I don't get the big deal about the abortion piece of the healthcare bill

[snooper2]

Isn't having an abortion an elective procedure? Like having lasic(sp?) surgery on your eyes or a crown(years ago mine wasn't covered) put on a tooth?


I would rather let them say no it won't be covered except in the case of rape or incest that results in pregnancy. Or if it saves the life of the mother. But just your average Bristol and Levi? They don't want to keep the kid they have to bear the cost of their mistake, fork out the $300 dollars.

And yes, this is coming from a man who paid for one with his then girlfriend obviously for personal reasons. And now has a beautiful 4 week old with the same woman who is now his wife.


It seems both sides "groups with funds" are just getting "up in arms" to get more funds/donations.


I would rather the time/money be spent pushing the public option.

[noamnety]

1. No, it is not just like having elective cosmetic surgery.

Do we really need to explain that on a weekly basis?

[snooper2]

2. I haven't seen an explanation on it at all..

so shoot away please....

[DURHAM D]

4. Read more - type less. nt

[Bonobo]

12. Incredibly short sighted!

You need to think long term implications as well.
Also, cost of abortion is between $600-$1,000 -but that is NOT The point.
The point has to do with women's rights over their own bodies.

[FBaggins]

63. With respect - how is that the case?

I'm not arguing whether it should be covered or not but...

...how does something cease to be your right when I'm not willing to pay for it?

You have a right to free speech... but I don't have to provide you with your own tv show. Some think you have a right to own a gun... but the government doesn't have to provide you with one. You have a right to privacy, but they don't replace locks on your doors for you or provide you with free anti-ID-theft software or insurance.

There's a legitimate point to be made that if the government is going to provide health insurance to some... that "good" health insurance should cover certain things...

...but legitimate debate or not, it doesn't impact your rights over your own body.

[Bonobo]

11. Whoops, again wrong reply! Ouch!

What's wrong with me? Oh, I know...

[elehhhhna]

3. viagra's "elective", too

[cbdo2007]

6. Viagra is a cure for a medical problem.

elective cosmetic surgery is not

[Kerrytravelers]

17. Regarding plastic surgery, this is not necessarily true.

Yet this is the argument when non-medical professionals attempt to pick which aliments should be treated first.

I don't pretend to know the need for all surgeries, both immediate and what might be considered "elective." What is the official definition of "elective"? Does it vary among health care insurers? Possibly between various state agencies. I don't know, and I don't pretend to know.

The healthcare reform abortion issue isn't really about cost. It is an abortion-rights battle. It is a social battle being fought over the health and health care of Americans.



You're making the argument that viagara can be used for more than just erection pills. By that same logic, "elective" plastic surgery can make the life of someone better, more livable, making them a more productive citizen. That seems worth the cost of including it in the health care reform package.

[avaistheone1]

25. Having an erection is not a medical necessity.

Nor is having sex by token of the same logic.

[cbdo2007]

32. Who is saying that it is?

Viagra restores normal functioning to a part of the body that has lost it. It's a medical problem to not be able to have an erection.

Getting pregnant accidentally isn't a medical problem so it isn't a good comparison to compare it to viagra. If being pregnant turns into a medical problem, i.e. the medical well being of the mother or baby are at risk, then it isn't considered elective at that point.

[dflprincess]

34. Getting pregnant by accident may be because the medical option used

to avoid it has failed; in those cases it is being used to correct a medical error.

And, what is the point of Viagra, but to enable sex? Getting laid is fun, but not a medical necessity.

[Scout]

40. "It's a medical problem to not be able to have an erection."

:rofl:

pathetically laughable

[Lance_Boyle]

49. Um, do you have anything to offer other than laughter?

Erectile dysfunction is a medical problem. I assume you also find vaginal lubricity deficiency in women to be hysterically funny?

[Scout]

59. nope.

erectile dysfunction in what age of man? a 20 year old, yeah, that's a medical problem. erectile dysfunction in a man in his 50's or so, not so much. men are not "entitled" to get boners all their lives just because they want them ... they are not lacking erections (necessarily) due to a medical problem. it's just life.

"vaginal lubricity deficiency" can be easily treated without medical intervention ... Astro-Glide, KY, hell even vegetable oil works.

the OUTRAGE that some express over lack of erections is really what's laughable...

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

84. Please educate yourself. Most erectile dysfunction is caused from medical problems.

The ignorance here is stunning sometimes.

[joeybee12]

46. No, it's not, really, just part of the aging process in most cases...so if you cover viagara...

...then cover my face lift.

[avaistheone1]

48. True.

Sad, but true.

[joeybee12]

52. What's sad but true? That I really do need a facelift?

:cry:

[cbdo2007]

54. does your face still function normally?

Erectile dysfunction does not mean that the penis looks old...it means that it does not function as a normal penis functions.

As long as your face still functions as a normal face functions then it isn't comparable to the argument.

[Thickasabrick]

73. Are you saying an old penis should function like a young penis?

Are you saying that an aging penis that functions even better than a younger penis is normal - or a medical necessity??

If someone's face looks old, then perhaps that is causing the erectile dysfunction so a face lift could be therapeutic to the problem.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

85. Yes barring health problems, they should do just that.

[nykym]

30. No

Viagra is not a cure because you have to take it every time you want to get it up! And I think it should be considered elective, maybe that will stop some unwanted pregnancies to boot.

[kenny blankenship]

37. sperm poisoning is a medical problem

one of the worst you can have if you're not prepared to deal with the consequences.

That's going to have to come out. Ouch!

[Scout]

38. it's not a medical problem that older men can't get a boner every time they want one...

it's the natural aging process.

getting a boner whenever one wants one is elective.

[cbdo2007]

55. It is a medical problem because it means the body is not functioning normally

whether it is part of the natural aging process or not. Then if there is medication to restore function where your body is not functioning normally, that isn't considered "elective".

Hey, I'm with you, I don't think it should be covered under people's health insurance, I'm just explaining why it is based on their definitions and showing a distinction between someone having an abortion and someone using viagra. This comparison usually comes up in this situation but it isn't a correct comparison unless getting pregnant is part of the "natural aging process" as well.

[Scout]

61. if it's "normal" that an old penis doesn't get a stiffy all the time, then it's

not a medical malfunction ... it's life.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lorien]

68. It's as "normal" for an older man not to get an erection as it is for an older

woman to no longer be fertile, but I doubt that you would support medical aid to 65 year old women who want to bear children.

[cbdo2007]

70. I don't think infertility benefits have an age limit, therefore it is covered

if infertility is covered in your insurance plan.

Still doesn't change anything in the viagra argument, actually helped prove my point. Thanks! Older women who want to have a kid but can't do so naturally because of age can get fertility treatments performed to help their body function normally again (somewhat) and have a baby.

[Thickasabrick]

75. Your argument is not proven. It is natural for a man's penis to stay

soft and a woman to be unable to bear children as they age. Anything trying to stop/prevent/undo that natural process is elective.

[Thickasabrick]

74. +100!!

[Hello_Kitty]

88. Not being able to fuck will not kill you. eom

[Kerrytravelers]

5. I don't consider plastic surgery or dental work merely elective.

My father had skin cancer on his face. When it was removed, plastic surgery was performed so he would look, in a sense, back to his old self. Plastic surgery is more than silicone and boobs.

I've had students who have such pain in their teeth, they just put their heads on their desks and cried through the pain. Dental work for them isn't elective. When one is sick and/or in pain, they can't concentrate on learning.

There are many reasons for abortion. I don't need to know someone's personal reasons, but I certainly wouldn't classify their reasons as "elective."

[cbdo2007]

7. Some plastic surgery is. Some isn't.

Usually plastic surgery to restore someone's appearance after an accident or other treatment (such as your father's skin cancer) will be covered while boob jobs are not.

There is a difference between the two so they can't be lumped together.

[Kerrytravelers]

14. Not necessarily at all. Coverage depends on your health care plan.

My dad is lucky.

on edit:

Some boob jobs are covered. Reduction, for example. Back problems can be alleviated by reducing breast size. Some insurers are wise enough to understand this and allow the elective surgery, others are not and cite elective surgery as the reason.

[dflprincess]

23. True

the difference is between reconstructive surgery and plastic surgery.

[snooper2]

8. But I thought we are trying to drive down costs...

If we have a public option that can take down the insuranace industry in 10 years; don't we need to cover everyone with cancer, who need limbs, heart disease first?

[Kerrytravelers]

15. No one is asking cancer, limb replacement or cardiac issues to wait.

Why should women's reproductive health?

[hedgehog]

9. I have a visceral opposition to abortion, but I think health plans should cover it.

Here's why:

1. Unless women are able to get abortions from certified medical personnel in certified settings, they'll get them elsewhere. If abortion is too expensive at the local clinic, someone knows someone who'll do it at a motel for less. There will be just as many abortions, and there will be the expense of paying for treating the infections and wounds left behind by amateurs. That's the cold, dollar and cents reason.

2. As soon as you say abortions won't be paid for, someone somewhere is allowed to decide what an abortion is. Is a third trimester procedure to end a pregnancy where no brain is present an abortion? If the fetus has no brain, is it a baby? That's a very hard, very rare situation, and my guess is it costs a lot more than $300. What if the woman has eclampsia? Who gets to decide when it is necessary to deliver the baby early? What if a couple goes in, ends up with an early delivery hoping for the best, loses the baby and is then handed the total bill because someone labeled what happened "an abortion"? What about a surgical procedure to end an ectopic pregnancy? Is that an abortion? What about a D&C to remove a molar pregnancy? Is that an abortion?

[cbdo2007]

13. Most of your issues in #2 are already defined clearly by most insurance companies.

In your Health Insurance benefits this all should be defined in terms of what is an "elective abortion" or what different birth/fetus removal procedures are classified as. "Elective abortion" is usually considered to be terminating a pregnancy for any non-medical reason. Sure, I'm sure even that can be argued as there are a million different situations and scenarios out there, but most insurance companies still will have many of those situations defined already.

[dflprincess]

26. Many insurance policies do cover elective abortions.

As they should - it is a legal medical procedure and it's not up to anyone else to judge why a women has made this decision (I notice the mother's "mental health" is rarely, if ever, mentioned in any of the acceptable exceptions).

And, I suppose from the insurance company viewpoint, it is cheaper than covering pregnancy and well baby care.

[cbdo2007]

33. There are plenty of other legal medical procedures not covered by all plans.

Including IVF and infertility benefits, so I don't think it's about whether they "should" or should not. It's fine to have different plans out there that cover different things for different people. That being said though, there should be a govt. plan that covers abortion for those people who want to purchase that option. We shouldn't force abortion coverage on anyone but we also shouldn't keep it from people who want/need it.

That's interesting that you mention the "mental health" of the Mother. I don't read many of these abortion threads so I'm curious...do you know what Mental Health diagnosis are usually acceptable to allow an abortion to be "medically necessary"?

[dflprincess]

35. Back when I was playing social worker I had a 16 year old

who tried to kill herself because she couldn't get an abortion so I would certainly list severe depression as a reason. There are also preexisting mental health conditions controled by medication that can't be taken when pregnant. In those cases, I think the mother has the right to choose her mental health over going without meds or risking damaging the fetus.

[snooper2]

16. thanks...

On number 1-
We used planned parenthood and it was around $300 give or take so was judging that by personel experience. We saw many people there who were not rich by any means along with ourselves so I figured that was 90% of the cases/settings where it was done?

On number 2-
I've never heard of an insurance company covering abortion procedures. I thought for most cases it was out of pocket but the rare cases you mention do make a good point. Those couldn't be written into the law as medically needed? If the couple/woman is planning to keep the baby from day one isn't it by default not an abortion?

[cbdo2007]

19. There are many plans out there that do cover elective abortions.

I used to work at BCBS and while it wasn't covered in all of the plans there were a lot that did cover elective abortions. It's up to the company who is buying the insurance on whether they want that included in their package. Again, it's been a few years now since I worked there so can't pull up quick examples like I used to be able to, but there are many that do cover it.

[snooper2]

22. Thanks, that sheds a different light on it for me...

I was under the impression it wasn't covered by most all insurance plans. I know mine doesn't.

The public option should then be based on what the "average" plan covers than....


Thanks!

See, it's not that hard to have a rational discussion. Without all the snark and dumbasses who upthread who think every person has twenty hours a day to read every thread on every topic. Some of use have diapers to change :)

[peace frog]

18. Women of modest to affluent means can always

obtain a safe abortion with or without insurance coverage. It's impoverished women who most need coverage, or we will return to the dark days of finding women dead in a back alley from botched abortions.

[Kerrytravelers]

21. This is exactly the point.

This whole issue is nothing more than the forced-birthers attempting to manipulate legislation that affects millions to their own personal wills. They are at constant war with women, and I, for one, have grown tired of this constant battle. Now, we can't even get a simple public option that will help millions without this nonsense.

[peace frog]

44. And I'm pissed off as hell to admit

that the forced-birthers are winning, inch by incremental inch. We're f*cked if our Democratic leadership desert us on this issue.

[Bonobo]

10. Sorry responded to wrong post.

[Blue State Blues]

20. By your reasoning, why should insurance cover any "elective" procedure?

Meaning any procedure that isn't required to immediately save the patient's life. Why not put every legal medical procure up to the Stupak "life of the patient" criteria?

By that reasoning, a knee replacement, for example, is an elective procedure.

After-all, while someone who needs a knee replacement might suffer a great deal of pain, he won't die, and under the Stupak rules we're not allowed to consider the patient's suffering.

While he might be unable to work and earn a living, he won't die, and under the Stupak rules we're not allowed to consider the patient's finances.

While he might be unable to get the exercise to manage a health condition such as diabetes, he won't die, and under the Stupak rules we're not allowed to consider a patient's health.

And knee-replacement is still a legal procedure. No one is saying the patient can't get a knee replacement. The patient just has to pay for it himself.

And while in your example an abortion costs only $300, "medically necessary" abortions that preserve the health of the mother or terminate an inviable pregnancy may cost much more than that -- $9000 to $18000. But when you get down to it, whether it costs $300 or $30,000 or $3 -- if it's money you don't have, you cannot get the procedure.

It also sets the precedent that coverage decisions about medical procedures that affect you can be made for reasons that have nothing to do with the practice of medicine.

So, for example, if stem cell research develops a cure for Parkinson's Disease and you have Parkinson's Disease, but religious groups oppose stem cell research, the precedent is set to deny you the treatment you need, even under a private insurance plan you pay for with your own money.

[snooper2]

24. see post 22...

thanks for the input as well...

[kctim]

27. Yes, this is ALL about funding

and has nothing to do with rights. It is just as you say it is, an elective procedure.

I am pro abortion and it is the womans right to decide when she needs one or not. Hell, she can have one every damn day for all I care, it is NONE of my business at all.
I'm not going to pay for them though, and anything forcing me to is not going to get my support one bit.

[Lars39]

28. Whines the male from Kansas City.

[kctim]

43. Eh

I acknowledge your rights on the matter, and more. If you want to whine about me "whining" for not wanting to pay for you to exercise those rights, more power to you.

[Bluebear]

53. .

[dflprincess]

39. I've met many people who are prochoice - I am myself

but I've never actually met someone who is "proabortion".

[kctim]

45. I have no problem

with the medical procedure itself or with womens rights to choose one if and when she does. Under ANY circumstance.

[cbdo2007]

41. You're paying for them all the time.

What do you think the cashier at the fast food place or the guy restocking shelves at your local hardware store are using their money for? Probably all sorts of stuff you don't want to be paying for for them.

Also, check with your own insurance company. If they pay for abortions for anyone of their members (not just in your group) then you are helping to pay for them.

[kctim]

47. Yes I am

doesn't mean I agree or don't vote against them being able to though.

People volunteer on their own free will to pick and choose an insurance company, so IF I choose to use one, I am choosing to abide by their rules and regulations of use.

[cbdo2007]

56. So you'll help pay for people's abortions if it means you get a good insurance rate?

But you won't pay for abortions for people who can't even afford insurance?

How very noble of you!

[kctim]

58. Any less noble

than one who claims to support abortions for people who can't afford insurance but does nothing because they expect everybody else to help pay for it? No, not really. Probably more noble because I at least have the guts to actually support what I believe in, rather than just talk about it and expect others to do it for me.

[Lorien]

69. It's elective unless your life is in danger

as many women's lives are during pregnancy. Can I choose not to pay for a prostate exam for you, since it doesn't impact MY life at all?

[kctim]

71. Did you miss that part in the OP?

"I would rather let them say no it won't be covered EXCEPT in the case of rape or incest that results in pregnancy. OR if it saves the life of the mother"

And, FWIW, yes, in a free country, YOU can choose not to pay for MY exam.
And, as an added bonus, you will not hear me claiming I am somehow losing some rights I do not have, by you not paying for it either.

[shadesofgray]

29. Having a baby is an elective procedure. Why should "funds/donations" pay for YOUR baby

but not MY abortion?

Oh big, whoop, bully for you - you paid for one out of your own pocket. My boyfriend paid for mine, too, when we were both Federal employees. Then when Clinton was elected, on his very first day in office, he rescinded the rule against Federal employees not being able to use our own insurance (that WE paid for) for abortions.

Of course, that didn't last long. The repugs switched it back as soon as they could. And now Obama is no better than they were, because he could have switched it back again with the stroke of a pen.

But the bottom line is that having a baby is just as much an ELECTIVE CHOICE as having an abortion - and it's a hell of a lot more expensive, too. So why the hell should YOUR choice be paid for, but not mine?

[cbdo2007]

36. That's a really good point! I was trying to think of a good comparison...

of an elective procedure that is covered while abortion is not. The viagra or smoking related causes don't cut it for me.

True though...having a baby fits all of the definitions of an elective procedure. Only when infertility treatments get involved does it turn into "fixing a medical problem".

[shadesofgray]

42. Thanks...I have never understood why people who CHOOSE to have kids act so damn entitled and

sanctimonious, when they CHOOSE to reproduce.

[Scout]

62. but they are DOING THE MOST IMPORTANT JOB IN THE WORLD

y'know, you must genuflect and kow-tow appropriately.
:sarcasm:

[shadesofgray]

72. Bwahahahahahaha

[BrklynLiberal]

76. Excellent point!

[Ignis]

31. No, because we're Democrats and support women's rights. (nt)

[Bluebear]

50. You should have paid all the money for your 4 week old. Having her was elective too.

[Zomby Woof]

51. Your offensive Bristol Palin analogy aside

...because hey, she represents the "average" woman who gets pregnant without planning, right? So fuck her and make her and/or her partner pay $300, and throw in some bootstraps for her to pull herself up by, of course.

$300 may be easy for YOU to cough up, but for many women with little means of self-support, it's a FORTUNE. That could be the difference between rent or a car payment.

So choke on your bootstraps.

[supernova]

57. It's not up to anyone else

why a woman wants or needs an abortion.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

60. No, wait, let me guess: poutrage at not getting a pony, right? -nt

[Neecy]

64. If you don't get plastic surgery, or a crown on a tooth,

The result won't be a child.

How difficult is this?

[madfloridian]

65. It is simple. It is conservative mindset that men are superior

and are capable of making their own decisions.

It is the religious conservative mindset that women are inferior when it comes to making their own decisions about health care....and they need help from superior men.

Is that clear enough?

[Odin2005]

66. It's a slap in the face of poor women that cannot afford one.

And the reason for having an abortion is none of anyone's business.

[madfloridian]

67. It's all about enabling men to feel dominant so they don't need viagra

So they can feel important. If a woman made her own healthcare decisions it might threaten their malehood.

[PeaceNikki]

77. It's about privacy, too. Hyde and Stupak violate a right to privacy.

A woman shouldn't have to disclose that she was raped or a survivor of incest to obtain (or obtain coverage for) a legal medical procedure.

[MissB]

78. You've been here seven years and you still don't understand a woman's right to choose?

Really?

You clearly understand nothing about potential effects to a
woman's health during pregnancy.

[niyad]

79. honestly, you live in a cave somewhere? comparing an abortion to elective cosmetic surgery

is so unbelievably stupid, and reichwing, it is absolutely disgusting to see that sort of statement here on DU.

wow--so you paid for a woman's abortion--that does NOT make you an expert on one, as your post so clearly demonstrates.

on the other hand, why am I not surprised? this sort of thing has been cropping up on DU with distressing regularity.

remdi95

[RidinMyDonkey]

80. The average abortion isn't a Bristol and Levi type couple

But rather a poor, or lower middle class woman, who has to choose between feeding the children she already has or having another one. WTF is she expected to do when she doesn't have $300?

[slackmaster]

81. It's not always elective, and neither is reconstructive surgery

But even elective ones should be covered IMO.

[Iggo]

82. What the hell?

They said these threads were out here.

I doubted it. But here we have one.

Truly amazing to behold.

[dysfunctional press]

83. i've always found 'in case of rape or incest' to be a ridiculous condition in the abortion argument-

if the anti-abortion crowd is so hung up on the fetus being an innocent human life- how do the circumstances of the conception make it any less human?

:shrug: ...anyone?

[Hello_Kitty]

89. The thing is this meme is more often heard from "progressives"

Who want to appear to be pro-choice while getting to express their desire to punish slutty women with pregnancy. It's corollary is "abortion shouldn't be used as birth control".

[RedCloud]

87. Overwheliming majority of abortions are natural. Therefore what controls nature is an abortionist!

[niyad]

90. one of the things I have noticed on this thread, even amoung those supporting a woman's right to

reproductive autonomy, is the constant use of the word "mother" with reference to the woman choosing to have an abortion, rather than woman. interesting, subliminal choice of words, all of you. a role, rather than a person. nice one.

[TCJ70]

91. Abortions are not always purely elective...

...sometimes they are, but certainly not always.