Abortion no longer covered by Military Health Insurance

[saracat]

Breaking on court TV scroll Abortion no longer procedure covered
Edited on Thu Aug-18-05 07:40 PM by saracat

by military health insurance. A sailors wife who is carrying a fatally defective fetus cannot have her surgery paid by the insurance! This is what we are looking forward to folks!
They state her life isn't in danger! Listen up all of you who think Roe isn't in danger! The first steps are being taken.

[fedupinBushcountry]

1. Is she overseas

Isn't this what Boxer was fighting, and they promised they would bring it up again, so she backed off filibustering.

[saracat]

3. Don't know This is the article

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/N/NAVY_ABORTION_FIGHT?SITE=TXSAE&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2005-08-18-17-51-50

[karynnj]

2. Do you think they are over-reaching by choosing this case?

This is just cruel. (I'm assuming a fatally defective fetus means the baby will die shortly after birth. ) I am pro-choice, but would feel an abortion was wrong for me under normal cicumstances.

[Mass]

4. This case is terrible, but not new.

It is not a change in the law. It is the law. This family has been seeking help for a few months now, but nobody really seems to care.

[saracat]

5. The Federal Appeals Court ruled today!

That is why it is current!

[Mass]

6. It is current, but nothing changed.

You said "no more covered" but it never was.

And really nobody seems to care, unfortunately.

[TayTay]

7. I haven't seen the story yet

Was this an abortin paid for by the military or by private insurance, but performed at a military hospital? (It matters.)

[fedupinBushcountry]

8. TriCare

Military insurance program.

[saracat]

9. Here you go Tay Tay!

AP Home Texas Wire National International Middle East
Business Technology Sports Entertainment Strange News

Aug 18, 7:28 PM EDT

Armed forces medical plan limits abortions

By DAVID KRAVETS
AP Legal Affairs Writer

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that U.S. armed forces medical benefits should cover abortion costs only when a mother's life is at risk, a decision that the judges acknowledged was "callous and unfeeling."

The ruling by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals came in the case of a Navy sailor's wife whose fetus had a fatal birth defect. She had an abortion five months into her pregnancy, but coverage for the procedure was denied.

She filed a lawsuit claiming an armed forces health plan owed her $3,000 for the procedure. The government argued that refusing to cover such services "furthers the government's interest in protecting human life in general and promoting respect for life."

In Thursday's 3-0 ruling, judges said they were not judging the "wisdom, fairness or logic" of congressional legislation that limited abortions under military medical plans.



Advertisement





Lawmakers served a legitimate governmental purpose by denying such benefits because of "an interest in potential life," Judge Richard C. Tallman wrote for the San Francisco-based court.

The court cited a 1980 Supreme Court decision in which the justices upheld Medicaid legislation forbidding payment for abortions unless the "the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term."

Some rape and incest victims also qualified for coverage under Medicaid, but such coverage is not available under the armed forces program.

Lisa Stone, executive director of the Northwest Women's Law Center, which represented the sailor's wife, said the case was a longshot because federal funds generally cannot pay for abortions except in limited circumstances.

Latest News
Armed forces medical plan limits abortions
Pro-Choice group won't back Va. candidate

Rules for morning-after pill may come soon

N.C. suit filed over judge vote financing

White House sides with N.H. on abortion





Related Item
Eric Rudolph's Statement




"We believe it was worth it to pursue it because the basis for upholding the government's ban - the interest in potential human life - does not apply here," Stone said. "There is no potential for human life."

Stone said the center was considering its next move. Options include letting the decision stand, asking the court to rehear the case with 11 judges or seeking Supreme Court review.

The Justice Department, which defended the government's position in court, had no comment, according to spokesman Charles Miller.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

Purchase this AP story for reprint.

[TayTay]

10. The reason I was asking is because

of all the recent (within last 5 years) votes in Congress on abortion funding in the military and whether the US govt. will pay for it, whether or not it can be done in a military hopsital and paid for under private insurance.

I am still looking up the Murray Snow Amendment from June 21, 2002 and trying to figure out if and when it was again reversed in the Senate.

Let me look again tomorrow. This is very interesting news. (And very sad news.)