Insane thing I just learned about HCR legislation.

[Statistical]

Some back story about preventive care changes in HCR:
One good thing about the HCR is that is makes "preventive car" a $0 copay and is covered regardless of deductible. Now I have a HDHP ($2400 deductible for family) so that is good news. With HDHP even Prescription are paid from deductible before copays apply. The thing I learned today is "Preventive RX" are also covered outside the deductible at low cost.

So the insanity:
Now in a sane world one would imagine birth control would be a "preventive care" right? It certainly isn't a post-op care. Nope. It isn't. Not under HCR legislation. Birth Control is specifically listed as "non-preventive" to exclude it from the "preventive RX" carve out. So any woman (or family) with HDHP will pay full price for birth control until deductible for the year is met.

Now the idea of low cost / no cost preventive care is smart and is actually something that could lower overall Health Care costs. Just sad the fundies prevented BC from being included.

[kctim]

1. Sad indeed

Very interesting bit of info.
Thanks Stat

[Angry Dragon]

2. But the republicans said they would help pay for any child expenses

[uncommon]

3. Too bad that's the only Rx med I take. I am so sick of that crap.

My reproductive organs are the most problematic parts of my body at this point in my life.

[OregonBlue]

4. Most prescriptions are free or close to it at Planned Parenthood. Thank God they are still around.

[uncommon]

6. How do they manage that?

[OregonBlue]

21. I believe the pharmaceutical companies actually donate many types of birth control.

[csziggy]

5. This is why so many were pissed at the last minute deals about HCR

ALL family planning services should be covered as preventive care. You'd think the insurance industry would be for it since birth control and family planning counseling is so much cheaper than pregnancy, childbirth and child care coverage.

You are right, this is crazy.

[uncommon]

7. "Pregnancy isn't a disease."

That's the answer you will get.

When asked why impotence should be covered when birth control isn't, the answer is, "Viagra corrects a dysfunction - birth control prevents what should naturally occur."

Ugh.

[jobycom]

9. They never met my brother.

Dysfunction doesn't begin to cover that birth...

Death occurs naturally. Preventative treatment is only meant to keep it from happening sooner than you want. Seems like the same should be true of birth control. Of course, even more basic is the whole concept that a woman's total body health is legislated based on religious codes while a man's health issues are considered the standard. Even if a flacid wigglie is a dysfunction, it's still an optional issue for a man's overall health. Childbirth for most women between 15 and 35 is the most pressing medical concern they will face, and it will affect not only their overall lifestyle, but their basic health, and can even be fatal. Medical control of pregnancy should be one of the most basic concerns of healthcare, but since our patriarchal culture dictates the norm, it's a compromise issue between groups of men who want to control women in different ways.

[Sal Minella]

16. Some of these guys (like O'Reilly) need to waddle around with a

9-month pregnancy for awhile, trying to work, sleep, do housework.

Would give them new insight into the word "dysfunction."

[Telly Savalas]

20. That's a legit answer

I scrounged up a definition of preventive medicine online and got "Medicine designed to avert and avoid disease." ( http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=5039 )

Under the Affordable Care Act, services graded A or B by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force must be covered with no copays, coinsurance, or deductibles. The list of such services can be found here:

http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/uspsabrecs.htm

This is a well established organization of medical professionals, and surveying the list indicates they're probably using the definition offered above. Unless somebody can point to CSPAN footage of GOP Senators singing "Every Sperm is Sacred" during debate on the bill, it's pretty safe to assume that the exclusion of birth control from the list is due to adherence to medical orthodoxy and not because of a deal to appease fundies.

Of course coverage of birth control is generally considerably cheaper than paying for a pregnancy/birth/newborn/etc. From a cost containment perspective it would have been smart policy to include birth control among services where copays are banned. It's not real clear what the fixation with so-called preventive medicine is. Maintenance medications for things like asthma, high blood pressure, and psychiatric disorders can save money by averting expensive hospital visits, but they aren't granted the zero copay status either. Even from a technocratic incrementalist perspective, there's a lot of shit in the bill that doesn't make much sense. That's sort of an inevitable outcome of having an 800 page bill crafted by folks who aren't subject matter experts and don't have a clear unified goal for the legislation. But we're not going to do any better until we start electing smarter people to Washington.

Boner juice is a red herring here. The Affordable Care Act doesn't treat it any differently than birth control. While some insurers cover boner juice but not birth control, this is the exception not the rule. In cases where it is covered and birth control isn't, "ugh" is right.

[Denninmi]

8. Now, we can't pay for birth control.

It would upset the religious fundies.

Of course, Viagra is covered. Go figure.

[former9thward]

10. It may be insane but why are you blaming the "fundies"

They all voted against the bill. Who pushed the bill? That is where you should look.

[Statistical]

11. Just because they voted against the final bill doesn't mean they didn't vote for hundreds of ammendm

Essentially this is the Republican strategy:

1) Demand bipartisanship. Steer the course to the right (demand public option, single payer, other provisions "off the table")
2) Propose various amendments to push the bill further to the right (like excluding birth control from the
3) Vote FOR "right leaning" amendments.
4) Vote AGAINST the final bill. Essentially this is a win-win.

If the vote fails - they killed the bill.
If the vote passes - they still included enough language in the bill to push it to the right, minimize the effect, limit the scope.

This isn't limited to just the HCR bill.

[former9thward]

12. Could be but it is speculation.

I don't know who put the BC provision in. Do you? Was it even put as an amendment? The Rs did not have a majority in the HCR Congress. So if there was an amendment they could not have put it in by themselves. I like blaming the correct people and not assume anything. Something I see lacking very often on DU.

[Statistical]

13. The former9thward doth protest too much, methinks. n/t

[former9thward]

14. The usual reply by someone who does not have any facts.

[rgbecker]

15. The Pope!

http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/2010/11/01/birth-control-could-be-free-under-obamacare-including-the-morning-after-pill/

Just the first thing that came up on Google....You might find more.

[JVS]

23. Wait, didn't the fundies vote for this amendment but not for the bill?

[SoCalDem]

17. Because birth control prevents a "natural process".. sex = birth

for a childbearing age woman who is engaging in sex, babies are a "natural" outcome, so preventing pregnancy is not technically "necessary" or therapeutic. If bearing a child is truly dangerous, a physician-ordered sterilization SURGERY would, no doubt, BE covered.

Temporarily preventing pregnancy is the ultimate "choice" item... not a medical "necessity".

Women who take the pill will not see it that way, but technically , it is.

For the ones who are upset that "boner pills" are included, the pills "can/may/do" correct a medical problem that prevents a "natural" function, so that's probably why they are covered.

[Sal Minella]

18. imho, it is not "dysfunction" when a 70-year-old guy can't rut all night

like a 17-year-old.

He can't run high hurdles any more either, so why isn't he taking pills for that?

This crap of BC pills "preventing a natural process" makes me really furious, especially when recreational boner pills for old farts are covered by insurance.
(Some younger guys do need them for valid medical reasons, I already understand that)

If a guy could have a baby every year for a few years, he would damn well begin to consider BC a "medical necessity."

[SoCalDem]

19. Until legislators start thinking like women, nothing will change

We women know how important it is to NOT have to have a baby every 12 months, but medically it IS a "normal" function. As soon as the pill came along, women celebrated it, but medical insurance chooses to cover what they want to cover, and until we change that, we are where we are.. We don't have to like it, but until we own the companies, we cannot change it, unless the laws change.. If a female population as large as we Boomers had could not do it, I don't see much changing .

[MattBaggins]

22. Thank you Bart Stupak

the religious fuckdamentalists got their way once again.