Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fired!

[beebrisk]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

To sum up: if you can't afford to have a baby (finance being one of the biggest reasons women are terminating pregnancies, according to recent studies), you'd still better have a couple of hundred/thousand lying around to cover an unnecessary medical procedure, a couple of days worth of lost wages, transportation, etc.

I hate to be blithe, but how long do we give it before women start resorting to back-alley solutions and suffering again?

Here's a solution. Can't afford a baby? Don't get pregnant. Preventing pregnancy is not rocket science. It's pretty basic, actually. Of course accidents happen but usually not if you are being responsible. Somehow I have managed my whole life not to get pregnant. That was my choice and I knew what to do (and, frankly, what not to do!). As we are all interested in the "health" of women, we should remember that having no pregnancy is obviously "safer" for us than the act of terminating one.

Yes, I know, there's the argument about the "life of the mother, etc...", but lets face it, the vast majority of pregnancies that are terminated are not done so because the mother's life is in danger.

When does "Our Bodies Ourselves" become "Our Bodies Ourselves and Our Own Responsibility"? After 30+ years of women shouting to keep the government out of their uteruses, they seem more than willing right now to have the government pay for what goes in and comes out of those uteruses.

Wow breebrisk, this is a very black and white perspective to a complex solution. Women should stop getting pregnant and use birthcontrol that insurance should cease to cover (and employers should be allowed to shame women into not using.) Hmmm, wonder which groups of women will be most impacted by this? The ones who can afford to pay for BC out of pocket or to walk away from a job that pays the bills because they don't like the new rules? Not likely.

Let me share something personal with you. I come from an upper middle class family. I'm highly educated and grew up with plenty of knowledge about my body. More than most, I'd say. I utilized Planned Parenthood to obtain BC pills when I was in my teens and avoided pregnancy just fine because I had a place to go where no questions were asked and pills were $5/month. Then, in my early adult years I had to get off the pill due to some hormonal side effects that weren't working well for me (after trying several different types of pill and working with my doctor). Despite utilizing other methods of BC (non-pill), after getting married I became accidentally pregnant twice. I guess that makes me pretty dumb, eh? After all, it's not rocket science.

Who said anything about anyone being "dumb"?

As I said before, employers don't have the right to know your medical background. They also don't have the obligation to provide anything to you besides your wages and a decent working environment. They can legally deny health benefits entirely. What part of that does anyone disagree with??

While I don't think my stance on "getting pregnant" is quite as black and white as you say, I do take a very strong stance on personal responsibility, which means keeping both my employer AND the government out of my business. My body, my pregnancy, my business.

 

[ericad]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

To sum up: if you can't afford to have a baby (finance being one of the biggest reasons women are terminating pregnancies, according to recent studies), you'd still better have a couple of hundred/thousand lying around to cover an unnecessary medical procedure, a couple of days worth of lost wages, transportation, etc.

I hate to be blithe, but how long do we give it before women start resorting to back-alley solutions and suffering again?

Here's a solution. Can't afford a baby? Don't get pregnant. Preventing pregnancy is not rocket science. It's pretty basic, actually. Of course accidents happen but usually not if you are being responsible. Somehow I have managed my whole life not to get pregnant. That was my choice and I knew what to do (and, frankly, what not to do!). As we are all interested in the "health" of women, we should remember that having no pregnancy is obviously "safer" for us than the act of terminating one.

Yes, I know, there's the argument about the "life of the mother, etc...", but lets face it, the vast majority of pregnancies that are terminated are not done so because the mother's life is in danger.

When does "Our Bodies Ourselves" become "Our Bodies Ourselves and Our Own Responsibility"? After 30+ years of women shouting to keep the government out of their uteruses, they seem more than willing right now to have the government pay for what goes in and comes out of those uteruses.

Wow breebrisk, this is a very black and white perspective to a complex solution. Women should stop getting pregnant and use birthcontrol that insurance should cease to cover (and employers should be allowed to shame women into not using.) Hmmm, wonder which groups of women will be most impacted by this? The ones who can afford to pay for BC out of pocket or to walk away from a job that pays the bills because they don't like the new rules? Not likely.

Let me share something personal with you. I come from an upper middle class family. I'm highly educated and grew up with plenty of knowledge about my body. More than most, I'd say. I utilized Planned Parenthood to obtain BC pills when I was in my teens and avoided pregnancy just fine because I had a place to go where no questions were asked and pills were $5/month. Then, in my early adult years I had to get off the pill due to some hormonal side effects that weren't working well for me (after trying several different types of pill and working with my doctor). Despite utilizing other methods of BC (non-pill), after getting married I became accidentally pregnant twice. I guess that makes me pretty dumb, eh? After all, it's not rocket science.

Who said anything about anyone being "dumb"?

As I said before, employers don't have the right to know your medical background. They also don't have the obligation to provide anything to you besides your wages and a decent working environment. They can legally deny health benefits entirely. What part of that does anyone disagree with??

While I don't think my stance on "getting pregnant" is quite as black and white as you say, I do take a very strong stance on personal responsibility, which means keeping both my employer AND the government out of my business. My body, my pregnancy, my business.

But you're ok with corporate for-profit health insurance companies and for-profit pharmaceutical companies and corrupt lobbyists directing your care and knowing your business? Because if you think that your care is currently between you and your doctor, you're sorely mistaken.

PS - when someone says "it's not rocket science" the implication is that the person is dumb. Like saying "duh." Am I wrong? Maybe I should restate and say, "I guess that makes me of average to below average intellect." Or "I guess that makes me NOT a rocket scientist."

 

[beebrisk]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

I feel contempt because of the number of abortions that take place when the pregnancy could have been prevented in the first place. Abortions are not all the result of "accidents". Many are the result of a woman being irresponsible and taking a chance. The fact that I never got pregnant has nothing to do with "luck" and everything to do with being pro-active and taking responsibility.

I understand some women cannot use the pill. I understand condoms fail. I understand things "happen". But if you are in a situation where you know something could potentially happen, and you go ahead anyway, that's called being irresponsible. In my book that's nothing more than throwing caution to the wind and hoping for "the best".

I'm tired of so many saying that they have such a deep interest in women's "health", yet will never advise against such irresponsible behavior.

Something could ALWAYS happen. Your BC pills could be faulty. Your morning after pill could fail. Even tubal ligations fail. So I guess every woman who ever has sex knowing that that's where babies come from is irresponsible, eh? Including you?

Nope. But then the person should admit fully that abortion IS used as a form of birth control.

I'm not here to argue the abortion issue. It hasn't gotten anyone anywhere in 30+ years and I don't think we'll solve it here on PS.

What I am saying with regard to the OP, is that I reject the media's depiction of me as a woman being subjugated by a bunch of politicos and having a war waged on me because of my sex. I patently refuse to buy into it. I'm no one's fool and no one's victim.

 

[Circe]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

I'm fascinated by how the terminology of independence is actually used AGAINST people now. Apparently, being independent and responsible and not-a-victim in this society means being willing to get completely shafted by the system?

Just to correct a basic misconception: employers don't provide health insurance out of the goodness of their hearts. It is part of your wage package. For an employer to dictate how your insurance is applied once you've paid your premiums is a form of their interfering in your life. Analogy: if you worked for a Jewish company and they had a clause that said you couldn't use any of your paycheck to buy shrimp, lobster, pork, or other trayf products, would that be a sign of your independence, or their interference in what should, by all rights, be your private business?

 

[beebrisk]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

To sum up: if you can't afford to have a baby (finance being one of the biggest reasons women are terminating pregnancies, according to recent studies), you'd still better have a couple of hundred/thousand lying around to cover an unnecessary medical procedure, a couple of days worth of lost wages, transportation, etc.

I hate to be blithe, but how long do we give it before women start resorting to back-alley solutions and suffering again?

Here's a solution. Can't afford a baby? Don't get pregnant. Preventing pregnancy is not rocket science. It's pretty basic, actually. Of course accidents happen but usually not if you are being responsible. Somehow I have managed my whole life not to get pregnant. That was my choice and I knew what to do (and, frankly, what not to do!). As we are all interested in the "health" of women, we should remember that having no pregnancy is obviously "safer" for us than the act of terminating one.

Yes, I know, there's the argument about the "life of the mother, etc...", but lets face it, the vast majority of pregnancies that are terminated are not done so because the mother's life is in danger.

When does "Our Bodies Ourselves" become "Our Bodies Ourselves and Our Own Responsibility"? After 30+ years of women shouting to keep the government out of their uteruses, they seem more than willing right now to have the government pay for what goes in and comes out of those uteruses.

Wow breebrisk, this is a very black and white perspective to a complex solution. Women should stop getting pregnant and use birthcontrol that insurance should cease to cover (and employers should be allowed to shame women into not using.) Hmmm, wonder which groups of women will be most impacted by this? The ones who can afford to pay for BC out of pocket or to walk away from a job that pays the bills because they don't like the new rules? Not likely.

Let me share something personal with you. I come from an upper middle class family. I'm highly educated and grew up with plenty of knowledge about my body. More than most, I'd say. I utilized Planned Parenthood to obtain BC pills when I was in my teens and avoided pregnancy just fine because I had a place to go where no questions were asked and pills were $5/month. Then, in my early adult years I had to get off the pill due to some hormonal side effects that weren't working well for me (after trying several different types of pill and working with my doctor). Despite utilizing other methods of BC (non-pill), after getting married I became accidentally pregnant twice. I guess that makes me pretty dumb, eh? After all, it's not rocket science.

Who said anything about anyone being "dumb"?

As I said before, employers don't have the right to know your medical background. They also don't have the obligation to provide anything to you besides your wages and a decent working environment. They can legally deny health benefits entirely. What part of that does anyone disagree with??

While I don't think my stance on "getting pregnant" is quite as black and white as you say, I do take a very strong stance on personal responsibility, which means keeping both my employer AND the government out of my business. My body, my pregnancy, my business.

But you're ok with corporate for-profit health insurance companies and for-profit pharmaceutical companies and corrupt lobbyists directing your care and knowing your business? Because if you think that your care is currently between you and your doctor, you're sorely mistaken.

PS - when someone says "it's not rocket science" the implication is that the person is dumb. Like saying "duh." Am I wrong? Maybe I should restate and say, "I guess that makes me of average to below average intellect." Or "I guess that makes me NOT a rocket scientist."

Ummm, no. I am not okay with for-profit health insurance companies and pharma knowing about my care. I stated that earlier. I am arguing the hypocrisy that exists by those that rail against the corporations but fully embrace having the federal government become their health care proxy.

 

[kenny]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

Beebrisk, you are brave to bring up a very good point, responsibility.
This is often framed as a health issue.
However many, likely most, pregnancies would not have occurred if the woman just ... used that aspirin and/or the man just kept his pants zipped up.
The vast majority pregnancies are the result of choice.

Abstinence is the only perfect BC, and I can see this without being a Senator or Rush Limbaugh or use the S-word or the P-word.

Abstinence is great but our world has changed, and The Pill is why.
It is natural for people to want a lot of sex but not want all babies that will result.
The pill gives them that.
They can have their cake and eat it too, and this genie is out of the bottle.

Now the problem is, since it is only available as an Rx, who should pay for it.
Is The Pill a medical need since we as a society accept sex as normal and natural, or is The Pill an expense for optional recreation?

 

[ericad]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

To sum up: if you can't afford to have a baby (finance being one of the biggest reasons women are terminating pregnancies, according to recent studies), you'd still better have a couple of hundred/thousand lying around to cover an unnecessary medical procedure, a couple of days worth of lost wages, transportation, etc.

I hate to be blithe, but how long do we give it before women start resorting to back-alley solutions and suffering again?

Here's a solution. Can't afford a baby? Don't get pregnant. Preventing pregnancy is not rocket science. It's pretty basic, actually. Of course accidents happen but usually not if you are being responsible. Somehow I have managed my whole life not to get pregnant. That was my choice and I knew what to do (and, frankly, what not to do!). As we are all interested in the "health" of women, we should remember that having no pregnancy is obviously "safer" for us than the act of terminating one.

Yes, I know, there's the argument about the "life of the mother, etc...", but lets face it, the vast majority of pregnancies that are terminated are not done so because the mother's life is in danger.

When does "Our Bodies Ourselves" become "Our Bodies Ourselves and Our Own Responsibility"? After 30+ years of women shouting to keep the government out of their uteruses, they seem more than willing right now to have the government pay for what goes in and comes out of those uteruses.

Wow breebrisk, this is a very black and white perspective to a complex solution. Women should stop getting pregnant and use birthcontrol that insurance should cease to cover (and employers should be allowed to shame women into not using.) Hmmm, wonder which groups of women will be most impacted by this? The ones who can afford to pay for BC out of pocket or to walk away from a job that pays the bills because they don't like the new rules? Not likely.

Let me share something personal with you. I come from an upper middle class family. I'm highly educated and grew up with plenty of knowledge about my body. More than most, I'd say. I utilized Planned Parenthood to obtain BC pills when I was in my teens and avoided pregnancy just fine because I had a place to go where no questions were asked and pills were $5/month. Then, in my early adult years I had to get off the pill due to some hormonal side effects that weren't working well for me (after trying several different types of pill and working with my doctor). Despite utilizing other methods of BC (non-pill), after getting married I became accidentally pregnant twice. I guess that makes me pretty dumb, eh? After all, it's not rocket science.

Who said anything about anyone being "dumb"?

As I said before, employers don't have the right to know your medical background. They also don't have the obligation to provide anything to you besides your wages and a decent working environment. They can legally deny health benefits entirely. What part of that does anyone disagree with??

While I don't think my stance on "getting pregnant" is quite as black and white as you say, I do take a very strong stance on personal responsibility, which means keeping both my employer AND the government out of my business. My body, my pregnancy, my business.

But you're ok with corporate for-profit health insurance companies and for-profit pharmaceutical companies and corrupt lobbyists directing your care and knowing your business? Because if you think that your care is currently between you and your doctor, you're sorely mistaken.

PS - when someone says "it's not rocket science" the implication is that the person is dumb. Like saying "duh." Am I wrong? Maybe I should restate and say, "I guess that makes me of average to below average intellect." Or "I guess that makes me NOT a rocket scientist."

Ummm, no. I am not okay with for-profit health insurance companies and pharma knowing about my care. I stated that earlier. I am arguing the hypocrisy that exists by those that rail against the corporations but fully embrace having the federal government become their health care proxy.

So if governmental oversight and regulation of for-profit corporate and pharmaceutical companies isn't the solution, what do you propose as a better option?

 

[beebrisk]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

I'm fascinated by how the terminology of independence is actually used AGAINST people now. Apparently, being independent and responsible and not-a-victim in this society means being willing to get completely shafted by the system?

Just to correct a basic misconception: employers don't provide health insurance out of the goodness of their hearts. It is part of your wage package. For an employer to dictate how your insurance is applied once you've paid your premiums is a form of their interfering in your life. Analogy: if you worked for a Jewish company and they had a clause that said you couldn't use any of your paycheck to buy shrimp, lobster, pork, or other trayf products, would that be a sign of your independence, or their interference in what should, by all rights, be your private business?

Correct. If an employer chooses to include health coverage as part of your wage package. They are under no obligation to do so.

And once again, I am NOT in favor of an employer being involved in health care decisions...even if they DO cover insurance! I don't think anyone here has argued FOR it, have they??

 

[Circe]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

Okay, then ... so it seems like we're on the same page, if approaching it from two different directions? Once an employer includes insurance as part of their reimbursement package, it's none of their business how it's applied? That the Arizona law is crazy-pants?

PHEW.

I've actually been idly pondering the fact that bipartisanship is getting worse because people on opposite sides of the divide are literally having trouble understanding one another because their shorthand terminology is so different. I've had recent threads where I've just walked away, because it felt like it would have been rude to say that I had NO idea what people were trying to say. Glad we crossed the divide on this one!

 

[beebrisk]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

To sum up: if you can't afford to have a baby (finance being one of the biggest reasons women are terminating pregnancies, according to recent studies), you'd still better have a couple of hundred/thousand lying around to cover an unnecessary medical procedure, a couple of days worth of lost wages, transportation, etc.

I hate to be blithe, but how long do we give it before women start resorting to back-alley solutions and suffering again?

Here's a solution. Can't afford a baby? Don't get pregnant. Preventing pregnancy is not rocket science. It's pretty basic, actually. Of course accidents happen but usually not if you are being responsible. Somehow I have managed my whole life not to get pregnant. That was my choice and I knew what to do (and, frankly, what not to do!). As we are all interested in the "health" of women, we should remember that having no pregnancy is obviously "safer" for us than the act of terminating one.

Yes, I know, there's the argument about the "life of the mother, etc...", but lets face it, the vast majority of pregnancies that are terminated are not done so because the mother's life is in danger.

When does "Our Bodies Ourselves" become "Our Bodies Ourselves and Our Own Responsibility"? After 30+ years of women shouting to keep the government out of their uteruses, they seem more than willing right now to have the government pay for what goes in and comes out of those uteruses.

Wow breebrisk, this is a very black and white perspective to a complex solution. Women should stop getting pregnant and use birthcontrol that insurance should cease to cover (and employers should be allowed to shame women into not using.) Hmmm, wonder which groups of women will be most impacted by this? The ones who can afford to pay for BC out of pocket or to walk away from a job that pays the bills because they don't like the new rules? Not likely.

Let me share something personal with you. I come from an upper middle class family. I'm highly educated and grew up with plenty of knowledge about my body. More than most, I'd say. I utilized Planned Parenthood to obtain BC pills when I was in my teens and avoided pregnancy just fine because I had a place to go where no questions were asked and pills were $5/month. Then, in my early adult years I had to get off the pill due to some hormonal side effects that weren't working well for me (after trying several different types of pill and working with my doctor). Despite utilizing other methods of BC (non-pill), after getting married I became accidentally pregnant twice. I guess that makes me pretty dumb, eh? After all, it's not rocket science.

Who said anything about anyone being "dumb"?

As I said before, employers don't have the right to know your medical background. They also don't have the obligation to provide anything to you besides your wages and a decent working environment. They can legally deny health benefits entirely. What part of that does anyone disagree with??

While I don't think my stance on "getting pregnant" is quite as black and white as you say, I do take a very strong stance on personal responsibility, which means keeping both my employer AND the government out of my business. My body, my pregnancy, my business.

But you're ok with corporate for-profit health insurance companies and for-profit pharmaceutical companies and corrupt lobbyists directing your care and knowing your business? Because if you think that your care is currently between you and your doctor, you're sorely mistaken.

PS - when someone says "it's not rocket science" the implication is that the person is dumb. Like saying "duh." Am I wrong? Maybe I should restate and say, "I guess that makes me of average to below average intellect." Or "I guess that makes me NOT a rocket scientist."

Ummm, no. I am not okay with for-profit health insurance companies and pharma knowing about my care. I stated that earlier. I am arguing the hypocrisy that exists by those that rail against the corporations but fully embrace having the federal government become their health care proxy.

So if governmental oversight and regulation of for-profit corporate and pharmaceutical companies isn't the solution, what do you propose as a better option?

I would have like to see the neck-breaking restrictions on insurance companies abolished in favor of a more free-market system that allows for real competition. In the opinion of many who are far more savvy about this stuff than I am, this would have brought consumer premiums down considerably, making it affordable for most. The more we depend on any entity, the greater the grip they have on our lives...that goes for the government as well as insurance companies. If insurance was a buyers market, you can bet there'd be less interference from them and thus a 'healthier' doctor/patient relationship.

Sadly, none of this was addressed by either political party and now we are stuck with the bureaucratic nightmare this 2000+ page bill hath wrought.

 

[MissStepcut]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

Beebrisk, you are brave to bring up a very good point, responsibility.
This is often framed as a health issue.
However many, likely most, pregnancies would not have occurred if the woman just ... used that aspirin and/or the man just kept his pants zipped up.
The vast majority pregnancies are the result of choice.

Abstinence is the only perfect BC, and I can see this without being a Senator or Rush Limbaugh or use the S-word or the P-word.

Abstinence is great but our world has changed, and The Pill is why.
It is natural for people to want a lot of sex but not want all babies that will result.
The pill gives them that.
They can have their cake and eat it too, and this genie is out of the bottle.

Now the problem is who should pay for it.
Is The Pill a medical need since we as a society accept sex as normal and natural, or is The Pill an expense for optional recreation?

Kenny, let's not imagine there was some golden age of abstinence. Before the pill, people had more kids, bigger families, shotgun weddings and unsafe abortions, alongside less reliable condoms and diaphragms.

I don't agree with the framing of your question: "Is The Pill a medical need since we as a society accept sex as normal and natural, or is The Pill an expense for optional recreation?"

To me the question is, is the financial benefit of cheap and accessible birth control to society as a whole greater than the cost? And this seems to be a very clear "yes," right up there with roads, bridges and clean drinking water.

 

[beebrisk]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

Okay, then ... so it seems like we're on the same page, if approaching it from two different directions? Once an employer includes insurance as part of their reimbursement package, it's none of their business how it's applied? That the Arizona law is crazy-pants?

PHEW.

I've actually been idly pondering the fact that bipartisanship is getting worse because people on opposite sides of the divide are literally having trouble understanding one another because their shorthand terminology is so different. I've had recent threads where I've just walked away, because it felt like it would have been rude to say that I had NO idea what people were trying to say. Glad we crossed the divide on this one!

YEP!

Of course we didn't discuss the church/state/access issue here but that's a WHOLE other ball o'wax I'm not willing to debate because frankly, who has the strength??

 

[Lotus99]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

When I lived in a third world country, you could buy BC pills over the counter for about a dollar a month. It's not actually a great idea considering the potential health problems from hormonal BC (high blood pressure, clots, etc.), but $1 sure is reasonable.

 

[beebrisk]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

Beebrisk, you are brave to bring up a very good point, responsibility.
This is often framed as a health issue.
However many, likely most, pregnancies would not have occurred if the woman just ... used that aspirin and/or the man just kept his pants zipped up.
The vast majority pregnancies are the result of choice.

Abstinence is the only perfect BC, and I can see this without being a Senator or Rush Limbaugh or use the S-word or the P-word.

Abstinence is great but our world has changed, and The Pill is why.
It is natural for people to want a lot of sex but not want all babies that will result.
The pill gives them that.
They can have their cake and eat it too, and this genie is out of the bottle.

Now the problem is, since it is only available as an Rx, who should pay for it.
Is The Pill a medical need since we as a society accept sex as normal and natural, or is The Pill an expense for optional recreation?

Here's who should pay for it: The person who asks for/needs the prescription, that's who...either out of pocket or via insurance benefit. If you can't afford it, there's easy access to free b/c just about everywhere. Heck, I can well afford it, even without insurance, yet I still have access to it at no cost since I can walk out of my doctor's office with 6 months of free 'samples'

Title X (conceived and passed by those misogynistic Republicans Nixon and George H.W, by the way....) provides for those who are not covered by insurance or cannot afford it. "Access" has never been an issue until the last few weeks and it still isn't. I'm just not interested in arguing that can o'worms here.

 

[sonnyjane]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

Here's who should pay for it: The person who asks for/needs the prescription, that's who...either out of pocket or via insurance benefit. If you can't afford it, there's easy access to free b/c just about everywhere. Heck, I can well afford it, even without insurance, yet I still have access to it at no cost since I can walk out of my doctor's office with 6 months of free 'samples'

I'm haven't chimed in until now, but I did just want to say that you are lucky in this regard. Fortunately I have insurance, so the copay for my birth control is $12 a month, which I can afford. Without insurance, my birth control is $60 a month, and frankly, I'm not having enough sex to make it worth that much lol! If I had to pay the full amount, I would just use condoms, which are not as effective. I also had one very generous doctor in college that once gave me a 2-month supply of birth control for free as a sample, but I've never been offered a free sample by a doctor before or since that time, and I've seen at least 10 gynos in my lifetime (frequent moving).

 

[movie zombie]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

[quote="MissStepcut|1331914887|3150042 I don't agree with the framing of your question: "Is The Pill a medical need since we as a society accept sex as normal and natural, or is The Pill an expense for optional recreation?"

To me the question is, is the financial benefit of cheap and accessible birth control to society as a whole greater than the cost? And this seems to be a very clear "yes," right up there with roads, bridges and clean drinking water.[/quote]


i agree with this.
the cost of birth control is a benefit to society.
to think that abstinence ever worked is a myth.
for it to work requires both men and women to deny a basic human urge.
the cost to society for unwanted children cannot be sustained.
don't want to pay for birth control? rather pay for more welfare, more food stamps, more HUD housing, etc.?
its not like men and women will stop having sex and babies will stop being born. they will be a huge drain on society.

 

[Amber St. Clare]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

personally, i don't think any employer has a right to delve into a woman's sexuality, her use of birth control or the reasons why.

when an individual or group decides to go into business, that individual and/or group needs to play by the same rules as other employers. otherwise, the patients and/or employees have been reduced to 2nd class citizens and/or receiving 2nd rate health care services.

this has nothing to do with separation of church and state.
this has nothing to do with someone paying for something don't approve of.
it has everything to do power and control as kenny stated.

for some of you too young to know: i came of age working when an employer REQUIRED that women wear dresses, hose, and heels to work. REQUIRED. eventually, there was an allowance for fridays on which a woman could wear a PANT SUIT and boots. but only on friday. women were not paid the same wage for the same work as men. women were not promoted because men were supporting families and the supposition was that women were working for the fun of it. it was difficult for a woman on her own to obtain a loan to buy a home. if divorced, she had to recreate credit in her own name and did not automatically have credit due to "credit was in his name so you don't have any credit". there was no Title IX to encourage women in sports. that world existed in the late 1960's and into the early 1970's when the womens' movement gained steam.

do not be fooled into thinking that your world cannot change and revert back to a day in which you are a 2nd class citizen. i never thought that in my life time i would see the advancement of opportunities for women, birth control available, roe v. wade guaranteeing that a woman and her dr would make health decisions together, etc. to this creepy and imo obsene perversion of so-called rights of employers. do you really want to have to ask your boss for permission to obtain medical treatment? do you want to pay the total cost of pregnancy? there are some that think that pregnancy is "natural" and therefore should not be covered under medical insurance. if you work for a jehovah witness, do you want that person denying you access to medical insurance that covers blood transfusions?!

sorry for the rant. but i've been there and i've done that re being in the trenches re womens' issues. its not going to affect me that much other than piss me off at this stage of life but for you that are just starting out, for you that are 34, and for those that are pushing 50, think very hard before you allow yourself to be cut off from those things that women have fought so hard to get.

ps and before i end this rant: i remember having a miscarriage and my boss calling me in to ask my intentions regarding getting pregnant again because he needed to know i was committed to the job........do you really want to return to that?!

And I remember having an interview for a job in MANHATTAN!!! of all places--in the early 70s and being asked what method of birth control I used, if I became pregnant would I work during my pregnancy and who would watch my potential child after it was born? We really did have to work twice ass hard for half as much money. I remember getting my Master Charge in my own name finally!!--I was so proud.

 

[kenny]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

One solution never fits all.

Abstinence works for the people it works for.
I encourage encouraging the choice of abstinence AND availability of the choice BC for partakers.
People vary, and so should solutions.

I guess I'm just an old fashioned homo.

 

[Imdanny]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

I'm fascinated by how the terminology of independence is actually used AGAINST people now. Apparently, being independent and responsible and not-a-victim in this society means being willing to get completely shafted by the system?

Just to correct a basic misconception: employers don't provide health insurance out of the goodness of their hearts. It is part of your wage package. For an employer to dictate how your insurance is applied once you've paid your premiums is a form of their interfering in your life. Analogy: if you worked for a Jewish company and they had a clause that said you couldn't use any of your paycheck to buy shrimp, lobster, pork, or other trayf products, would that be a sign of your independence, or their interference in what should, by all rights, be your private business?

Correct. If an employer chooses to include health coverage as part of your wage package. They are under no obligation to do so.

And once again, I am NOT in favor of an employer being involved in health care decisions...even if they DO cover insurance! I don't think anyone here has argued FOR it, have they??

Employers are required to provide it in my state if an employee works 20 hours a week.

 

[beebrisk]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

I'm fascinated by how the terminology of independence is actually used AGAINST people now. Apparently, being independent and responsible and not-a-victim in this society means being willing to get completely shafted by the system?

Just to correct a basic misconception: employers don't provide health insurance out of the goodness of their hearts. It is part of your wage package. For an employer to dictate how your insurance is applied once you've paid your premiums is a form of their interfering in your life. Analogy: if you worked for a Jewish company and they had a clause that said you couldn't use any of your paycheck to buy shrimp, lobster, pork, or other trayf products, would that be a sign of your independence, or their interference in what should, by all rights, be your private business?

Correct. If an employer chooses to include health coverage as part of your wage package. They are under no obligation to do so.

And once again, I am NOT in favor of an employer being involved in health care decisions...even if they DO cover insurance! I don't think anyone here has argued FOR it, have they??

Employers are required to provide it in my state if an employee works 20 hours a week.

Wow..is that all businesses or just those with over a certain number of employees?

 

[movie zombie]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

abstinence: how has that worked out for those that "ride your bus", kenny?
there are those that would tolerate homosexuality as long as young and old homos didn't partake in sexual congress as it used to be referenced.

abstinence is as you stated fine for that use it. not belittling it at all.
its just as unrealistic now as it ever was....whether married or unmarried there is a need for birth control and it is to society's benefit economically to make it cheap and easy to access.

Amber, watching Mad Men should be enlightening to younger men and women.........and not much changed between the 50's and 70's as you experienced.....amazing isn't it that there are those that think those were the glory years?!

 

[iLander]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

this has nothing to do with separation of church and state.
this has nothing to do with someone paying for something don't approve of.
it has everything to do power and control as kenny stated.

for some of you too young to know: i came of age working when an employer REQUIRED that women wear dresses, hose, and heels to work. REQUIRED. eventually, there was an allowance for fridays on which a woman could wear a PANT SUIT and boots. but only on friday. women were not paid the same wage for the same work as men. women were not promoted because men were supporting families and the supposition was that women were working for the fun of it. it was difficult for a woman on her own to obtain a loan to buy a home. if divorced, she had to recreate credit in her own name and did not automatically have credit due to "credit was in his name so you don't have any credit". there was no Title IX to encourage women in sports. that world existed in the late 1960's and into the early 1970's when the womens' movement gained steam.

do not be fooled into thinking that your world cannot change and revert back to a day in which you are a 2nd class citizen. i never thought that in my life time i would see the advancement of opportunities for women, birth control available, roe v. wade guaranteeing that a woman and her dr would make health decisions together, etc. to this creepy and imo obsene perversion of so-called rights of employers. do you really want to have to ask your boss for permission to obtain medical treatment? do you want to pay the total cost of pregnancy? there are some that think that pregnancy is "natural" and therefore should not be covered under medical insurance. if you work for a jehovah witness, do you want that person denying you access to medical insurance that covers blood transfusions?!

sorry for the rant. but i've been there and i've done that re being in the trenches re womens' issues. its not going to affect me that much other than piss me off at this stage of life but for you that are just starting out, for you that are 34, and for those that are pushing 50, think very hard before you allow yourself to be cut off from those things that women have fought so hard to get.

And I remember having an interview for a job in MANHATTAN!!! of all places--in the early 70s and being asked what method of birth control I used, if I became pregnant would I work during my pregnancy and who would watch my potential child after it was born? We really did have to work twice a$$ hard for half as much money. I remember getting my Master Charge in my own name finally!!--I was so proud.

Yes to all this.

But you have to remember the ERA was never ratified. It's expired.

"In 1972, it passed both houses of Congress and went to the state legislatures for ratification. The ERA failed to receive the requisite number of ratifications before the final deadline mandated by Congress of June 30, 1982 expired and so it was not adopted."

And we still don't make equal pay. We makes 77 cents on the dollar.

 

[amc80]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

whether married or unmarried there is a need for birth control and it is to society's benefit economically to make it cheap and easy to access.

Not necessarily. I haven't been on birth control for a long time. My husband and I use a combination of natural family planning methods. I didn't get pregnant until the month we were trying. Not saying this will work for everyone, because it takes time and discipline. But those are small prices to pay to avoid being on hormonal bc. I have several friends who do this as well. Not for religious reasons, just a dislike of synthetic hormones. None of us have ever had an accident.

 

[kenny]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

abstinence: how has that worked out for those that "ride your bus", kenny?
there are those that would tolerate homosexuality as long as young and old homos didn't partake in sexual congress as it used to be referenced.

abstinence is as you stated fine for that use it. not belittling it at all.
its just as unrealistic now as it ever was....whether married or unmarried there is a need for birth control and it is to society's benefit economically to make it cheap and easy to access.

Amber, watching Mad Men should be enlightening to younger men and women.........and not much changed between the 50's and 70's as you experienced.....amazing isn't it that there are those that think those were the glory years?!

What's sexual congress, and what are you asking with this comment? ... "there are those that would tolerate homosexuality as long as young and old homos didn't partake in sexual congress as it used to be referenced."

If you are asking about homosexuals who abstain from sex, I have no clue.
I'm not a researcher or authority on all things gay.
I'm just gay.

I guess some gay DO abstain for whatever reasons, STD prevention is a reasonable one.
Gays vary.
I don't abstain; I'm in a monogamous long-term relationship.
Of course there is no need for BC with gay sex so I'm not sure how gay's sexual behavior relates to this thread.

Abstinence is not unrealistic for those who abstain.
Again people vary.
If abstinence works for some it works for them.
For the rest . . . BC.
I promote both, abstinence AND BC.
When you accept that people vary supporting abstinence as a first choice does not mean I'm anti-BC.

 

[MissStepcut]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

whether married or unmarried there is a need for birth control and it is to society's benefit economically to make it cheap and easy to access.

Not necessarily. I haven't been on birth control for a long time. My husband and I use a combination of natural family planning methods. I didn't get pregnant until the month we were trying. Not saying this will work for everyone, because it takes time and discipline. But those are small prices to pay to avoid being on hormonal bc. I have several friends who do this as well. Not for religious reasons, just a dislike of synthetic hormones. None of us have ever had an accident.

Well we had an accident.

Just because one method works for some people some of the time doesn't make for sensible public policy. People who are young, new to sex, uneducated about birth control (yay abstinence only education!), etc are the most likely to have birth control failures. In other words, those who I least want to see be parents.

 

[beebrisk]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

One solution never fits all.

Abstinence works for the people it works for.
I encourage encouraging the choice of abstinence AND availability of the choice BC for partakers.
People vary, and so should solutions.

I guess I'm just an old fashioned homo.

Yep. I'm all for "encouraging" abstinence while knowing full well it's not a reality for most. Sadly, it should be more of reality for kids but that's not what's happening.

I am against employers knowing my personal business.

I am against my tax dollars being used to fund birth control for those that CAN afford it (Ms. Fluke, included) and against my tax dollars being used to fund abortion under any circumstances.

I am against insurance companies not being able to compete across state lines for my business, thus having no other option but to offer a product for sale that no one can afford any longer; leaving ONLY government interference as an option.

And, I am against the government knowing my personal business and being involved in my health care, but aside from hoping for a full repeal, I have no control over that.

I guess I'm just an old fashioned hetero

Thank you Kenny for your civility and humor....

 

[kenny]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

Thank you Kenny for your civility and humor....

That reminds me of a quote.


'They laughed when I said I wanted to be a comedian. They’re not laughing now.' ~ Bob Monkhouse

 

[packrat]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

Nothing constructive to add..just wanted to point out that I've been on PS too long. When I first came here it took me forever to see STD as anything other than sexually transmitted disease. Now reading Kenny's post above I couldn't figure out what in the world "save the date prevention" was..

Here employers don't have to offer insurance if they have less than however many employees..25 or something, not sure exactly. We don't have it at our office anymore. And w/my husbands insurance, my nuva ring is $30 a month-so when I can I grab samples from the office.

I was another member of the two forms of birth control club back in the day-and even after we got married, we still used two forms until we were ready to try for a baby. That's just me tho..99.99% effective isn't 100% so..I need something to cover that .01%. And if the guy couldn't cover his .01%, he could put it back in his pants cuz it wasn't touching my 99.99%.

 

[beebrisk]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

whether married or unmarried there is a need for birth control and it is to society's benefit economically to make it cheap and easy to access.

Not necessarily. I haven't been on birth control for a long time. My husband and I use a combination of natural family planning methods. I didn't get pregnant until the month we were trying. Not saying this will work for everyone, because it takes time and discipline. But those are small prices to pay to avoid being on hormonal bc. I have several friends who do this as well. Not for religious reasons, just a dislike of synthetic hormones. None of us have ever had an accident.

Well we had an accident.

Just because one method works for some people some of the time doesn't make for sensible public policy. People who are young, new to sex, uneducated about birth control (yay abstinence only education!), etc are the most likely to have birth control failures. In other words, those who I least want to see be parents.

People who are "new to sex"? What exactly does that mean? You first have to have sex to understand that doing so can cause you to become pregnant? Or maybe you have to be really experienced and really good at it ( ) to figure out that sperm can fertilize an egg? Apparently those people don't just need birth control, they need brains!

Either way, I don't wanna pay for it.

 

[amc80]

Re: Use birth control pills to prevent pregnancy? You're fir

whether married or unmarried there is a need for birth control and it is to society's benefit economically to make it cheap and easy to access.

Not necessarily. I haven't been on birth control for a long time. My husband and I use a combination of natural family planning methods. I didn't get pregnant until the month we were trying. Not saying this will work for everyone, because it takes time and discipline. But those are small prices to pay to avoid being on hormonal bc. I have several friends who do this as well. Not for religious reasons, just a dislike of synthetic hormones. None of us have ever had an accident.

Well we had an accident.

Just because one method works for some people some of the time doesn't make for sensible public policy. People who are young, new to sex, uneducated about birth control (yay abstinence only education!), etc are the most likely to have birth control failures. In other words, those who I least want to see be parents.

That's not the population I was talking about. I was specifically commenting on the "married" part of the quote. People who know they are going to be in a monogamous relationship. If I couldn't afford bc, I wouldn't expect others to pay for it. I would take the time to get educated and do what I need to do to be protected. It's all about personal responsibility, something our society is seriously lacking these days.