This is how I feel about the BC debate

[mommy2kaitlyn]

Originally Posted by MamaNae My only sticking point is the 'free' part. If we have to pay $530 every 3 months for the medications my husband needs to not DIE then women can pay a $25 copay on birth control considering 98% of the time it's not life or death that they take it.

BCP's at least ones I was on are $4 if you go to a place with that plan. Just an FYI.

[MamaNae]

Originally Posted by mommy2kaitlyn BCP's at least ones I was on are $4 if you go to a place with that plan. Just an FYI.

LOL! Okay $4...

My body rejects all hormonal forms of birth control and I come >thisclose< to bleeding to death anyway so the copper is out so I am not aware of what BCP costs on our ins...I believe it is Tier 3 which means it costs $13 for generic and something like $30 for name brand or something like that. (and I think that's for a 3 month supply so...)

[3 ladybugs]

Originally Posted by DesertRat I wonder and worry about the long-term effects of birth control. It's not without it's side-effects. I've even heard that it could be linked to certain cancers. I mean, we're essentially screwing with the natural hormones in a woman's body. I think birth control is something that women should very carefully consider before taking it, especially if it's something they plan on taking for YEARS on end. So, the fact that people want to make birth control free for everybody, (which include very young girls who could be on it for much of their fertile life), and therefore incredibly accessible, makes we worry that in 10-30 years we're going to see major repercussions when it comes to women's reproductive health. FTR, I was on birth control for a while before #1, and then tried the minipill after #2. I couldn't deal with the side-effects so I quit. We're currently TTA, but I just can't bring myself to use hormonal birth control so we're using other methods.

http://nymag.com/news/features/69789/ I haven't read all of this (it is quite long and need to do something else before dinner) however I had heard that when they were making the female pill, they also made a male pill as well. However there were too many side effects with the male pill that they stopped it. The female pill actually killed 3 women (or something like that) and it went forward. Now I could have been told misinformation but it has always made me wonder about the pill.

[l_Kimmie_l]

OP - I saw that on FB the other day and laughed. How true! As a woman, you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

As far as the other topic(s) on this thread, there are many valid points and many opinions. Healthcare should be something that is covered under an insurance plan. If you are paying for your insurance, then it is pretty reasonable to expect that your copays for all medications, procedures, and tests should be extremely low. We can blame the insurance companies for wanting to make sure that we not only pay a monthly premium, we also pay for all our meds for the majority of the cost, a huge deductible to make up for what they lose when we have no choice but to buy the least expensive plan, and then restrict what we take, who we see, and when we can get care (at least covered care).

Medication coverage is another big business. If a non-life threatening medication is wanted, but too costly, the user can choose to say forget it. Life sustaining medications are big money. You HAVE to take them or die! If you cannot afford them, too bad, so sad. That is where they get you. I think that there needs to be laws governing what one can charge for medications that are supposed to save lives. Again - insurance plans need to include these costs in their premiums, as well.

Charging more to self inflictors. I am conflicted on this one as who is a self inflictor? I used to smoke, but no longer do. Do I now still deserve to pay out of pocket for my asthma meds that I used long before I ever smoked? I have the precursor to Type 2 diabetes in PCOS. It is not self inflicted, it is HEREDITARY from my maternal side. Should I be punished for my family predisposition, plus the Depekote I had to take that caused the PCOS? What about those who are obese, but do exercise, eat right, and just cannot lose the weight due to predisposition? Yet again, I do understand and think that my personal insurance premiums should not go up due to the chonic smoker, drinker, or druggie who had health issues related directly to their choice. How do we take what makes sense and turn it into a law? It is not easy.

Birth control. Seriously, why on earth would any other person want another to not be allowed to make that choice for their body? Who is uneducated about birth control today??? Parents SHOULD be discussing sex, birth control, etc with their children, the schools teach it, there is the Internet of children's laptops for school and cell phones, who the h3ll does not know how babies are made and prevented??

The bigger question is why is the government and random strangers telling anyone what they should take for birth control? Are they medical people with education to inform patients on how these drugs work, what the side effects are, and what can happen with long term use? No. Are they going to raise the children produced by making birth control expensive or out of reach? No. So why do they get a say? Making birth control easy to get and cheap makes the birth rates for unwanted children go down, abortion rates drop, and child abuse and neglect drop. Guiltling women to have babies are punishment for having sex is emotional abuse and terrorism. The main problem with many of the new "bills" and "laws" taking over is that they are against women. Sex in a relationship is very bonding and special. If I cannot afford $55 per month, I surely cannot afford another child, and it is horrible to think I would be expected to just not have sex until menopause. Not all women are broody animals who are only to have sex to make offspring. Many of us enjoy the closeness and physical pleasure that sex with our partners brings. Affordable birth control allows women and men to make choices about their reproduction.

I guess I am all for informing patients on all the info available to date on ANY medication. I am for all people chosing what they want to put in their body, as what works for one, may not work for another. If you do not want to take something, don't take it. Do not dictate that other people should not have it either. That is not for anyone else to decide except the person injesting the medication and the person prescribing it.

[jamieism]

Originally Posted by mcpforever You CAN get lung cancer without smoking. You CAN get diabetes while eating awesome and being a gym rat. You canNOT (accidentally) get pregnant without having sex. There's also a much shorter timeline between having sex and getting pregnant than there is between smoking and getting lung cancer, eating poorly/not exercising and becoming diabetic. Pregnancy literally happens overnight.

?? I don't see the point here ^^. What does timeline have to do with it?

Originally Posted by Janine Off-topic I know, but this is what disturbs me. The politicians who are waging this war against birth control coverage, or birth control in general, are the same ones who want to do away with places like Planned Parenthood. Yes, if I can't afford birth control and the government doesn't want to force insurance companies to cover it, I can go to Planned Parenthood. Except if these politicians had their way, there wouldn't be any Planned Parenthood either. It is this bigger war on women that worries me. If you can't afford birth control and your insurance doesn't cover it and then politicians cut all funding for Planned Parenthood, well what options are left? And I guess you could say just don't have sex, but we all know that won't happen. So instead there will be more abortions, or more kids in foster care, or more parents on assistance. The whole thing makes absolutely no sense. Which is why it seems rather obvious to me that the root of this has nothing to do with money (birth control is MUCH less expensive than prenatal care, delivery, and assistance), and everything to do with the personal opinions on birth control of these politicians. It is no coincidence that the politicians who argue this most are also vehemently against premarital sex and are very religious. Sorry for the tangent.

Hear hear! :handclap:

Originally Posted by Kirsie Hmmm chocolate, eh. I wonder if we can come up with a way to make that debatable, too?

I think chocolate is non negotiable and really should be available for $0 copay.

The debate over the copay? I think they should ALL be covered. But then I also think we would be FAR better off with universal healthcare. This for profit system is literally killing us in the name of "choice" and a freedom that is neither free, nor a choice many have the option to make.

[DesertRat]

Originally Posted by 3 ladybugs http://nymag.com/news/features/69789/ I haven't read all of this (it is quite long and need to do something else before dinner) however I had heard that when they were making the female pill, they also made a male pill as well. However there were too many side effects with the male pill that they stopped it. The female pill actually killed 3 women (or something like that) and it went forward. Now I could have been told misinformation but it has always made me wonder about the pill.

This, among other side effects, is what bothers me most about this push to make the pill free for everyone.

The Pill didn’t create the field of infertility medicine, but it turned it into an enormous industry. Inadvertently, indirectly, infertility has become the Pill’s primary side effect.

What feels like "freedom" now is going to feel pretty darn oppressive in 10-15 years when women want to have babies, or are suffering from other side effects of the pill.

I'm not saying the pill is bad. But I feel like the people pushing the BC debate are not being open enough about the possible side effects. They'd be happy if every teenager girl and older were able to get a lifetime supply of BC for free without one word of caution against it.

Now, if someone was trying to make a copy of Toni's "Taking Charge of Your Fertility" available for every woman over 16, I'd be totally on board.

[vatblack]

Originally Posted by ReadingRenee I don't know, maybe they are trying to lower the number of unwanted pregnancies, unwanted babies and consequently abortions by having insurance provide birth control with no co pay. Seems like a good idea to me.

I would have thought that was what was behind it too.

Originally Posted by Ellasundies What I think is stupid is that my husband pays just shy of $10,000 per year for health ins. + the money that his company pays for his health ins. AND I have to pay $75/month for my BC that I use for health reasons NOT BC. I also think it's stupid that life saving meds aren't paid for by some policies. I have no problem paying a small copay but paying full price is ridiculous and I think it's even more ridiculous and sexist that policies don't pay for BC but WILL pay for viagra.

I agree that it is silly. All medications should be covered. Most drugs are preventative when all is said and done. Some prevent death, others pregnancies and others from an illness progressing.

Originally Posted by Janine Who pays for what is the least of my worries. What concerns me above and beyond all this insurance stuff is the general attitude of some of the politicians out there. If a politician thinks that women should pay for their own birth control, that is one thing. If a politician is morally-opposed to birth control and feels the need to impose that belief on women, well that is quite another. I find the opinions of the extreme religious right to be far more disturbing than any financial discussion about who should pay the tab for birth control. I feel like I'm witnessing a war on sex in general, and more specifically a war on women. THAT is what I find frightening.

EXACTLY. THIS IS WHAT I MEANT WHEN I POSTED THIS PICTURE. It had nothing to do with the insurance thing. I think insurance companies are benefiting so much anyway that they can drop the co-pay, but I also know they would not want to.

Originally Posted by mcpforever Condoms really are THE thing to use from a cost saving standpoint. They are not expensive. They prevent pregnancy which is a big medical cost followed by an entire new person to insure. They also prevent STDs/STIs (pick your preferred letters) which cost a big chunk of change.

And that is what we use because because of the side effects the pill has. I'm fat and I used to smoke, so my risk is higher than a normal weight woman's.

However, I do wish I could use it so that my husband and I can have sex without a barrier. We do it some of the time but we cannot always. Our sex life has taken a hit since we started using condoms (Or is that the children's fault?)

Originally Posted by Janine Off-topic I know, but this is what disturbs me. The politicians who are waging this war against birth control coverage, or birth control in general, are the same ones who want to do away with places like Planned Parenthood. Yes, if I can't afford birth control and the government doesn't want to force insurance companies to cover it, I can go to Planned Parenthood. Except if these politicians had their way, there wouldn't be any Planned Parenthood either. It is this bigger war on women that worries me. If you can't afford birth control and your insurance doesn't cover it and then politicians cut all funding for Planned Parenthood, well what options are left? And I guess you could say just don't have sex, but we all know that won't happen. So instead there will be more abortions, or more kids in foster care, or more parents on assistance. The whole thing makes absolutely no sense. Which is why it seems rather obvious to me that the root of this has nothing to do with money (birth control is MUCH less expensive than prenatal care, delivery, and assistance), and everything to do with the personal opinions on birth control of these politicians. It is no coincidence that the politicians who argue this most are also vehemently against premarital sex and are very religious. Sorry for the tangent.

Not at all off topic, this is one of a few posts that actually GET what I was going for!

I am surprised that it took this long for someone to stipulate exactly where this whole "war" on the pill and planned parenthood is going. I do not know exaclty why they want women out of the work force and barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen again. Maybe so they can discount us in their annual unemployment figures and fool Americans into believing there is only 3% unemployment when there is really 53%! (Yeah, they are arbitrary numbers based on nothing concrete).

If you look at the picture, it is a woman talking to a man. A woman explaining how we are treated in this whole sex thing. We cannot win!

Men say: Don't have sex before marriage. Don't have sex if you don't want children. - Such a woman is a prude and ridiculed for it. We all know they are ridiculed for it.

Men say: Women on the pill just want to have sex morning, noon and night. Women say: Go on the pill if you want to accomplish anything career wise. You need not to get pregnant. It is a tall order to stay celibate until you are in your 30s.

People say: Why did you get pregnant? Have you not heard about condoms or the pill? You should really have used both. Who in this day and age is still stupid enough to get pregnant when they don't want to.

People say: You are a murderer to have an abortion. You should die in hell.

Yay - I have all these wonderful family planning options. It is called - um... wait.. ummm... Oh, I really don't have any choice that won't get me negative feedback SOMEWHERE.

Originally Posted by l_Kimmie_l OP - I saw that on FB the other day and laughed. How true! As a woman, you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

Just so!

[kattayanna_mom]

I could drive 30 mins to the naval hospital pharmacy and get my oldest DD's BC for free but it is just easier to drive 2 min to the nearest pharmacy and pay our $12 co-pay a month.

[MommyKeller0107]

BC is $40 / month copay for me (Obviously when I'm NOT knocked up). The picture made me giggle. & That's all I have to add!

[palsmama]

Originally Posted by keonli It sounds like a good idea in theory. However, condoms are free in many places right now and there are still unwanted pregnancies. I haven't read too deeply into this issue, but from my own experiences with teenage friends, unwanted pregnancies resulted from lack of education and a theory that "it would never happen to me" coupled with "we'll be together forever." I honestly feel as though America is becoming a nation of self-entitlement and irresponsibility in many ways. There's no accountability anymore. And with the numerous other scary issues we face as a nation, this isn't exactly what I would rate as a "top issue."

agree with the bolded 100% one of our HUGE problems as a nation and society!