Eye On Modesto

Thoughts and observations about Modesto and Stanislaus County

Archive for the tag “insurance coverage”

Here We Go Again – What Men Don’t Understand About Birth Control

By Gaetana Drake

Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wi) was recently discussing how low-income women can get birth control.  He was asked “what if I can’t afford birth control?”  His response was to “Google it”.  He explained that his wife recently Googled it and “bam, it was there!”  So, I tried it.  I went to Google and typed in “what if I can’t afford birth control”?  He was right in one respect.  BAM!  There were my solutions, right there on Google.  Four solutions from which to choose:

Option #1 – go to Planned Parenthood.  Wonderful idea, as Planned Parenthood’s mission is self-explanatory.  Planned Parenthood is so much better than unplanned parenthood.  And Planned Parenthood provides so many necessary services, along with affordable or free birth control.  But then I remembered!  The GOP is trying desperately to defund Planned Parenthood.  So, the first option just flew right out the window.

Option #2 – go to a doctor.  The initial visit may cost from $45 – $125 (in my opinion this is a very low estimate for costs).  Follow-up visits may run up to $60.  Then there’s the cost of the actual birth control.  Pills can run from $9 – $40, depending on what pill works best for the woman.  As a woman who has had experience with the pill, I know that pills have different effects on different women and there are many women who simply can’t tolerate the pill.  How about an IUD?  $1500 – $2000.  What part of “what if I can’t afford birth control” didn’t the good Senator Johnson understand?  But then, Senator Johnson and his family have the best health care in the world – at our expense. 

Option #3 – If your employer offers a choice of insurance plans, simply choose one that covers contraception.  Hmmmm….30 – 35 million Americans without health insurance and thousands of employers that don’t offer insurance coverage,  but just pick the plan that covers contraception.   Again, the good senator doesn’t seem to understand the problem.

Option #4 – ask your partner to contribute to the cost of contraception.  I agree with this completely!  Especially since options 1, 2 and 3 aren’t really valid in so many cases.  Unfortunately, even in 2012, there is a mindset among many men that birth control is just a “woman’s issue” and they don’t need to be involved in it.  And let’s not forget that most men don’t like condoms, and don’t want to use them.

So here we have a U.S. Senator (male) who has absolutely no realistic understanding of the costs of birth control and how that effects low-income women.   And we have Rush Limbaugh (male) who famously believed that you took a pill every time you wanted to have sex (I believe he was confusing birth control pills with his Viagra!)  I truly believe it’s time that men stop making comments about this issue unless they actually have something valid to contribute to the discussion.  When they make outrageous statements, like both of these men did, they just look silly.

Since 1960 when the pill was approved by the FDA, the graduation rates (from high school and college) for females have skyrocketed.  And the number of women in the workforce has tripled since then.  All of this is directly tied to being able to control when and how often we give birth.

Senator Johnson claims there is no one trying to deny women access to contraception.  He claims this is an issue of religious freedom.  As I’ve said before, no one is forcing any woman to use contraception, so I really don’t understand the “religious freedom” issue.

In the past I have thought that this GOP/male obsession about birth control was just something to distract us from the real issues – war, jobs, the economy.  But I’m beginning to believe there is a more sinister reason behind their plan.  The political and financial power of women has steadily increased since 1960.  They don’t like that.  They would like to change that.

We have the strength and determination of our great-grandmothers and grandmothers who fought for the right to vote.  We have the strength and determination of our mothers who fought for their rightful place in the workforce.

I think they’re afraid of us.  And they should be.  Because we won’t stop fighting.

Advertisements

The Benefit Of Being A Man

By Gaetana Drake

We’ve all heard much about whether or not insurances should cover contraception for women.  I’m sure we each have our own opinions.  Many people are opposed to federal funding for birth control and abortions for low-income women, saying they don’t want their tax dollars used for that purpose.   I understand that.  But did you realize that your tax dollars are paying for penile implants for men over 65?

There is a push to allow employers to deny coverage for contraception unless it is used for some other purpose, such as controlling menstrual cycles, preventing ovarian cysts,  controlling endometriosis.  These purposes have a health benefit. Some proposed bills would require that a woman provide her medical records to her employer in order to prove she is not using the pill for it’s real purpose – contraception. Many people believe birth control is mainly for “recreational purposes” and no employer should be required to cover it.  Mind you, they are talking about women who are paying for their private insurance and lawmakers would like to ban private insurance from being required to cover contraception.

Now we find that men over 65 can use their Medicare coverage (or their private insurance, if it covers them) for penile implants.  There is no health benefit to these implants.  They are purely for recreational purposes.  Not even for procreation.  Just recreational sex.  Why is it no one has a problem with insurances covering “recreational” items for men?  Insurances don’t cover breast implants (unless they are reconstructive surgery after a mastectomy).  Generally speaking, breast implants are for “recreational” purposes.   I wonder if a woman over the age of 65 can have Medicare pay for breast implants?

Personally, I object to my tax dollars being used for a 65 year old man to get a penile implant just for “recreational” purposes. I would much rather my tax dollars go to contraception for low income women, which benefits all of us in the long run.  I don’t see the benefit to society in general in an elderly man using my tax dollars for his penile implant.  Do you?

Post Navigation