• 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!

Shouldn't health insurance be for health? Lawmakers consider IVF insurance proposal

holbritter

holbritter

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
21,500
Reaction score
10,419
Location
NY
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
Lawmakers consider IVF insurance proposal
Lawmakers consider IVF insurance proposal - WTEN

ALBANY, N.Y. (NEWS10) - Almost 70,000 babies were born through In-vitro fertilization in 2015, contributing to a growing number of success stories of families using fertility treatments. The only thing stopping many families is cost.

IVF has a huge success rate but can cost as much as $20,000. It is not covered by insurance in New York. The Papanikos had to save for years to have their baby Hailey.
"Who wants to go through this whole process, and then having to pay so much on top of that that's sort of adding insult to injury."

A bill pending in the Senate right now would require insurance companies to cover IVF and would cost New Yorkers an additional 56 cents a month. The bill passed in the Assembly, but is still waiting for a vote in the Senate.



Health insurance should be for preventative care and health problems only. Another reason for higher premiums? Why must everyone else pay for this?

I'm sorry you are unable to conceive on your own. It's been a problem for many people for many years. But guess what, they dealt with it, because that's life.

P.S. It costs way more than $20k to have and raise a child. So if you can't afford it now, what makes you think you can once you have one?
 
holbritter said:
Health insurance should be for preventative care and health problems only. Another reason for higher premiums? Why must everyone else pay for this?
Click to expand...
Infertility is a health problem. If you’re going to exclude IVF because it isn’t a critical condition, you’d logically have to exclude a vast range of other treatments currently made available.
 
holbritter said:
Lawmakers consider IVF insurance proposal
Lawmakers consider IVF insurance proposal - WTEN

ALBANY, N.Y. (NEWS10) - Almost 70,000 babies were born through In-vitro fertilization in 2015, contributing to a growing number of success stories of families using fertility treatments. The only thing stopping many families is cost.

IVF has a huge success rate but can cost as much as $20,000. It is not covered by insurance in New York. The Papanikos had to save for years to have their baby Hailey.
"Who wants to go through this whole process, and then having to pay so much on top of that that's sort of adding insult to injury."

A bill pending in the Senate right now would require insurance companies to cover IVF and would cost New Yorkers an additional 56 cents a month. The bill passed in the Assembly, but is still waiting for a vote in the Senate.



Health insurance should be for preventative care and health problems only. Another reason for higher premiums? Why must everyone else pay for this?

I'm sorry you are unable to conceive on your own. It's been a problem for many people for many years. But guess what, they dealt with it, because that's life.

P.S. It costs way more than $20k to have and raise a child. So if you can't afford it now, what makes you think you can once you have one?
Click to expand...

I agree completely. Being childless is not a health issue. Many children are in foster homes waiting to be adopted, and those children can often be adopted for very little money.

Paying for IVF is like the old practice of subsidizing private adoptions where the parents want a newborn white baby and will accept nothing else.

These costs are up to the potential parents to pay -- no one else.
 
HonestJoe said:
Infertility is a health problem. If you’re going to exclude IVF because it isn’t a critical condition, you’d logically have to exclude a vast range of other treatments currently made available.
Click to expand...

No it's not. It's a "physical" problem but it doesn't affect anyone's health.

All treatment is non-essential, hence, it's in the same realm as breast augmentations and rhinoplasty.
 
HonestJoe said:
Infertility is a health problem. If you’re going to exclude IVF because it isn’t a critical condition, you’d logically have to exclude a vast range of other treatments currently made available.
Click to expand...

I don't agree that it is a 'health' problem. It does not effect your biological health at all.
 
HowardBThiname said:
No it's not. It's a "physical" problem but it doesn't affect anyone's health.
Click to expand...
Infertility is a health problem. It’s generally a consequence of clinical condition and can have clinical consequences. It’s isn’t a critical or life-threatening health problem but that isn’t the distinction being stated here.

HowardBThiname said:
All treatment is non-essential, hence, it's in the same realm as breast augmentations and rhinoplasty.
Click to expand...
Or prosthetics (especially non-functional ones), braces, hearing aids, re-constructive plastic surgery and countless other things. The question is how far you’re willing to push, especially in to areas that you might be seeking treatment for one day?
 
HonestJoe said:
Infertility is a health problem. It’s generally a consequence of clinical condition and can have clinical consequences. It’s isn’t a critical or life-threatening health problem but that isn’t the distinction being stated here.

Or prosthetics (especially non-functional ones), braces, hearing aids, re-constructive plastic surgery and countless other things. The question is how far you’re willing to push, especially in to areas that you might be seeking treatment for one day?
Click to expand...


Insurance covers very few, if any, elective surgeries. No one "needs" to become a parent -- it's a desire, that's all. And there are many options open to them if they really want a child that do not include childbirth.

It's just one of those things insurance should not cover.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Insurance covers very few, if any, elective surgeries. No one "needs" to become a parent -- it's a desire, that's all. And there are many options open to them if they really want a child that do not include childbirth.
Click to expand...
Do you think insurance should cover routine maternity and post-natal care (for the mother specifically, separate to any care for the child)?
 
HonestJoe said:
Do you think insurance should cover routine maternity and post-natal care (for the mother specifically, separate to any care for the child)?
Click to expand...

Really?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom