Not part of the plan: 21 states ban private abortion coverage
What they’re trying to do make abortion more difficult to access and unaffordable for women, and this is one of the ways they can do that….
It’s part and parcel of the larger effort to make abortion harder for women to get….
Abortion should just be part of the comprehensive plan that women get because they don’t necessarily look for that or think, ‘Oh, I might need an abortion’….
They’re not going to ever predict a situation in which they’re going to have an unplanned pregnancy or a problem pregnancy or a sexual assault leading to pregnancy.
It’s not something that you plan for.
~ Gretchen Borchelt, director of state reproductive health policy at the National Women’s Law Center, responding to reports that 21 states have now banned private health insurers from providing abortion coverage, as quoted by Jeffrey Young in the Huffington Post, September 3
Also noted in the article:
Thirty-three percent of women who had abortions in 2008 were uninsured, 30 percent had private health insurance and 31 percent were enrolled in Medicaid, according to a 2010 Guttmacher Institute report. Nevertheless, 57 percent of these women paid for their abortions out of pocket, including 63 percent of those with private insurance. Women with insurance coverage pay for abortions for several reasons, including having plans that won’t cover it, not knowing what their insurance benefits are, or wanting to keep an abortion secret from family members….
(Click image to enlarge.)
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“reports that 21 states have now banned private health insurers from providing abortion coverage”
Excellent! Now to do something about the remaining 29 states + DC.
How empowering. Women are too stupid to realize that they can’t live without abortion, so it needs to be part of their comprehensive plan.
And what about pro-life women who don’t want to subsidize abortions with their health insurance premiums?
Prolife women? Prolife women should not have their own heath insurance but be covered under their husband’s insurance plan. Take off your shoes and get back in the kitchen where you belong, Kelsey!
Michigan is working on it with our petition drive currently, and in this state it’s only 4% of women who pay for abortions with their health insurance.
So what happens in these states once Obamacare goes into full effect?
… I live in the best state in the nation to get your girlfriend pregnant if you don’t like responsibility, so not much changes for me. We fight like we have been, stand outside of clinics, pray, and work towards change. But I’m curious what happens in, say, North Dakota or Idaho when Obamacare takes full effect?
“So what happens in these states once Obamacare goes into full effect?”
It depends on whether or not the state has opted out of abortion coverage in the Obamacare exchanges. In some states, these plans willl cover abortion, in some they won’t. It all depends on the actions of the state legislature and governor.
Soooo….then these clinics need to take a page out of the crisis pregnancy center handbook and start offering all of their services for FREE. I don’t know why they aren’t already when they get hundreds of millions of tax dollars! If you really care about poor women then do abortions for free. Otherwise, shut up. CPCs are staffed by volunteers who don’t get paid so I guess you pro-abortion folks will have to do the same. Cause I’m not paying for your abortions. Period.
JDC,
Gotcha. Thanks!
As of today, Illinois medicaid (allkids) does not cover neither the abortion pill nor abortions. The following states have medicaid programs that provide for the pill and pay for an abortion: AL, CA, CT, HA, MD, MA, MN, MO, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA, WV.
I think that there is a definite correlation between medicaid coverage for and no ban on private insurance coverage for abortions. The map shows states that do not have bans but if you look at my list, these states do not provide for abortion-related “services” in their medicaid programs. Very telling on how these states are leaning and how these states would respond to O-Care insurance exchanges.
“If you really care about poor women then do abortions for free. Otherwise, shut up.”
(Just worth repeating.)
Well of course its not covered. Abortion is an elective procedure.
They don’t complain about boob jobs not being covered. Why? because its an elective procedure. Something a person chooses to have done.
Abortion is not an illness that needs treatment. Therefore, it is not healthcare that insurance companies should cover.
“Abortion is not an illness that needs treatment.”
Is pregnancy an illness? If not, then why cover prenatal services?
Oh the irony here. These same women who want insurance companies forced to cover abortion don’t even realize that if they get their wish, the cost of abortion will surely rise dramatically. Most people don’t realize just how affordable healthcare was and still can be for people who choose to negotiate the cost of their care in cash. But that’s really neither here nor there. With the amount of taxpayer funding groups like PP get, how in the world are they getting away with charging anything for their so-called care. Seems to me they’re double dipping from both the public and the women they supposedly care so much for. I agree with Sydney M here – if these individuals and groups feel so strongly about the need, they should be providing abortions for free, just as the crisis pregnancy centers offer their array of services without charge. Just to add, I don’t think abortions should be free or subsidized by any tax paper or insurance participant (or even legal for that matter) – I just wanted to point out the obvious that if groups like PP really cared about the poor they could do much more with the millions of tax dollars they do receive.
Pregnancy gives life whereas abortion deletes life. Society gains through pregnancy but is diminished through abortion. No coverage for abortion equals valuing life whereas covering abortion means subscribing to the culture of death. Hope this helps BlueVelvet. Please choose wisely.
@Thomas – it’s been our experience in Illinois PP will use medicaid to cover abortions — what has happened today that forbids this? is this only for the children’s portion of care? PP has even used it sometimes as a selling point to try to have women who are undecided about abortion to come in because they figure out how to have the woman not pay for their abortion. Please clarify! Thank you!
Maybe it’s time to create a Not So United States of America.
Some states could outlaw abortion, gays and science. They could eliminate all taxation and adopt a pay as you go system. You know, for roads, schools, hospitals and police. Close down any welfare systems.
I’m sure there would be plenty of wealthy folk and church leaders who would happily assume political office without being paid for it. So no cost there.
They could wind back some of the things those dreaded progressives have brought about. Things like equal pay for women. Equal rights for minorities. Maybe even voting rights for women and minorities.
The remaining states could be the civilized ones.
BlueVelvet says:
September 5, 2013 at 3:49 pm
“Abortion is not an illness that needs treatment.”
Is pregnancy an illness? If not, then why cover prenatal services?
Healthcare does two things:
1) Healthcare attempts to cure illness and heal wounds of persons who are not well. Pregnancy is not an illness that is “cured” by abortion.
2) Healthcare seeks to sustain and enhance the health of persons who are well. Pregnant women and their children benefit greatly with prenatal care.
Abortion is not healthcare. It is a lifestyle choice. It is a morally repulsive choice, because it murders children and is often associated with the abuse of women. Voters in many states do not want to assist in the abuse of women and killing of children, and so they refuse to subsidize it.
Do you have any more clever questions?
NewtoLifeandLove says:
I just wanted to point out the obvious that if groups like PP really cared about the poor they could do much more with the millions of tax dollars they do receive.
Planned Parenthood is a Fortune 500-sized mega-corporation. They are greed incarnate. They only care about their income stream and their profit margins. They do not care about the poor women whom they prey upon.
Look at how many families we help through non-profit Pregnancy Centers — without a dime of taxpayer money! And at no cost to the families who receive the help. Not to mention that we are with them for the long term…. not just the mandatory minimum of two clinic visits.
“Reality” your name again makes me laugh, as you try to claim that those who support tearing their children apart limb-by-limb are the scientific and civilized among us.
How far in the sand must one stick his head to get it all the way back up his rear? “Reality” could give us insight from his experience.
“Some states could outlaw abortion, gays and science. They could eliminate all taxation and adopt a pay as you go system. You know, for roads, schools, hospitals and police. Close down any welfare systems.”
I know you’re trying to sound ridiculous, Reality, but only a couple of those sound like a bad idea to me. Kidding … kindof.
All I can say MaryRose, is that once your states resemble some sort of post-apocalyptic disaster zone of starvation, disease, broken infrastructure and pitched battles between a myriad of small splinter groups, the rest of the world will be there to help. Maybe. A little bit. Or we might just observe and use the data to compare with what we know about prehistoric culture.
Well there you go then LifeJoy.
My states? Which are those? The ones that don’t kill their offspring? Not condoning unjustifiable killing is going to send me into an “apocalyptic” future?
Lol.
“Healthcare seeks to sustain and enhance the health of persons who are well.”
Right, which is why you support abortions for health reasons, including the woman’s physical and mental health. Correct?
Also, please remind me why having children is a necessity and not a lifestyle choice, to your phrase. Thanks.
“Not condoning unjustifiable killing is going to send me into an “apocalyptic” future?’ – I’m not talking about unjustifiable killing. But assuming you are meaning abortion then yes. The state of the state you would need to reside in will deliver that apocalyptic state of affairs to you.
Reality, I am with you in splitting these not so United States — red and blue if you like. Bring it on. Let’s see which group of states fares better. It won’t play out like you propose though. I seriously doubt there will be a walking back to pre-Civil and suffrage rights. You would do well to remember that feminists who fought for the 19th Amendment were against abortion because it was child murder.
Let’s look at the socio-economic sphere. “There is no doubt that the State can act within the principle of authority which affirms the need for a moral force in society capable of efficaciously directing and encouraging the actions of all towards the common good of the social body.
However, there are two other pillars of a Christian social order that must be considered. First, the principle of solidarity, derived from the common nature of men, which leads them to show mutual concern and support for others. There is also the principle of subsidiarity — whereby what can be done by an individual or smaller group is not assigned to a larger group. This principle stems from the fact that man is not only a social being but also a rational, essentially free and responsible being. Thus, he is guaranteed the right to resolve his problems either by himself, through his family or other intermediate social bodies without being obliged to wait for solutions from public authority.
When the State intervenes unnecessarily in the life of its citizens, it invokes the principle of authority to suppress the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity. However, while the principle of authority is fundamental for the promotion of the common good, its role is to support and complement the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity, not to destroy them. Without balance and harmony among these three fundamental principles, society falls into disarray and easily slides towards totalitarianism, a regime that respects neither individual rights nor freedom.”
Cf. Baltasar Péres Argos, S.J., “Los Cuatro Pilares fundamentales del Ordem Social y Economico, Segun la Doctrina de la Iglesia,” Verbo, Mar.-Apr. 1991.
Personally, I think the brilliant founders of the United States would be appalled at the current size and overreach of the federal government.
Joy from Illinois: Every lit I read informs that IL medicaid does not cover but I have heard about PP finding loopholes to legitimize medicaid coverage. Is it that those that approve it at the state level are asleep at their desks (which incidentally is the norm for state employees anyway)? PP has some strong connections everywhere. The problem is that IL voters have not demanded the overhaul of allkids. BTW I am an Illinoisan.
megan, you most certainly were not healed by your abortion.
Hi Courtnay! I’ll be sure to keep that in mind the next time I get an abortion to fix a broken bone.