The "WAr On Women??"

[denuseri]

You're assuming that the ONLY reason women want it is to avoid pregnancy. But even if that is so, aren't the low costs of birth control far more tolerable than the high costs of getting pregnant? Prenatal care, labor and delivery, post natal care, child care, etc., are all much higher costs to the insurance company, as well as the patients and society in general, than birth control.

But in the now-infamous Sandra Fluke case, immortalized by Rush Limbaugh, she was only talking about women who need those pills for medical reasons, not specifically as birth control pills. And that should be covered by insurance even by your standards.

If they need the pill for medical reasons other than to prevent pregnancy or to make life more fluffy for them IE for other than "elective" reasons then I am all for it being covered by their insurance.

[StrictMasterD]

If they need the pill for medical reasons other than to prevent pregnancy or to make life more fluffy for them IE for other than "elective" reasons then I am all for it being covered by their insurance.

That's the whole Point, most people do not Realize Or Accept that Birth Control is used by Women for more then just Presenting them from getting Pregnant, it is for a Myriad of other Allements, I know people who receive Anti Deressents and the Filler card says "This Medication is to Treat the Symptoms of Depression OR OTHER MEDICAL ISSUES AS DIRECTED BY THEIR DOCTOR" so you can be on an Anti Deprssent not be Bi Polar but stil beneift from the Chemical Makeup of the Medciation
Women do use birth control for reasons beyond just not getting pregnant