Women's Health

[Tanya93]

Blog Latest Post

RSS

Women’s Health = Not Having Babies

by Patrick Thornton
2 days ago

RSS

Of course, all of us have now heard that contraception is a very, very important part of Women’s Health™ (can someone help me register that as a trademark because I think that would be kind of funny if I owned it?).

We’ve had this fact pounded into our skulls by the current administration and their media minions.

Google thinks balancing yogurt and strawberries are an important part of Women's Health.

Women’s Health™ (yes, I’m going to keep writing it like that and in fact, every time you read it I want you to go “Ahhh” in your head in a kind of a sing-songy way like a chorus of angels would if the clouds had just parted and a powerful beam of sunlight was shining down upon the word) is different from regular health.

And it’s actually much more important.

We have been told repeatedly by our esteemed Commander in Health that it is so important that EVERY insurance program should cover it.  No matter what.

Not only should they cover it, but they should cover it WITHOUT a co-pay.

Because, you know, asking women to pay $20 for a prescription is evil and horrible and mean and most likely, (cringe) Republican.

These women are healthy. You can tell because they are not having babies.

Now, say your child has an ear infection or pneumonia, you can pay $20 for that because it’s not a Women’s Health™ issue it’s just a plain-old, regular health issue.

If a young mother has a heart condition and needs medication, well she can pay $20 for that too because it is not a matter of Women’s Health™ (“Ahhh…”).  It’s just a matter of regular health.

If that same young mother wants to have sex without having a baby, well she damn well better not have to pay $20 for that!  Because as well know, that is a matter of Women’s Health™.

So, it seems like Women’s Health™ is all the parts of healthcare that have to do with uteruses (or is it uteri?) and sex and pregnancy and not-getting pregnant and taking pills that might kill babies.

Pretty clear, right?

Oh wait, but there is one big exception: Women’s Health™ does not cover pregnancy or childbirth or any care related to either one.

Nope.  Not one bit.

NOT covered under Women's Health. You must pay extra for this.

Oh wait, I just thought of this – pregnancy IS a part of Women’s Health™, but only if you want to kill your baby with the morning-after pill.  If you want to keep your baby, well that’s on your own dime because it is not a part of Women’s Health™.

Got that?

You see, pregnancy (where you want your baby to live) and childbirth are extra services.  If you want them, you don’t just have to pay a $20 co-pay.  You actually have to pay extra for your insurance.  Lots extra.  Like several thousand dollars per year per insured woman extra.

And your insurance company doesn’t even have to offer you the extra service, if they don’t feel like it (most don’t).

There is really only one conclusion to draw here:  Women’s Health™ is all about supporting women to not have babies.  It’s not at all about supporting their choices.  If it was, it would demand coverage for “not having babies” and for “having babies.”

But it doesn’t.

It actually penalizes women who choose to have babies and makes them pay more.

"Let me be clear, pregnancy and having babies have nothing to do with Women's Health. It's totally different and you should pay extra for it."

Thoughts?

[punky3175]

Isn't Women's Health already trademarked as a magazine? :D (sorry - I know those aren't the thoughts you were looking for, but I'm caffeine-deprived today.) 

[Tanya93]

funny is good

[Veni.Vidi.Vici.]

Doh

[la_bella_vita]

 Bump-to read later

[heidimoose134]

[etsmom]

I agree that there is a problem with this picture.

[UpSheRises]

Not sure why it has to be free, i pay a co-pay for my two monthly prescriptions, but access to contreception has implications for women's health beyond preventing pregnancy. I think insurance policies should be required to provide coverage for the medication your doctor prescribes to you.

[katy_kay08]

Who is Patrick Thornton and why should we care what his opinion is on our access to birth control?   Given his obvious lack of knowledge on how contraception works I'm not all that inclined to see him as a relevant contributor on the topic.

source: http://www.catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?author=14

Nope, no agenda from this source. 

[LindaClement]

Not too filled with hyperbole and invective...

[paganbaby]

Quoting la_bella_vita:

 Bump-to read later