More Birth Control = Fewer Abortions

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

This is an informative article on what really happens when people try to legislate sexual morality and insist others live according to THEIR religious beliefs. Sadly, this is not going to have the effect the moral warriors are hoping for. Limiting birth control options by making them more costly or harder to access is going to lead to more abortions or more poor outcomes for both the mothers and children. Abstinence based initiatives have been studied and shown to have no measurable impact on abortion rates. Birth control use did. In a big way. Don't like abortion? Make birth control MORE available, not less.

So why is the current Administration trying to make birth control harder to come by?

Trump jeopardizes progress in reducing teen pregnancy and abortion rates


Teen birth rates have been cut in half over the last decade, which is beneficial not only to young women but to Americans as a whole. The decline is attributed to public health outreach and better use of contraception.

President Donald Trump has put that access to contraception in jeopardy with his rollback of a rule that required employers, with some narrow exceptions, to include contraception, at no cost, in their health insurance plans....

The Trump administration has already quietly cut more than $200 million for ongoing research into the most effective ways to prevent unwanted teen pregnancies, a decision most likely driven by ideology rather than science.

Three-quarters of U.S. teen pregnancies are unplanned and nearly a third end in abortion, which is much higher than the overall abortion rate of 14.6 percent. That’s the lowest rate since 1973, the year of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision.

Teen pregnancy has multi-generational consequences. Only half of teen mothers receive a high school diploma by age 22, compared with 90 percent of women who do not give birth as teens.

The children of teenage mothers also are more likely to drop out of high school. In addition, they are more likely to have more health problems, be incarcerated at some time during adolescence, give birth as teenagers, and face unemployment as young adults.

Do you use BC?

I use the most effective form of birth control available. It is called being old and ugly. The only thing that happenes in my bedroom is sleep. Yet I still belive we all have a right to use BC and have it affordable. God bless those who get some! More power to them. At least some one has some happiness. You crazy right wingers wnat no hppiness for anybody.

I love BC.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You miss the point. Employers should have NO SAY in what medical treatments are covered in employee health care packages. None. That is between the employer and their doctors.

Here in Canada, the Catholic Church pays for health care for its employees which includes both birth control and abortion. Not once ever have they filed lawsuits claiming a violation of their religious freedom.

This whole "it's against our religion" is a scam to try to force others into living by THEIR religious ideals. That violates the religious freedom of every employee working for them.

I don't believe in religion. I believe in ownership rights.
When I use the word employer, I'm talking about the owner of the company.
The owner gets to spend his money as he sees fit.
Including not providing any insurance at all.

If health insurance is part of the compensation package it's not his money it's his employees' money. They earned it. The employer should be asking the employees what they want in their healthcare since it's their healthcare not his.

You both are wrong. The only reason we basically HAVE to get health insurance through our work is because of over regulation. That regulation corners us into tighter markets for the insurance companies. So instead of having 500 some plans to choose from depending on your needs (and employers saying we’ll pay for this amount of that cost) you get maybe 3 options, and the risk is not spread out to the rest of America, but to the 40 or so employees you work with, and if 10 of them are over 50, another 5 are overweight, and another 5 smoke...well the other 20-30 have to cover that increased risk.

What the hell are you talking about?

Would it be fair if you had to get car insurance through your employer?? And then one of your co-workers gets into an accident, and another gets a DUI, and your rates go up too? NO, so why do we let regulation limit us to get health insurance through our employers, where the insurance companies view that company as a risk group, vs car insurance which is the entire nation. Does that make more sense?

You apparently know very little about how rates are set for group insurance. If you work for a small company, that risk is spread throughout all small companies that have policies with that insurance company. It is not just your company. There is no way to actually assess the risk of the members of a group without violating their privacy and HIPAA regulations. That's why they employ actuaries.

 

[The Derp]

Why can’t employers just offer, 2 grand, or 3 grand a year for health insurance, you choose the plan you want.

Because the average health insurance plan provided by employers costs $17,000, with the average worker paying $5K and the average employer paying $12K. And that's cheap compared to what you would have to pay in the individual market without subsidies.

 

[Esmeralda]

Sorry, I was never covered for maternity in all my life.Yet now it’s a right that makes men and post menopausal women pay for it.

Conservatives simply do not understand, on a fundamental level, what health insurance is.

I will never grasp why males and post menopausal women must pay to be covered for maternity.

The same reason they pay taxes for public education: for a better overall society. The lower the teen pregnancy rate, the better for society. The lower overall unwanted pregnancy rate, the better for society. Why we pay taxes for welfare, so we don't have people begging in the streets, if possible. If you want to live in a 3rd world country, then live in a country where the haves and the have nots live entirely separate lives with the have nots living on top of garbage dumps and the haves living behind electric fences. In some countries people pay taxes not only for maternity leave but to help support day care. It provides a better overall society.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

This is an informative article on what really happens when people try to legislate sexual morality and insist others live according to THEIR religious beliefs. Sadly, this is not going to have the effect the moral warriors are hoping for. Limiting birth control options by making them more costly or harder to access is going to lead to more abortions or more poor outcomes for both the mothers and children. Abstinence based initiatives have been studied and shown to have no measurable impact on abortion rates. Birth control use did. In a big way. Don't like abortion? Make birth control MORE available, not less.

So why is the current Administration trying to make birth control harder to come by?

Trump jeopardizes progress in reducing teen pregnancy and abortion rates


Teen birth rates have been cut in half over the last decade, which is beneficial not only to young women but to Americans as a whole. The decline is attributed to public health outreach and better use of contraception.

President Donald Trump has put that access to contraception in jeopardy with his rollback of a rule that required employers, with some narrow exceptions, to include contraception, at no cost, in their health insurance plans....

The Trump administration has already quietly cut more than $200 million for ongoing research into the most effective ways to prevent unwanted teen pregnancies, a decision most likely driven by ideology rather than science.

Three-quarters of U.S. teen pregnancies are unplanned and nearly a third end in abortion, which is much higher than the overall abortion rate of 14.6 percent. That’s the lowest rate since 1973, the year of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision.

Teen pregnancy has multi-generational consequences. Only half of teen mothers receive a high school diploma by age 22, compared with 90 percent of women who do not give birth as teens.

The children of teenage mothers also are more likely to drop out of high school. In addition, they are more likely to have more health problems, be incarcerated at some time during adolescence, give birth as teenagers, and face unemployment as young adults.

Do you use BC?

I use the most effective form of birth control available. It is called being old and ugly. The only thing that happenes in my bedroom is sleep. Yet I still belive we all have a right to use BC and have it affordable. God bless those who get some! More power to them. At least some one has some happiness. You crazy right wingers wnat no hppiness for anybody.

If they want happiness, let them pay for it! I am in the same shape you are, so why should I care if anyone else is getting any?

Last time I checked, paying someone to have sex was illegal in most places.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Clueless as usual. Reality and you are 180 apart.

So this compulsion to "punish" people by forcing them to have kids doesn't come from a place of yours where you were taught sex is a sin?

Sex is a sin? Never read the Song of Songs. You probably never knew it existed. Doesn’t fit the narrative your masters feed you.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That is your choice. Everyone should have that choice. Does that make sense now?

You miss the point. Employers should have NO SAY in what medical treatments are covered in employee health care packages. None. That is between the employer and their doctors.

Here in Canada, the Catholic Church pays for health care for its employees which includes both birth control and abortion. Not once ever have they filed lawsuits claiming a violation of their religious freedom.

This whole "it's against our religion" is a scam to try to force others into living by THEIR religious ideals. That violates the religious freedom of every employee working for them.

I don't believe in religion. I believe in ownership rights.
When I use the word employer, I'm talking about the owner of the company.
The owner gets to spend his money as he sees fit.
Including not providing any insurance at all.

If health insurance is part of the compensation package it's not his money it's his employees' money. They earned it. The employer should be asking the employees what they want in their healthcare since it's their healthcare not his.

This isn't about Canada.
I don't expect you to understand American freedom.

I understand American freedom is a myth. My birth control was always paid for in my health insurance. Abortions in Canada are paid for in full by my government health insurance. No copays no paperwork. That's freedom.

Employers have no right to tell me I can't have birth control because Of THEIR religious beliefs. What you call "freedom" is in fact the opposite. It is the employer's attempt to inflect his religious beliefs on his employees.

This is one of the reasons why Canada ranks much higher In the ranking of countries with the most personal freedoms than the USA. Freedom means freeedom for all, not just for those holding the purse strings.

What about the freedom not to pay for your sexual adventures?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Sorry, I was never covered for maternity in all my life.Yet now it’s a right that makes men and post menopausal women pay for it.

Conservatives simply do not understand, on a fundamental level, what health insurance is.

I will never grasp why males and post menopausal women must pay to be covered for maternity.

The same reason they pay taxes for public education: for a better overall society. The lower the teen pregnancy rate, the better for society. The lower overall unwanted pregnancy rate, the better for society. Why we pay taxes for welfare, so we don't have people begging in the streets, if possible. If you want to live in a 3rd world country, then live in a country where the haves and the have nots live entirely separate lives with the have nots living on top of garbage dumps and the haves living behind electric fences.

You idiots act like healthcare never existed before.

 

[The Derp]

No Dufus, costs went up for men so they could get covered for maternity.

No, it's not that they got covered for maternity, it's that the people enrolling in their plan did because in order for you to keep premiums low, you need to have younger, healthier people enrolled in your plan. The more people enrolled in your plan, the lower the premium cost. And if you're attracting people to the plan who are young and healthy, and thus won't incur as much medical costs, you have to offer maternity care. Otherwise, your premium pool is narrow and would be subject to higher yearly increases.

You don't seem to know what health insurance is.

 

[The Derp]

What about the freedom not to pay for your sexual adventures?

Not a freedom.

 

[sakinago]

I don't believe in religion. I believe in ownership rights.
When I use the word employer, I'm talking about the owner of the company.
The owner gets to spend his money as he sees fit.
Including not providing any insurance at all.

If health insurance is part of the compensation package it's not his money it's his employees' money. They earned it. The employer should be asking the employees what they want in their healthcare since it's their healthcare not his.

You both are wrong. The only reason we basically HAVE to get health insurance through our work is because of over regulation. That regulation corners us into tighter markets for the insurance companies. So instead of having 500 some plans to choose from depending on your needs (and employers saying we’ll pay for this amount of that cost) you get maybe 3 options, and the risk is not spread out to the rest of America, but to the 40 or so employees you work with, and if 10 of them are over 50, another 5 are overweight, and another 5 smoke...well the other 20-30 have to cover that increased risk.

What the hell are you talking about?

Would it be fair if you had to get car insurance through your employer?? And then one of your co-workers gets into an accident, and another gets a DUI, and your rates go up too? NO, so why do we let regulation limit us to get health insurance through our employers, where the insurance companies view that company as a risk group, vs car insurance which is the entire nation. Does that make more sense?

You apparently know very little about how rates are set for group insurance. If you work for a small company, that risk is spread throughout all small companies that have policies with that company. It is not just your company. There is no way to actually assess the risk of the members of a group without violating their privacy and HIPAA regulations. That's why they employ actuaries.

They are still limited to companies, and not allowed to cross state lines. Again it makes no sense to limit the risk pools. What we have is not at all a free market system and hasn’t been for a loooong time. Switzerland doesn’t do it that way, and they have no problems with health privacy, as well as a much more affordable care with better quality than our own.

 

[The Derp]

You idiots act like healthcare never existed before.

Thanks to advances in medicine, health care delivery is more expensive. We don't cure people with leeches anymore. 50 years ago, there was no such thing as an MRI. All these advances cost money, and employing those advances costs money too. You can't pay for health care with chickens anymore. This isn't the 1930's, and we have state-of-the-art medical facilities. If we want this progress in medicine and health care, it has to be paid for.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Sorry, I was never covered for maternity in all my life.Yet now it’s a right that makes men and post menopausal women pay for it.

Conservatives simply do not understand, on a fundamental level, what health insurance is.

I will never grasp why males and post menopausal women must pay to be covered for maternity.

The same reason they pay taxes for public education: for a better overall society. The lower the teen pregnancy rate, the better for society. The lower overall unwanted pregnancy rate, the better for society. Why we pay taxes for welfare, so we don't have people begging in the streets, if possible. If you want to live in a 3rd world country, then live in a country where the haves and the have nots live entirely separate lives with the have nots living on top of garbage dumps and the haves living behind electric fences. In some countries people pay taxes not only for maternity leave but to help support day care. It provides a better overall society.

The major difference that you are ignoring is cost. Birth control is NOT expensive. It should NEVER be covered unless there is a medical need for it..

Using your reasoning, vision and hearing should always be covered by every health insurance coverage. It is not. Why? Because they can be very expensive and not everyone needs that coverage.

 

[Esmeralda]

Sorry, I was never covered for maternity in all my life.Yet now it’s a right that makes men and post menopausal women pay for it.

Conservatives simply do not understand, on a fundamental level, what health insurance is.

I will never grasp why males and post menopausal women must pay to be covered for maternity.

The same reason they pay taxes for public education: for a better overall society. The lower the teen pregnancy rate, the better for society. The lower overall unwanted pregnancy rate, the better for society. Why we pay taxes for welfare, so we don't have people begging in the streets, if possible. If you want to live in a 3rd world country, then live in a country where the haves and the have nots live entirely separate lives with the have nots living on top of garbage dumps and the haves living behind electric fences.

You idiots act like healthcare never existed before.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Health care before national health care programs was not for everyone. The poor, the have nots, did not have it. There is a huge difference between what we used to have and the type of national health care program Dragon Lady describes having in Canada. If you'd ever lived in a country where everyone gets decent health care and other basic needs, you'd have experienced a safe, sane society.

 

[Weatherman2020]

No Dufus, costs went up for men so they could get covered for maternity.

No, it's not that they got covered for maternity, it's that the people enrolling in their plan did because in order for you to keep premiums low, you need to have younger, healthier people enrolled in your plan. The more people enrolled in your plan, the lower the premium cost. And if you're attracting people to the plan who are young and healthy, and thus won't incur as much medical costs, you have to offer maternity care. Otherwise, your premium pool is narrow and would be subject to higher yearly increases.

You don't seem to know what health insurance is.

Keep defending the insanity of Obamacare. Democrats are extinct.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Sorry, I was never covered for maternity in all my life.Yet now it’s a right that makes men and post menopausal women pay for it.

Conservatives simply do not understand, on a fundamental level, what health insurance is.

I will never grasp why males and post menopausal women must pay to be covered for maternity.

The same reason they pay taxes for public education: for a better overall society. The lower the teen pregnancy rate, the better for society. The lower overall unwanted pregnancy rate, the better for society. Why we pay taxes for welfare, so we don't have people begging in the streets, if possible. If you want to live in a 3rd world country, then live in a country where the haves and the have nots live entirely separate lives with the have nots living on top of garbage dumps and the haves living behind electric fences.

You idiots act like healthcare never existed before.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Health care before national health care programs was not for everyone. The poor, the have nots, did not have it. There is a huge difference between what we used to have and the type of national health care program Dragon Lady describes having in Canada. If you'd ever lived in a country where everyone gets decent health care and other basic needs, you'd experience a safe, sane society.

Like I said, you’re delusional. Millions are uninsured, most want it that way.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

If health insurance is part of the compensation package it's not his money it's his employees' money. They earned it. The employer should be asking the employees what they want in their healthcare since it's their healthcare not his.

You both are wrong. The only reason we basically HAVE to get health insurance through our work is because of over regulation. That regulation corners us into tighter markets for the insurance companies. So instead of having 500 some plans to choose from depending on your needs (and employers saying we’ll pay for this amount of that cost) you get maybe 3 options, and the risk is not spread out to the rest of America, but to the 40 or so employees you work with, and if 10 of them are over 50, another 5 are overweight, and another 5 smoke...well the other 20-30 have to cover that increased risk.

What the hell are you talking about?

Would it be fair if you had to get car insurance through your employer?? And then one of your co-workers gets into an accident, and another gets a DUI, and your rates go up too? NO, so why do we let regulation limit us to get health insurance through our employers, where the insurance companies view that company as a risk group, vs car insurance which is the entire nation. Does that make more sense?

You apparently know very little about how rates are set for group insurance. If you work for a small company, that risk is spread throughout all small companies that have policies with that company. It is not just your company. There is no way to actually assess the risk of the members of a group without violating their privacy and HIPAA regulations. That's why they employ actuaries.

They are still limited to companies, and not allowed to cross state lines. Again it makes no sense to limit the risk pools. What we have is not at all a free market system and hasn’t been for a loooong time. Switzerland doesn’t do it that way, and they have no problems with health privacy, as well as a much more affordable care with better quality than our own.

I can agree that should it should be changed to allow sales across state lines as there is no valid reason for it anymore. No argument from me on that point. Welcome to the Republican Party!

 

[The Derp]

They are still limited to companies, and not allowed to cross state lines. Again it makes no sense to limit the risk pools. What we have is not at all a free market system and hasn’t been for a loooong time. Switzerland doesn’t do it that way, and they have no problems with health privacy, as well as a much more affordable care with better quality than our own.

So here's the thing about why insurance isn't sold across state lines; all states regulate health insurance differently. I live in GA, and we allow out-of-state insurers to operate here. But they don't attract many people...why? Simply because the administrative costs for an out-of-state insurer to comply with GA's own regulations and standards is too burdensome to justify providing it. Now imagine you're an insurer and there's 50 states -each with their own set of regulations and standards- whose regulations you must abide by in order to do business. What will end up happening is that these insurers will spend more on administration and conformity for all those 50 different sets of rules, and on whom do you think those admin costs get pushed?

Also, it would lead to market consolidation with fewer choices, as is exactly what happened with telecom companies, cable companies, and banking. Too-big-to-fail insurers that would need to be bailed out because the business model of for-profit insurance is unsustainable if you're guaranteeing universal coverage.

 

[sakinago]

Why can’t employers just offer, 2 grand, or 3 grand a year for health insurance, you choose the plan you want.

Because the average health insurance plan provided by employers costs $17,000, with the average worker paying $5K and the average employer paying $12K. And that's cheap compared to what you would have to pay in the individual market without subsidies.

Exactly, it WOULD NOT be that expensive if we didn’t limit the risk pools, like we do now. That would create more options, for more customizable plans. So if your a 20 something single male, you’re probably not going to be that much of a risk and get a much more basic, very cheap plan, that the company should easily be able to afford and give a bonus if the plan only costs 1500 a year, while they offer 2 grand a year. Now if that guy marries, and they want to start a family, now he’ll probably want to move to a plan that costs a bit more, but offers better coverage, let’s say a plan that cost 4 grand. 2 grand coming out of your pocket a year isn’t bad at all.

 

[The Derp]

Like I said, you’re delusional. Millions are uninsured, most want it that way.

No one wants to be uninsured, it's a choice they are forced into making.