance companies should treat them equally as well. I'm not saying each and every type should be an equal amount, but equal properties=equal amount. The Nuva Ring does the same thing as the pill, but it doesn't disperse the hormones throughout your system like the pill. I don't think it should cost more for a monthly Rx of Nuva vs. tricyclen. They do the same thing, the delivery method is just a little different. KWIM?
P.S. It's nice to have a healthy debate/conversation going on.
I work with a largley Medical-Assistance population, and the sad truth is that a large part of that population still does NOT receive the medical care they (and their children should) no matter how free it is for them. So i think that the women who have always paid for their birth control will continue to take birth control - but I really don't think it will urge anyone who isn't already being responsible to say, "You know, I really should get on birth control."
And while I know that was not the crux of the conversation you ladies were just having, that's my thought on the whole thing. Oh, and yes, I'm sure we will all end up paying for this somehow.
I think this is untrue only for the ones who were in my situation that I said before...I was paying $100/month for insurance and then $120 for BC on top of that. Most ladies purchasing their own insurance would bypass that extra $120, but if it was included/covered, even with say a $20 copay, I think more ladies would be apt to at least try it out.
But I do agree that those who can't afford insurance or are just plain irresponsible probably wouldn't be prompted to get it anyway. *shrug*