To All My Ladies That Use Birth Control
Replies
-
From the article I read, it's regulation affecting insurance companies, so someone without insurance wouldn't get the benefit.What about those who do not have insurance? That's my big question...0 -
That is good news. I know my insurance changed to cover some preventive care already this year. My annual exam was free instead of my usual $30 co-pay.0
-
Bingo!wellll...it's not free. Someone's still paying for it somewhere, maybe with higher premiums.0 -
But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?
I agree with this. As someone who can't use birth control but pays a **** load of taxes, seems kind of sucky on my end.0 -
But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?
Generally, measures of preventative care are cheaper than treating something... I am sure that covering BC is cheaper than covering the cost of prenatal care, delivery, and possible complications of birth... not to mention the cost of illnesses and injuries that kids are prone to...
So whether or not they have to cover it is more a political debate, but by cost-benefit analysis, it is probably in their best interest to do so. I'm suprised not all companies cover BC right now. Mine does... I pay $7 a month for the pill. Before that, my NuvaRing was $25/month (vs. $80 out of pocket!!)0 -
Bingo!wellll...it's not free. Someone's still paying for it somewhere, maybe with higher premiums.
Yep.0 -
From the article I read, it's regulation affecting insurance companies, so someone without insurance wouldn't get the benefit.What about those who do not have insurance? That's my big question...
See, that's what stinks, because they're likely the ones who need it the most...
So really, the title of this post should be "To all my INSURED ladies who use BC..." :ohwell:0 -
fact you may not have known until now....
many insurance companies covered "Viagra" and other ED medications, but carved out contraception, abortion, and/or maternity coverage LONG before anyone bothered to raise hell about it. pun not necessarily intended, but i hope that sticks in your head.
Yeah, this little tidbit has always riled me up.
I consider myself fortunate to even have health insurance here in the States; the cost of it, though, makes me shake my head. Also, I do consider myself lucky to have had my monster over in the U.K. (loved my midwives, amazing women) and then have my vag-switchblade installed over there for free (i.e., copper IUD).
0 -
Should they have to pay for bariatric surgery, gym memberships, safe vehicles, and healthy groceries for every one as well?
Generally, measures of preventative care are cheaper than treating something... I am sure that covering BC is cheaper than covering the cost of prenatal care, delivery, and possible complications of birth... not to mention the cost of illnesses and injuries that kids are prone to...But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?0 -
Side note-- Will this only benefit women who have insurance, though? The real need for BC assistance is with low-income populations, many of whom are also uninsured...
^^^This. I work with these kids ... not always pretty.0 -
But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?
I don't think they should have to, but fiscally it makes sense.
prenatal care, maternity care, delivery, pediatric care - these are all expenses associated with a HEALTHY pregnancy and delivery. If you have to add NICU, (the single most expensive variable length of intensive care outside of trauma or cardiac ICU), surgeries, complications, etc... the cost skyrockets well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
as a taxpayer and a uterus-owner, i'd certainly rather pay $30/mo for a decent contraceptive method.0 -
now I just need insurance:grumble:0
-
Awesome!! Although I'm about to quit my BC and switch to the Fertility Awareness Method... but good news for the ladies (and their partners/families!!) that will benefit from it.
Side note-- Will this only benefit women who have insurance, though? The real need for BC assistance is with low-income populations, many of whom are also uninsured...
What's fertility awareness? Will it help you get pregnant if and when you're ready? I use BC now, I'm just wondering... :blushing:0 -
No need here...my tubes are tied now Im just a play toy !! LOL0
-
Most states have low-cost options available to folks that don't have insurance or cannot afford it.
See, that's what stinks, because they're likely the ones who need it the most...
From the article I read, it's regulation affecting insurance companies, so someone without insurance wouldn't get the benefit.What about those who do not have insurance? That's my big question...0 -
Then there should be no reason for anybody to not use it?0
-
Does it cover ALL birth controls? Or only some? I use nuva ring... LOVE it!!0
-
Should they have to pay for bariatric surgery, gym memberships, safe vehicles, and healthy groceries for every one as well?
Generally, measures of preventative care are cheaper than treating something... I am sure that covering BC is cheaper than covering the cost of prenatal care, delivery, and possible complications of birth... not to mention the cost of illnesses and injuries that kids are prone to...But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?
honestly, if they simply offered a deductible reimbursement or reduction plan based on participation in a gym membership, healthy eating program, or using a safe transportation method, i would jump at the chance. in the short term, yes. it would cost more. in the long term? if people actually USED it, and didn't do everything they could to circumvent it and use the benefits without actually driving the safe vehicle, or going to the gym, etc... it would reduce premiums and healthcare costs in the long term.0 -
Should they have to pay for bariatric surgery, gym memberships, safe vehicles, and healthy groceries for every one as well?
Generally, measures of preventative care are cheaper than treating something... I am sure that covering BC is cheaper than covering the cost of prenatal care, delivery, and possible complications of birth... not to mention the cost of illnesses and injuries that kids are prone to...But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?
Yes. Is that the answer you want? jk.... lolol... But more seriously, I'm not getting into a political debate.
But when you compare the cost of BC coverage-- roughly $240-$1200 per year, depending on method-- to the cost of prenatal visits (many visits), ultrasounds (multiple, also), labor and delivery ($4,000 - $10,000), not to mention potential complications of birth that could cost 10's of thousands of dollars... plus having to cover a child who may or may not be healthy.... really, like I said, I'm surprised they don't all cover it already.0 -
now I just need insurance:grumble:
visit your local planned parenthood, or ask your doctor for a low cost prescription or sample. springing for the cost of one visit is worth the risk.0 -
:noway: HUH?!?!??!??!
Mine is $72 a month WITH insurance.. I don't pay that much though because the own birth control company has a savings card in which I pay $24/mo.
Yay!0 -
Should they have to pay for bariatric surgery, gym memberships, safe vehicles, and healthy groceries for every one as well?
Generally, measures of preventative care are cheaper than treating something... I am sure that covering BC is cheaper than covering the cost of prenatal care, delivery, and possible complications of birth... not to mention the cost of illnesses and injuries that kids are prone to...But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?
Birth control is used as a method to treat certain conditions such as PCOS. It is not just used as a preventative measure for pregnancy.0 -
Should they have to pay for bariatric surgery, gym memberships, safe vehicles, and healthy groceries for every one as well?
Generally, measures of preventative care are cheaper than treating something... I am sure that covering BC is cheaper than covering the cost of prenatal care, delivery, and possible complications of birth... not to mention the cost of illnesses and injuries that kids are prone to...But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?
I'm on it to prevent myself from ripping someone a new arsehole every month...it's either that or prozac :huh:0 -
But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?
I don't think they should have to, but fiscally it makes sense.
prenatal care, maternity care, delivery, pediatric care - these are all expenses associated with a HEALTHY pregnancy and delivery. If you have to add NICU, (the single most expensive variable length of intensive care outside of trauma or cardiac ICU), surgeries, complications, etc... the cost skyrockets well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
as a taxpayer and a uterus-owner, i'd certainly rather pay $30/mo for a decent contraceptive method.
Fellow uterus-owner. I love that.0 -
What's fertility awareness? Will it help you get pregnant if and when you're ready? I use BC now, I'm just wondering... :blushing:
Yes!! It sounds totally cool and many women have gotten great results... it's based on the book "Taking Charge of Your Fertility," you should look it up on Amazon! It has really great reviews! I ordered it yesterday, can't wait to get it and QUIT my BC! 0 -
if a business -- which insurance companies are -- believed that would work and chose to do it, great! The problem is when they are forced to do it. When that happens, much like taxes, they pass the cost back to those that are paying for the service. So, it really ain't gonna be "free" in the end.
honestly, if they simply offered a deductible reimbursement or reduction plan based on participation in a gym membership, healthy eating program, or using a safe transportation method, i would jump at the chance. in the short term, yes. it would cost more. in the long term? if people actually USED it, and didn't do everything they could to circumvent it and use the benefits without actually driving the safe vehicle, or going to the gym, etc... it would reduce premiums and healthcare costs in the long term.
Should they have to pay for bariatric surgery, gym memberships, safe vehicles, and healthy groceries for every one as well?
Generally, measures of preventative care are cheaper than treating something... I am sure that covering BC is cheaper than covering the cost of prenatal care, delivery, and possible complications of birth... not to mention the cost of illnesses and injuries that kids are prone to...But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?0 -
now I just need insurance:grumble:
visit your local planned parenthood, or ask your doctor for a low cost prescription or sample. springing for the cost of one visit is worth the risk.
They wont give the pill because I smoke,and planned parent hood isnt so cheap for me because technically we make to much money0 -
if a business -- which insurance companies are -- believed that would work and chose to do it, great! The problem is when they are forced to do it. When that happens, much like taxes, they pass the cost back to those that are paying for the service. So, it really ain't gonna be "free" in the end.
honestly, if they simply offered a deductible reimbursement or reduction plan based on participation in a gym membership, healthy eating program, or using a safe transportation method, i would jump at the chance. in the short term, yes. it would cost more. in the long term? if people actually USED it, and didn't do everything they could to circumvent it and use the benefits without actually driving the safe vehicle, or going to the gym, etc... it would reduce premiums and healthcare costs in the long term.
Should they have to pay for bariatric surgery, gym memberships, safe vehicles, and healthy groceries for every one as well?
Generally, measures of preventative care are cheaper than treating something... I am sure that covering BC is cheaper than covering the cost of prenatal care, delivery, and possible complications of birth... not to mention the cost of illnesses and injuries that kids are prone to...But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?
well of course, but that seems more of a consumerism standpoint than a 6 years in health insurance authorizations and billing perspective. which is where i'm coming from. I see your point - clearly. And in the short run, you're correct. I still believe the long term benefits would eventually surpass the short term cramped style.0 -
Understood. Please note that I was responding to a comment about insurance carriers being obligated to pay for preventative application of BC.
Birth control is used as a method to treat certain conditions such as PCOS. It is not just used as a preventative measure for pregnancy.
Should they have to pay for bariatric surgery, gym memberships, safe vehicles, and healthy groceries for every one as well?
Generally, measures of preventative care are cheaper than treating something... I am sure that covering BC is cheaper than covering the cost of prenatal care, delivery, and possible complications of birth... not to mention the cost of illnesses and injuries that kids are prone to...But the question is... why should the insurance companies have to?0 -
*0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions