Federal Health Department Approves Free Birth Control

[bonnie]

Federal Health Department Approves Free Birth Control

WASHINGTON – Health insurance plans must cover birth control as preventive care for women, with no copays, the Obama administration said Monday in a decision with far-reaching implications for health care as well as social mores.

The requirement applies to all forms of birth control approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

The requirement is part of a broad expansion of coverage for women's preventive care under President Barack Obama's health care law. Also to be covered without copays are breast pumps for nursing mothers, an annual "well-woman" physical, screening for the virus that causes cervical cancer and for diabetes during pregnancy, counseling on domestic violence, and other services.

"These historic guidelines are based on science and existing (medical) literature and will help ensure women get the preventive health benefits they need," said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

The new requirements will take effect Jan. 1, 2013, in most cases. Tens of millions of women are expected to gain coverage initially, and that number is likely to grow with time. At first, some plans may be exempt due to a complex provision of the health care law known as the "grandfather" clause. But those even plans could face pressure from their members to include the new benefit.

Sebelius acted after a near-unanimous recommendation last month from a panel of experts convened by the prestigious Institute of Medicine, which advises the government. Panel chairwoman Linda Rosenstock, dean of public health at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that prevention of unintended pregnancies is essential for the psychological, emotional and physical health of women.

As recently as the 1990s, many health insurance plans didn't even cover birth control. Protests, court cases, and new state laws led to dramatic changes. Today, almost all plans cover prescription contraceptives — with varying copays. Medicaid, the health care program for low-income people, also covers contraceptives.

Indeed, a government study last summer found that birth control use is virtually universal in the United States, according to a government study issued last summer. More than 90 million prescriptions for contraceptives were dispensed in 2009, according the market analysis firm INS health. Generic versions of the pill are available for as little as $9 a month. Still, about half of all pregnancies are unplanned. Many are among women using some form of contraception, and forgetting to take the pill is a major reason.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies is only one goal of the new requirement. Contraception can help make a woman's next pregnancy healthier by spacing births far enough apart, generally 18 months to two years. Research links closely spaced births to a risk of such problems as prematurity, low birth weight, even autism. Research has shown that even modest copays for medical care can discourage use.

In a nod to social and religious conservatives, the rules issued Monday by Sebelius include a provision that would allow religious institutions to opt out of offering birth control coverage. However, many conservatives are supporting legislation by Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., that would codify a range of exceptions to the new health care law on religious and conscience grounds.

"It's a step in the right direction, but it's not enough," said Jeanne Monahan, a policy expert for the conservative Family Research Council. As it now stands, the conscience clause offers only a "fig leaf" of protection, she added, because it may not cover faith-based groups engaged in social action and other activities that do not involve worship.

Although the new women's preventive services will be free of any additional charge to patients, somebody will have to pay. The cost will be spread among other people with health insurance, resulting in slightly higher premiums. That may be offset to some degree with savings from diseases prevented, or pregnancies that are planned to minimize any potential ill effects to the mother and baby.

The administration did allow insurers some leeway in determining what they will cover. For example, health plans will be able to charge copays for branded drugs in cases where a generic version is just as effective and safe for the patient.

The requirement applies to all forms of birth control approved by the Food and Drug Administration. That includes the pill, intrauterine devices, the so-called morning-after pill, and newer forms of long-acting implantable hormonal contraceptives that are becoming widely used in the rest of the industrialized world.

Coverage with no copays for the morning-after pill is likely to become the most controversial part of the change. The FDA classifies Plan B and Ella as birth control, but some religious conservatives see the morning-after drugs as abortion drugs. The rules HHS issued Monday do not require coverage of RU-486 and other drugs to chemically induce an abortion.

Advocates say the majority of women will be covered once the requirement takes effect in 2013, although some insurance plans may opt to offer the benefit earlier. Aside from the conscience clause, the only other major exemption is for so-called "grandfathered" plans, many of which are offered by large employers. With the passage of time, however, many currently grandfathered plans are likely to lose that designation as they make routine changes affecting their benefits. Consumers should check with their health insurance plan administrator.

[Dr. Shane]

A move in the right direction.

[bonnie]

A move in the right direction.

Yup,right of the cliff.There is never a free lunch and this one is very costly.

Our neighbor has/had a cadillac insurance plan. He has three very sports minded sons so felt he needed it. He paid 800.00 per month and had a reasonable copay.

He has now opted out of any insurance.He is perfectly willing to pay the fine or have his employer pay it if that is what is required.

When he found himself taking a part time job with Wal-Mart to pay the hike in his insurance premium he decided he would opt out. With the insurance now having to insure up to 26 year olds

on the parents policy and several mandated "free" Dr visits his premium went to 1500.00 a month his share.Plus a hike in co-pays that still valid

I have not talked to him recently but he was banking his former insurance premium. He is a pretty disciplined man and I expect him to carry thru with that.

Obama thinks he can wave his magic wand and all businesses will

fall in right behind him.

Only a liberal defines fair as making those not having children

or long past the ability to help pay the price.

Many do want the government teat to nurse them thru life

[Dr. Shane]

I don't favor individual mandates but certainly we should have a universal insurance coverage. I think the government should come up with three health insurance packages that can be sold. That would clear up a lot of the confusion out there and make things a lot easier.

Birth control certainly should be free. The cost should be spread across society as a whole. We all benefit from birth control and those that most need it tend to be those that can least afford it. More people using birth control will mean less babies on welfare. Mexico gives away birth control for free to its citizens.

[bonnie]

I don't favor individual mandates but certainly we should have a universal insurance coverage. I think the government should come up with three health insurance packages that can be sold. That would clear up a lot of the confusion out there and make things a lot easier.

[Dr. Shane]

The federal government has no right to determine "free services" by private for profit companies.

[bonnie]

Wrong. Government has a right to protect consumers. Let's give Obama credit where he deserves it. This is a good thing.

[Dr. Shane]

The government has no right to state what will be in that contract and what it is going to give "free"

[bonnie]

Wrong. The government requires cars to have air bags and to get specified GPM. It has a right to protect consumers. Let's give Obama a big thumbs up here. He is doing so much wrong. He deserves some credit where credit is due.

[bonnie]

You seem to have this idea that there are those that need to pay for the consequences others incur for their own actions.

Keep them on welfare,require nothing,force insurance companies into policies that make the rest of us pay for what we don't need.

Let's hurry and get those rich so we can keep on handing out.

You have often said that to those that have much,much is required,and that is true.You know that is not speaking of more and more taxes and regulations but our own personal giving

But like so many you don't seem to recognize God had some very uncomplimentary statements to make concerning those who did not work.It is pretty tough to beat the even handness of God. He knew that the same percent of varying amounts required more from those that had more.Nothing in the bible indicates those with less were exempt and others should pay their percentage.

He requires something from each of us. That is not for some to be demanding the labor of another without effort or work on their part. .Those with more should be like the Good Samaritan and give willingly,not pour "contributions" down a bottomless hole.

The parable of the Talents really spells it out quite plain.

The rich,middle class,and the poor.

The rich and the middle class were industrious and did something with their talents.They received high praise,"Well done thou good and faithful servant. The poor or the one that was given only one was called lazy and wicked by the "Master"and he was to give his measly one talent to the rich.

There are many other statements in the bible dealing with the lazy.

If you do not do as much for yourself and family as you can,lazy pretty well sums it up

The man/woman that does not work shall not eat.

Most people that depend on others for their survival can do better.

[Dr. Shane]

You seem to have this idea that there are those that need to pay for the consequences others incur for their own actions.

[bonnie]

Am I my brother's keeper.

No man is an island that his or her actions do not produce ripple effects that impact those around them. Unwed pregnancy is a societal problem. It is not just the problem of that poor, white, trailer trash or the black girl down in the ghetto or the latino woman in the barrio.

[Dr. Shane]

The poor,those on welfare the rich do not need a dictator in Washington to force insurance companies to pay all for their birth control.

[bonnie]

companies to pay all for their birth control.

[bonnie]

A daughter and SIL of close friends of ours needs your assurances as well. They have both worked for the same company

since right out of highschool.They are in their mid-forties.

Their employer has also laid out their options.

Continued layoffs or a cut in pay.They took the pay cut.Between them it means478.00 a week less.Increase in insurance premium amounts to 500.00 additional every month.This is before Obama's forced giveaway.I am sure they are waiting with bated breath to be able to "contribute" more following the latest theft

[Dr. Shane]

Soon, because of Obamacare, your daughter and SIL's employer will have to provide them health insurance. It's going to pay or play.

It's about time!

That Obamacare isn't all bad. Let's thank God for some of those blessings.

[bonnie]

Soon, because of Obamacare, your daughter and SIL's employer will have to provide them health insurance. It's going to pay or play.

It's about time!

That Obamacare isn't all bad. Let's thank God for some of those blessings.

It is not my daughter and SIL. The employer is already providing insurance. No,if he cannot afford it or write the high cost into his expenses,guess what? The employee will pay a much larger portion,harming the ones Obama professes to have such concern over or the employer will layoff and cut way back. Or as my neighbors employer,he has already told them,if he doesn't feel it workable he will shut it down.

For those that do dance to Obama's tune,they will make sure it filters down and pass on their cost.Of course then hitting the sacred poor.

The cost to the employer as it stands will be enormous. Some operate on a pretty slim margin and can't swallow it or pass it on.So then Obama can take care of them.

[bonnie]

After talking with my neighbor he says anyone that thinks this helps has limited understanding of math.

He very well may lose his job over Obama's meddling.His insurance before the Obama fix was something he could afford. His co-pays were 15.00 and he had good coverage.

Now with the previous forced "freebies" the insurance company has been forced to give,without knowing what this most recent idiocy he can't afford to have insurance.

With the economy in the tank and the added burden of thousands of dollars per month for insurance,then a coming increase in tax he would like Obama to quit saving him money. He has worked the same job for 18 years. Did just fine before this "great one" decided he knew best and he hasn't a clue.

Most of us will pay dearly for the presidency of this man. Some are so enanmored of government control instead of personal responsibility,they don't care.

[Dr. Shane]

if he cannot afford it or write the high cost into his expenses,guess what? The employee will pay a much larger portion

[Paula]

Here's what I don't understand. Bonnie, you seem to be of the philosophy that we need less people on welfare. With the insurance companies offering "free" birth control, you'll have A LOT LESS unwanted pregnancies. That will mean less abortion AND less people on welfare due to having too many kids. It will also mean less free lunches at school, and probably less mexicans(you know... all those hispanics who have so many children). I'd think you'd be jumping for joy over this! And its not really "free", since the monthly premium one pays more than covers the cost of birth control pills. I pay nearly 800 a month for my family of 6, and half the time I don't even use insurance. They make quite a profit off of people like me. And yet EVERY year my premium, AND my co-pays go up! So I for one am happy to see them use some of my hard earned money on birth control.

[bonnie]

Not to worry. Obamacare actually stipulates the amount the employer must cover.

[Dr. Shane]

Even as great as Obama thinks he is he cannot control premiums at this point.

[bonnie]

Obama can control the percentage of the premium paid by the employer.

[phkrause]

Business' were not doing well. Insurance costs have been going up every year. Higher and higher for at least 30-40 years. When I got laid off back in '08, the company I worked for had laid off about 3/4's of the employees that originally had been there. We had 3 shifts only about 1 to 2 years prior to my be laid off. The main reason was the cost of Health Insurance. From what I understand if Obama had not got the changes that he had got HC costs would've been even higher than it is now. I'm not saying that the HC system is perfect or better, but in many ways it is better than it would've been had not someone done something. Instead of all of us fighting each other about what is or was better, we should be looking at how we got to this point in our country. And don't say because of Obama. Because its been going down hill for many years. And see how we can make it better. If we look at other countries we see none of them seem to be any better off. Or are they, and if they are lets look at what works for them.

[bonnie]

Business' were not doing well. Insurance costs have been going up every year. Higher and higher for at least 30-40 years.