The title of this post is actually the headline from a Sunday New York Times article on November 20th. I find it incredible that as Rome burns our politicians, in this case apparently Democratic politicians, find their cause celeb is the “free” coverage by insurance of birth control pills. I am trying to restrain myself at the stupidity of all this.
Why in the world do birth control pills have to be “free?” One exception may be within Medicaid where it makes sense to make this investment for people who likely truly need the help, but for the general population, give me a break.
According to the one quote below millions of working women need coverage. Get it “working women” need someone else to pay for their pills. Apparently it is alright for them to pay 20% of the cost for open heart surgery, or treatment for breast cancer, but not 20% of the cost of a $35 prescription. Many health plans have for years provided coverage for contraceptives with either modest co-pays or coinsurance, but that is now insufficient, it has to be free.
And you thought there was hope for us managing health care costs; not while this mentality persists there isn’t.
Quotes from the NYT article:
When the administration announced the requirement for contraceptive coverage, it said the decision was “based on science.”
House members have sent a letter to Mr. Obama urging him not to widen the exemption. Such a change, they said, would keep contraception out of reach for millions of women.
Representative Diana DeGette, Democrat of Colorado, said the broad exemption was “an outrageous idea.”
“Millions of women work for colleges, hospitals and health care systems that are nominally religious, but these folks use birth control and need coverage,” said Ms. DeGette, a leader of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus.
Based on science? . . . exactly what science tells us that people can’t afford to pay the cost or some part of the cost of a low-cost, voluntarily prescription drug? Why is something that costs $15 to $50 a month out of the reach of millions of women when millions of (working} women already have such coverage with nominal co-pays or coinsurance?
Exactly what can a working women afford to spend $15 to $50 per month on; perhaps a few lattes, a trip or two to get their nails done, makeup, an extra pair of shoes, their hair? No I am not being condescending or simply a smart ass, I am trying to point out that $1 spent on some important health care item is the same $1 spent on something not so important but that is not paid for by someone else. We would think it ludicrous to say a manicure is covered by insurance, yet we don’t expect a person to make the choice between the manicure and a birth control prescription because “insurance should pay for the later.” The prescription should be “free!” As I have already said, we are not talking about the poor who cannot afford either.
When I Googled(r) to find the current cost of oral contraceptives I often found something like this:
The initial physical exam in your healthcare provider’s office could range from $20 to $200. The monthly fee for each supply of pills ranges from $5 to $30 or more, depending on your medical coverage
Or
Costs for generic birth control prescriptions change from pharmacy to pharmacy and also depend on your insurance plan, if it covers birth control. Often, insurance co-pays will be less for generics than for brand names. For example, you might pay $10 instead of $20 or $30. Some insurance plans will only pay for generics.
Get it, they don’t understand what the cost of something is, it depends on your insurance. Here is a clue; the co-payment you pay is not the cost.
According to the Planned Parenthood website oral contraceptives cost between $15 and $50 per month.
Drugstore.com “One popular birth control pill costs $48.07 per month for the brand name, or $27.99 for the generic.”
What hope does America have for controlling health care costs? Very little as long as we think we can cover it all and that the real cost of health care is only the portion we are expected to pay, which apparently is shrinking by the day.
Related articles
- Democrats Urge Obama to Defend Birth Control Rules (nytimes.com)
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 