Michigan Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Great Lake State.
Welcome to Michigan Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post 09-12-2009 10:12 AM by gypsy. 5 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (6 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 01-01-2001 12:00 AM

    • admin
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-22-2008

    2009 House Bill 5156 (Mandate contraceptive insurance coverage )

    Introduced in the House on June 25, 2009

    Click here to view bill details.
  • 09-10-2009 4:59 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 House Bill 5156 (Mandate contraceptive insurance coverage )

     This is one of the reasons health insurance is so expensive.

     

  • 09-11-2009 9:35 AM In reply to

    • gypsy
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 03-19-2009

    Re: 2009 House Bill 5156 (Mandate contraceptive insurance coverage )

    This would help reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. Birth control pills are a lot cheaper than pre-natal, birthing, and post-natal care. They are also cheaper than abortions.

  • 09-11-2009 12:35 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 House Bill 5156 (Mandate contraceptive insurance coverage )

     All true, but when you force insurance companies to include more and more coverages, from birth control to toe nail clipping, the coverage costs go up and those of us who pay for health insurance pay more.  One would think that a woman who is mature enough to have sex, knowing that that is how babies are made, would be responsible enough to pay for birth control or not have sex.  Sterilization would also be cheaper than pregnancy, perhaps we should just make it a law that if you want the insurance company to pay for birth control you need to get your tubes tied.

     

  • 09-11-2009 3:16 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 House Bill 5156 (Mandate contraceptive insurance coverage )

    gypsy:

    This would help reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. Birth control pills are a lot cheaper than pre-natal, birthing, and post-natal care. They are also cheaper than abortions.

    Again, I agree with gypsy.  Overall health care costs are likely to go down in the future if we take a proactive approach toward prevention today.  A forever standing reactive approach emphasizing and hoping to provide cure, care or comfort has proven costly, indeed.  

     

     

     

     

  • 09-12-2009 10:12 AM In reply to

    • gypsy
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 03-19-2009

    Re: 2009 House Bill 5156 (Mandate contraceptive insurance coverage )

    changeagent:
    One would think that a woman who is mature enough to have sex, knowing that that is how babies are made, would be responsible enough to pay for birth control or not have sex. 

    A female may be able to bear children as early as 10 years old, hardly mature enough to decide on the use of birth control. A male is also required for procreation. I'm sure you just forgot to mention his responsibility for birth control.

    changeagent:
    Sterilization would also be cheaper than pregnancy, perhaps we should just make it a law that if you want the insurance company to pay for birth control you need to get your tubes tied.

    I assume that is an attempt at humor.

     

Page 1 of 1 (6 items)
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems