Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (9472)	2/16/2012 4:23:55 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

Now you need to make a drs appointment for birth control AND pay for the pill. The doctors appointment could still be coverage without the pill being covered. The controversy is not about whether doctors visits should have to be covered (at least this specific controversy isn't, the more general requirements for insurance coverage are also controversial), its about coverage for the contraception. And if your concerned about the cost of the doctors visit, why not just not require a prescription? Also there are organizations that provide free or cheap contraception, such as Planned Parenthood. But since you're living on the edge Most of the people here would not be living on the edge, we are talking about people who have jobs, and jobs good enough to include full medical coverage. And having it paid for through insurance isn't really saving them money anyway, since insurance is part of their compensation, they are effectively paying for it whether or not its covered. And even if there was some huge need to have a predictable moderate expense, included in insurance coverage, why should the employer have to pay for it. It really doesn't provide any benefit, but if it was a vital benefit, why should the cost fall on employers (esp. employers with a strong objection) rather than some one else?

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (9472)	2/16/2012 4:28:54 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	5 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

The evidence is already there. The cost of contraception and abortions is not the problem. They can already get these things at no cost. They just have to be willing to get off their ass and do it. The problem is that the ramifications of screwing up and getting pregnant are not significant enough for the woman to make the effort. And if you knew any inner city single mothers, you would know that having a kid is often seen as a way of increasing income. Like I said, unless you are actually going in there and rolling the condom on for the couple, the cost of the birth control isn't going to have any positive effect on the number of unwanted babies.