Comments on: Senator Kyl: “I don’t need maternity care,” so why should insurers have to cover it?

By: Terry Velazques

Terry Velazques — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 20:04:34 +0000

I have been browsing online greater than three hours nowadays, but I never discovered any fascinating article like yours. It is pretty worth enough for me. Personally, if all site owners and bloggers made good content material as you did, the web will likely be much more helpful than ever before.

By: Laura

Laura — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 22:28:22 +0000

@misanthropope, WTF are you talking about?

By: misanthropope

misanthropope — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 01:40:20 +0000

well obviously if you choose the uterine lifestyle instead of being healthy normal people, you should be prepared for the consequences.

the religious convictions that have made our country great are abundantly clear about your degenerate and inferior nature.

By: Globals

Globals — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 06:24:34 +0000

all good things

By: Sarah

Sarah — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:22:54 +0000

I take issue with Chris’s comments about a woman’s right to choose and translating that to the thought that those who cannot have children should not have to “pay” for maternity coverage.

Let me start by addressing the right to choose thing: so, in your mind, a woman chooses to be of childbearing age?? How does one go about choosing that? And how else would you categorize the different groups that do and do not need maternity coverage? Or should we just cut off coverage to everyone and let expectant mothers struggle to pay for expensive healthcare, while erectile dysfunction is paid for!!!

Next, let’s address the idea that those who cannot bear children shouldn’t have to “pay” for maternity insurance. What, exactly, does that mean? We all pay into the same pool for coverage. Does that mean I think that prostate cancer shouldn’t be covered beacause I can’t get it? Does that mean well-child exams or infant vaccines shouldn’t be covered, because I am no longer an infant and don’t want my premiums to go up because of them?

Folks need to get their heads on straight here and realize that if insurance companies aren’t forced to cover these vital medical procedures/conditions, more than likely local, state, and Federal governments will have to foot the bill in the form of uninsured ER visits … which means the taxpayer — you and I — end up having to pay!

Face reality folks, better to take it out of the excessive salaries of insurance company execs than the pockets of lower to middle class American taxpayers!

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:07:09 +0000

I would warn us women that a women’s right to choose works both ways. If we have the right to terminate a pregnancy or the right to choose to remain pregnant, that is a choice that I think we need to own up to it and agree that as mothers, the gift of being a mother is something that has many blessings, as a cost. Because pregnancy is an option, I think we should be accountable and willing to pay higher premium rates during our child-bearing years, especially if we intend to choose to have children. And it seems reasonable that those of us who no longer can have children should be exempt from this higher rate. As a health condition, pregnancy is not the same as cancer, diabetes, etc, and those diseases should be actuarialized across the population. I am concerned with the opinion that the general public should have to fund our choices. Ultimately, if we loose our sense of character when we demand that we should not be responsible for our personal choices but expect our government to increase rates on children, men, and seniors just so that we can do whatever we want. There is no free lunch.

By: Rachel Russell

Rachel Russell — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 03:35:07 +0000

He is a selfish-ignorant jerk. Sure, personally, I will never need a regualr prostate exam, but heck, my Dad, husband, etc. do, and who the crap am I to be so selfish to say, well, I don’t need it, so such basic exams for men should not be covered?!

By: Clarissa

Clarissa — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 14:35:35 +0000

I’m going to a town hall forum in Gainesville, FL today to discuss health care reform with R, Cliff Stearns. I had already planned on primarily asking about maternity care. I’ve been making notes and citing stats and sources for the past 3 days. One stat, women are 51.8% of the country but only make up 17% in congress, how do we know congress is adequately representing the voice of women. Senator Kyl, gave me just the proof I needed that some men in congress have no care or concern for half of the population.

By: Kathy R

Kathy R — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 03:47:56 +0000

Thank goodness for Senator Debbie Stabenow! It may be my pregnancy hormones but news of this is causing me to blow my lid!! Does this man not have grandchildren? Is he not pro-life, like 99% of all Republicans? How can someone with a pro-life stance even think something so stupid? I certainly hope in another twenty years we will no longer be seeing this kind of generation gap ignorance. I do hope his constituents are outraged. Any idea when he’s up for relection and who his opponent could be?

By: slee

slee — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:34:08 +0000

Some people are too arrogantly stupid for words. I hope that his constituents realize they don’t need him and elect someone with both a brain and a soul.