Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Is your state doing anything like this?

If you want them to but do not speak up they won't.I am happy to hear this news :)

Answer Question
 
tnmomofive

Asked by tnmomofive at 1:15 PM on Apr. 13, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 32 (56,190 Credits)
Answers (26)
  • tnmomofive

    Answer by tnmomofive at 1:15 PM on Apr. 13, 2010

  • i think it's an awful idea.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 1:18 PM on Apr. 13, 2010

  • I think it's awful that a legal medical procedure won't be covered because someone else decided it didn't meet with their personal political view points.

    If you're not a medical professional, you shouldn't get to decide what a patient can and can't do.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 1:27 PM on Apr. 13, 2010

  • double standards ladies.Look alot of folks do not want to pay for others elective abortions.If you noticed the state insurance does and will still continue to pay for abortions for the reasons of rape,incest,or potential threat to the mothers life.
    tnmomofive

    Answer by tnmomofive at 1:31 PM on Apr. 13, 2010

  • 1.) I thought Fed Law superseded State Law; so why isn't this the same as the DEA being able to pop marijuana clinics in CA even though CA legalized them?

    2.) Anon ___:27PM --- Not even medical professional's should get to decide what a patient can and can't do. All they should be doing is giving the patient their best trained medical advice and allowing the patient to then make their own decisions about what to do or not with their own body - end of story.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 1:38 PM on Apr. 13, 2010

  • I'm pro-choice.

    Your body, your choice.
    Your choice, your dollar.

    Control, Control-that's what this TN bill is all about. Just adds to their PA bottom line. Talk about a power grab
    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 1:40 PM on Apr. 13, 2010

  • I think it is great! My lib lovin state would never consider it though.
    yourspecialkid

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 1:56 PM on Apr. 13, 2010

  • >double standards ladies.

    What's the double standard? You assume we have a double standard because we're not agreeing with you. Did anyone here provide a list of what should and should not be covered?

    Anon1:38 - point taken. What I mean is that if a doctor decrees a procedure appropriate or something you're eligible for, and you opt for it. . .the insurance (or state) should not get to say no. Not totally applicable in this original example. However, to explain myself, I'll use something different - my DD would benefit from a prescription allergy medication to help manage her severe reactions to tree pollen this spring. Our insurance won't cover it until we've used every OTC option and can argue with them relentlessly that nothing has worked and this is a last resort. Her allergist has already said her reactions are so bad, she NEEDS the RX. He can't do a thing though until she suffers a bit more with useless OTC pills.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 1:56 PM on Apr. 13, 2010

  • myself, I'll use something different - my DD would benefit from a prescription allergy medication to help manage her severe reactions to tree pollen this spring. Our insurance won't cover it until we've used every OTC option and can argue with them relentlessly that nothing has worked and this is a last resort. Her allergist has already said her reactions are so bad, she NEEDS the RX. He can't do a thing though until she suffers a bit more with useless OTC pills.


    This is an ex of how Insurance Cos control HC. Now, for folks with $$$, no problem You buy your child's expensive drugs and pay oop. For the poor or those on a very fixed income, they might have to go without. How is that ok in anyone's reasoning? Why should the Insurance Co's get to dictate when and if MEDICALLY ORDERED treatments will be for and for whom?

    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 2:02 PM on Apr. 13, 2010

  • TN let me elaborate - I personally detest the idea of abortion. However, I support it as a choice because the instances of rape, incest and mother's health. I watched a friend die at a young age leaving a large family behind because she opted to wait out the delivery of her youngest instead of aborting and starting cancer treatments. It was her choice - but she AND her 10 kids and DH deserved to have that choice.

    I think the rape victim or the incest victim has been through a enough. Asking them to PROVE they qualify for an abortion is just insult to injury. I also think it opens the door to false accusations from the scared woman who sees no way out. Placing the caveat as a qualifier for the procedure, imho, creates a new host of issues. So personally, because I support the "in these cases" I take a pro-choice stand. Laws like this - fall into the same category for me. TN saying "prove it before we pay" is wrong.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 2:03 PM on Apr. 13, 2010

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.