• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Contraceptive Recommendation Creates New Controversy for Health Care Law

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is praising a recommendation from the Institute of Medicine that insurance companies be required to offer free contraceptives to all women in a report she called " historic," suggesting she'll make the recommendations official policy.
The prospect of free, government-ordered contraceptives and even agents to induce abortion, has ignited a national debate. Some are clearly pleased.


Read more: Contraceptive Recommendation Creates New Controversy for Health Care Law - FoxNews.com

"Free"? Really? Just mandate it and it's "Free"? Is it any wonder we're so far in debt we can't begin to see straight?

Wow, I mean, just ****ing wow.
 
"Free"? Really? Just mandate it and it's "Free"? Is it any wonder we're so far in debt we can't begin to see straight?

Wow, I mean, just ****ing wow.


Uhmm this doesn't add to the government debt.
 
Uhmm this doesn't add to the government debt.

....

Okay, you missed the point, it's too deep I guess. Here, I'll make it simple.

"Just mandate it as free..."

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREE.

What do you think will happen to the cost of Insurance? Go up, or down?

Mandated to be paid for, for free...

(insert jeopardy theme music)


Answer?



So, the over all point is, the people making these decisions have no ****ing clue what the repercussions for their actions are.
 
....

Okay, you missed the point, it's too deep I guess. Here, I'll make it simple.

"Just mandate it as free..."

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREE.

What do you think will happen to the cost of Insurance? Go up, or down?

Mandated to be paid for, for free...

(insert jeopardy theme music)


Answer?



So, the over all point is, the people making these decisions have no ****ing clue what the repercussions for their actions are.


I don't know are there maternity cost going to go down?
 
Abortions are evil and murder.

But don't make contraceptives easier to get.
 
I definitely support this.
 
I really doubt the cost of contraception can hold a candle to the cost of unwanted pregnancy. Wanna do something about single parents on welfare, abortion, and the maternity care you're paying for offered to these women who are getting pregnant when they really can't afford to be? This is your answer.

This is awesome. Complaining that it's not free and therefore we shouldn't do it while simultaneously complaining about abortion and welfare mothers, is a bit like complaining about the cost of a police force in your city and therefore we should abolish them while simultaneously complaining that businesses don't want to be in your town and the economy sucks. Well, duh.

I'm lucky enough to live in a state where we have the money to run programs like this that are very available to women, but I have lived in states where that is not the case. Guess what? Their unintended pregnancy rate is much higher.

I don't claim to speak for all Minnesotans, but if it makes you feel better, I'd be happy to opt out and save us some money. We're already running a pretty good program here. Send my money to San Antonio, Texas, my best wishes to the women in your town, and my thanks Miss Selebius.
 
Last edited:
I really doubt the cost of contraception can hold a candle to the cost of unwanted pregnancy.

Not the point. The simple point is it's erroneous to say they are "free".
 
"Free"? Really? Just mandate it and it's "Free"? Is it any wonder we're so far in debt we can't begin to see straight?

Wow, I mean, just ****ing wow.

The government are a bunch of overpaid bureaucratic assholes who use government funds to take vacations and fund private jets, not to mention throwing money around like confetti at completely idiotic things, and you are outraged by THIS? Seriously?
 
Unwanted pregnancies and divorce drive poverty rates. This is pretty meh. But, its not free, thats a given.
 
Unwanted pregnancies and divorce drive poverty rates. This is pretty meh. But, its not free, thats a given.


Maybe cost effective?


Maybe cheaper than FREE, because contraceptives save money in avoiding the costs of unintended pregnancies, like Casey Athony. How much did Caylee end up costing?


"An analysis of the economic benefits of adolescent contraceptive use utilizes information from a national private payer database and from the California Medicaid program to compare private- and public-sector costs and savings. The study estimates the costs of acquiring and using 11 contraceptive methods appropriate for adolescents, treating associated side effects, providing medical care related to an unintended pregnancy during method use and treating sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and compares them with the costs of using no method. The average annual cost per adolescent at risk of unintended pregnancy who uses no method is $1,267 ($1,079 for unintended pregnancy and $188 for STDs) in the private sector and $677 ($541 for unintended pregnancy and $137 for STDs) in the public sector under the most conservative assumptions. At one year of use, private-sector savings from adolescent contraceptive use range from $308 for the implant to $946 for the male condom; public-sector savings rise from $60 for the implant to $525 for the male condom. Both the use of male condoms with another method and the advance provision of backup emergency contraceptive pills provide additional savings.

Six previous studies have demonstrated that contraceptive use saves substantial health care dollars in both private and public settings in the US. The present study was the first to focus on the costs and savings of contraceptive use among US adolescent women 15-19 years of age. Through use of data from a national third-party private payer database and from the California Medicaid program"





http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9429869

..
 
Last edited:
Wanna do something about single parents on welfare, abortion, and the maternity care you're paying for offered to these women who are getting pregnant when they really can't afford to be? This is your answer.

This is awesome.
Yes, cutting down on the number of future liberals is awesome indeed :wink:
 
"OBJECTIVE:

To estimate cost savings from emergency contraceptive pills in Canada.

METHODS:

We modeled cost savings when a single emergency contraceptive treatment was provided after unprotected intercourse and when women were provided emergency contraceptive pills in advance.

RESULTS:

Each dollar spent on a single treatment saved $1.19--$2.35 (in Canadian currency), depending on the regimen and on assumptions about savings from costs avoided by preventing mistimed births. The dedicated products Preven (Shire Canada, Inc., Oakville, Ontario) and Plan B (Paladin Labs, Inc., Montreal) were cost-saving even under the least favorable assumption that mistimed births prevented today occur 2 years later. Each dollar spent on advance provision of Preven saved $1.24--$12.23, depending on the regular contraception method, on how consistently emergency contraception was used when needed, and on whether mistimed births were averted forever or simply delayed. Plan B was almost always cost-saving, although less so."



Cost savings from emergency contraceptive pills in... [Obstet Gynecol. 2001] - PubMed result
 
Fox is not the only one using the word "free".

CNBC ~ Panel Recommends Coverage for Contraception

Yes well......I'm not that surprised that they are unable to understand how things work either.

WASHINGTON — A leading medical advisory panel recommended on Tuesday that all insurers be required to cover contraceptives for women as part of their coverage as one of several preventive services under the new health care law.

I wouldn't do this to a quote of a poster but why is it so difficult for news sources to make their articles accurate?
 
Yes well......I'm not that surprised that they are unable to understand how things work either.



I wouldn't do this to a quote of a poster but why is it so difficult for news sources to make their articles accurate?

Then what would be a more accurate thing to say? What would you prefer?
 
Back
Top Bottom