Unreal: The ‘Tell-your-boss-why-you’re-on-the-pill’ bill
Ceridwen | Wikimedia Commons
I swear this isn’t a joke. Instead, it’s an abominable sign of how weirdly polarized America has become. And on one side are the freakishly moralistic voyeurs.
They actually are arguing in favor of a bill in the Arizona legislature that would require women who are on the pill to explain to their bosses why they’re taking it. If it’s for birth control, health insurance coverage would be a no-no.
If it’s for polycystic ovarian syndrome, or another medical condition unrelated to avoiding pregnancy, their health insurance would pay for it, provided they could prove that via a doctor’s note. The legislation is HB 2625.
It has passed the Arizona House, and Wednesday the Arizona Senate Judiciary Committee endorsed this legislation by a vote of 6-2.
From Statepress.com:
Arizona House Bill 2625, authored by Majority Whip Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, would permit employers to ask their employees for proof of medical prescription if they seek contraceptives for non-reproductive purposes, such as hormone control or acne treatment.
“I believe we live in America. We don’t live in the Soviet Union,” Lesko said. “So, government should not be telling the organizations or mom and pop employers to do something against their moral beliefs.”
Lesko said this bill responds to a contraceptive mandate in the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act signed into law March 2010.
“My whole legislation is about our First Amendment rights and freedom of religion,” Lesko said. “All my bill does is that an employer can opt out of the mandate if they have any religious objections.”
Here are some moral and commonsense objections to this legislation.
First, what the hell business is it of ANY employer why ANY doctor is prescribing ANY medication to ANY female employee? Seriously. Let’s take the case of acne. It’s malpractice for any doctor to prescribe Retin-A, to clear up acne, to any woman of childbearing age unless she’s on birth control or is otherwise sterile. Doctors know that acne medication will cause severe birth defects. So they will insist on prescribing her the pill at the same time. Why should her employer have to be informed of this?
Second, what if an employer has a moral and/or religious belief that acne is God’s will, and that a woman should not try to interfere with her God-given complexion? After all,” moral and/or religious beliefs” is one hell of a big tent, and there are some weird religions out there. In that case, the bill has a “not-covered” loophole so large that you could pass a Planned Parenthood clinic through it.
Third, not one health-insurance-providing employer in all of Arizona would be required, even without the bill, to “pay for his employees’ birth control” under any circumstance. Actually, at the worst, covering for birth control requires the employer to save money. Because pregnancy and childbearing and maternity leave cost insurance companies and employers much more than birth control does.
That’s how you know this is ALL about employers wanting to know about their female employees’ sex lives.
You can be darn sure that if this bill passes in Arizona, Virginia Del. Bob Marshall or some other so-called morally crusading lawmaker is going to sponsor it in our Virginia General Assembly next year.
America 2012. Ain’t it grand?
March 14, 2012 - 8:27 PM
And they just keep on proving my point.
This is embarrassing.
Sometimes you just can’t cure stupid.
If they think women are going to willingly go back to the dark ages, they are more insane than they seem.
Let the Republican wingnuts keep on pushing this agenda. They will lose the women’s vote by a huge margin in the fall elections and doom themselves to defeat. The more the better. Tell the ignorant idiots to bring it on.
Politicians need to become acquainted with HIPAA and Dr/Patient privacy rules.
And the RW’s say liberals want us to live in a communist nation. It’s not us.
http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/index.html
Bob Marshall is kicking a fence post wishing he’d thought of this first.
I have to agree that this is insane. Employers have encroached too far into the personal lives of employees. They don’t own them. What you do on your own time should be your business and not theirs. Next they will tell you how you can spend your vacation time…wait, that’s already happened too. Teachers getting fired for pictures on facebook of them holding a beer while on vacation at the beach.
I screwing my boss. Ergo I need birth control. Shall I put this in a memo.
(o\ ! /o), thank you for speaking up for REASON.
As for the teachers, well, they’re teachers! Lots of idiots in this country believe teachers should be fired just because the idiots don’t like the NEA (and they don’t care if the teachers are members or not).
What’s next? If your boss finds out you’re taking penicillin, do you have to prove you don’t have an STD.
They must all believe in term limits, Dave. Theirs will certainly be up.
How about, if your boss find out you’re taking statins, they put you on a treadmill. If the result is not good, they find a way to off-load you (which is EASY in right-to-work states such as Virginia) because they fear you’ll need a costly heart bypass op down the road.
It’s not unusual for a bypass op to require transfusions. What if the employer has a moral/religious objection to those? Some faiths do.
Can they opt-out of that coverage?
The conservative Republican war on women continues.
I agree Phil, this is embarrassing. The GOP I volunteered for through 2000 or so is not the same one that exists today.
Dr Allen…you are fantastic.
From an article in The Atlantic titled, “The Fiscal Conservative’s Case for Spending More Money on Birth Control.”
“Put aside the fact that contraception is used to treat conditions that have nothing to do with sex (this was Fluke’s actual point). Put aside that a woman’s ability to control whether or not she is pregnant is about as fundamental and important as the right to health gets. (I’ve never been pregnant, but it sure seems like a more serious medical condition than a lot of the things we expect health insurance to pay to prevent, such as the flu.) Put aside that it’s only if we assume all women are abstinent or should be that female contraception is about promoting sex instead of protecting health, and that no society in history has ever made this assumption. Even put aside that O’Reilly and Limbaugh don’t complain about male contraception such as vasectomies, and they definitely don’t complain about “paying for people to go skiing,” which is exactly what happens when your health care premiums go toward fixing all those broken legs.
Even if you reject all of the above, you should still want health care to cover female contraception, and you should be excited about paying for it. This is because health care subsidies on birth control actually save you money — a lot of money. Every dollar that our society spends on preventing unintended pregnancies produces us “savings of between two and six dollars,” according to a new report from the Brookings Institution. The savings come from averting health care, child care, and other costs associated with unplanned pregnancies. That’s a rate of return of 100% to 500%, making it one of the safest and most profitable investments anywhere.”
If they keep going like this, OJ, they won’t be around much longer.
Just a basic question:
Why the HELL should an employer pay health insurance for something that has absolutely nothing to do with health? No leftwinger ever asks that.
This seems to be in direct violation of the EEOC laws which are set forth to prevent discrimination based on the fine print at the bottom:
“Religious Discrimination And Employment Policies/Practices”
“An employee cannot be forced to participate (or not participate) in a religious activity as a condition of employment.” (Practicing abstinence as a form of birth control can certainly be construed as participating in a religious activity.)
I think the argument can be made that an employer who withholds benefits based on THEIR own religious beliefs is discriminating against those who do not hold the same beliefs.
http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm
“Why the HELL should an employer pay health insurance for something that has absolutely nothing to do with health? No leftwinger ever asks that.”
It’s a ridiculous question. You can’t separate pregnancy from health.
You are indeed showing your profound ignorance again Suzie #20. There are many common conditions that make menstruation very very hard on a woman and it affects their health, attendance, productivity and quality of life. Contraceptives are a relatively easy, quick fix that millions of women rely on. Would it kill you to do some research if you are going to pretend to be a woman?
#20 Wow, one of your stupidest posts ever.
“You can’t separate pregnancy from health.”
You also can’t separate the resulting complications from the smoking that causes them. There are certain conditions the auto manufacturers require before they’ll honor the warranty on the health of your car. When people make VOLUNTARY choices on their health, it should make a difference too. That said, I’m sure it’s much better deal money-wise to pay for the pill. Children aren’t cheap!
If you follow this one down the path, what about the doctors in California where medical marijuana is legal perscribing it? There is a lot of abuse going on perscribing that. Is insurance paying for that?
John Wilburn,
At some companies, when you sign up for insurance, if you smoke you pay more, because of the health costs of that choice down the road. Think for a moment about the implications for that one.
If you choose a policy that covers childbearing, rather than one that covers birth control, you pay more (not less). Because your employer will be paying MORE.
The RWers WANT that. That’s what they’re asking for. They want employers allowed to offer ONLY the child-bearing policy, and not the less expensive one.
I cannot understand why a conservative wouldn’t want BOTH options offered, so the employee could choose.
(Unless they’re anti-choice, of course).
The insurance rates for a group are based on several criteria. Size of your group is important. What your plan paid out in care the previous year, what the ages, histories, and overall health claims say about your near term costs for the next year and yes the ages, weights, and personal choices that can cost them more (whether they do or not). Non-smokers also get lung disease and other “smoker’s diseases”, skinny people can get high-blood pressure and diabetes etc. FYI. They also can charge you a “penalty” if a couple chooses the better of different employer coverage plans, ours costs us an additional $600 per year.
Stuff like this is so awesome.
Obama doesn’t even need to have a debate or put a commercial on the tv.
The Idiot Parade is going to get him elected on their own.
Sandi@11:17
Why should he/she/it do research. He/she/it already knows everything. All the experts in economics, medical care, education, national security, science, philosophy or any other field you can name just come to he/she/it whenever they have a question or problem and he/she/it gives them the answer saving them all immense hours of study and research.
He/she/it was chosen by God to function as a human computer and given super intelligence and the gift of being all knowing and all seeing.
The Pope has he/she/it already on the fast track to sainthood.
No they won’t Debbie. I’m still no fan of the Democrats or the independents out there, but the Republicans make it damned impossible to support any one of their candidates, in just about any level of government…with stuff like this going around. Maybe it’s because at the time the GOP in Virginia Beach was not taken up by the religious movement, but I fully supported them and worked on numerous campaigns when I lived there. They stood for smaller & less-intrusive government, a strong military, sensible taxes, and fiscal conservatism. Now it seems like those points are the also-rans of the platform, behind the socio-religious direction the party has since taken. It’s all fine and good, but it is really turning a lot of younger adults away from supporting them, and BSC (try a few words and you’ll figure what I mean) policy directions will not help that. But, it’s not my party anymore…so if it wants to nosedive off a cliff in a blaze of fading glory, that’s their prerogative.
Sandi-
“There are many common conditions that make menstruation very very hard on a woman and it affects their health, attendance, productivity and quality of life.”
Yep. My wife used to suffer from this. She is a Type A personality, doesn’t miss work (or back then, school) for anything. Yet her periods would cause her to stay home. The pain and cramps were agonizing. She also suffered from irregular periods. Birth control pills took care of both issues.
Keep it up Republicans, you are doing a great job tossing a winnable election.
As far as employment goes, you would think that employers would gladly cover contraception. Helping their employees avoid pregnancy, helps them avoid work time missed for medical visits and assorted things after the child is born.
Lots of parents can and do work from home, but that’s not possible in all cases. It seems more sensible for an employer to help prevent unplanned pregnancies.
It didn’t take long to figure out “BSC” OJ. I’ve seen the words enough times on this blog.
REPUB =
Reactionary
Enforcers
Promoting
Unplanned
Births
Sorry for the multiple posts, but don’t most insurance policies already cover various forms of contraception?
It’s a ridiculous question. You can’t separate pregnancy from health.
By this logic, health insurance should buy everyone a Stairmaster since not using it could result in obesity, heart problems, diabetes. It should pay for everyone’s winter clothes since not wearing them could lead to exposure, hypothermia, or frost bite. Frankly, health insurance should buy people all the food they eat since they’ll develop dire health problems without food.
It’s one thing if people voluntarily choose to overpay for everyday ridiculousness through health insurance; it’s quite another when they’re FORCED to pay for unnecessary things that are also evil and contrary to God’s will.
Y’all keep this up and you might as well put a pretty bow on Santorum’s keys to the White House.
The fact that women are stepping forward to spearhead these kinds of bills is so depressing to me. They (GOP) are putting women in front of them to make the medicine go down more smoothly. It’s like saying “Look! A woman is suggesting this, so all you other women should feel comfortable with it because you know your fellow woman wouldn’t stab you in the back!” Oh yeah? Really? Look at the most back-stabbing women on this forum. They never outgrew that ole stupid high school mentality of being girl-haters. And then they step forward and voice the ridiculous ideas of men and are nothing more than bought and paid for whores.
Talk about intellectual and emotional sluts. Completely ethically bankrupt in my opinion.
Debbie, as far as I am aware, yes…under the Rx portion of the plans.
Here’s my question.
How can you be pro-life support this bill?
I’m more of a pro-lifer than I am pro-choice, but I also believe that being a responsible pro-lifer means that you make the choice (as a man or a woman) to use proper birth control for you and your partner. It’s also my belief as a pro-lifer that a woman not putting herself in the position to want an abortion is the healthiest thing that she can do for her own reproductive health, which would mean to me that taking birth control for the purpose of avoiding a pregnancy is a choice that a woman makes to keep herself healthy. In my opinion, this should be covered by health insurance.
Joining the GOP: So easy a caveman could do it.
I concur, Miriam. It’s like the “women” who ran around nattering how “We’re just not ready for a female president” when Hillary Clinton was running.
Even a Muslim nation like PAKISTAN has had a female head of state. We are so backwards in so many ways. And by “we”, I mean people dumb enough to make statements like “We’re not ready for a female president”.
hokie24, if you keep being all logical like that, people will start slapping the L word on you.
Yes, the vast majority of employers offer the best insurance coverage they can get for what they and their workers can afford and that includes contraceptives. They are or have wives too.
Miriam #37, right on!! It is so sad but so true.
Amen 4 Hokie24! That is so true. THANK YOU for getting it.
Again Suzie, your profound lack of research and facts skews your argument into absurdity. Many larger companies have insurance that does survey and assess the healthy practices of their employees and they offer to guide you to healthier choices, programs, “coaches”, weight loss, smoking cessation, and goal setting to make whatever your issue is more manageable and better, plus save you both money. Even small companies offer access to the “nurse line” and have referral services. They ARE being proactive and fighting the lifestyle choices that cost more. And few do not offer prescription coverage for birth control pills, because they know that the benefits outweigh the cost.
#36 Birth control is “evil and contrary to God’s will.” Yes, folks, suzie wants to force her religion on you.
at the most back-stabbing women on this forum. They never outgrew that ole stupid high school mentality of being girl-haters. And then they step forward and voice the ridiculous ideas of men and are nothing more than bought and paid for whores.
Wow. Calling us ‘whores’. That’s pretty uncivil discourse, Miriam. Where’s liberal Ron on this?
The truth is, Miriam, you act as if conservative women are doormats like liberal women are. Y’all are the ones listening to the voices on your side who are selling the idea it’s good, even desirable to kill your own children. Could there be a greater con job than that?
As for high school, frankly I was one on the receiving end of female envy, just like I am on here. Things just kind of worked out for me and there were some folks who resented it.
#36 Birth control is “evil and contrary to God’s will.” Yes, folks, suzie wants to force her religion on you.
Am I blocking you people from being able to buy their birth control? No. Am I being forced by you people to buy birth control for others? Yes.
So who the hell is forcing their beliefs on whom?
I’m treading on dangerous ground, Kristen!!
I found a typo in my post though. My question was supposed to be “How can you be pro-life AND support this bill?”
@47 Suzie, I agree with this statement: “Calling us whores. That’s pretty uncivil discourse, Miriam” I should have, in the last sentence you quoted said “And then they (the female legislators), etc.” as that sentence was referring back to those women and not to the regular blog trolls.
However, I don’t know why it’s okay for Rush but not okay for me, darnit! Ha.
And your final statement about high school pretty much reinforces my point as far as I’m concerned. and I can promise you that not a single woman that posts here “envies” you the slightest. Most of us pity, ignore, or revile you…depending on the day. But yeah, comfort yourself however you want. That’s fine.
@50 Oh, and Suzie, it’s always most amusing when you call me out for being uncivil (not denying that I can be at times) but just coming from you makes it so extra special.
+1
You’re right, Miriam. No woman on here envies Suzie, except maybe pammala. I wouldn’t wish Suzie’s obviously miserable life on my worst enemy.
The description in the lead in to this thread leaves out a few key points. First the bill only applies to religious institutions. It gives them the right to not cover birth control as part of their insurance coverage. It also does not allow them to discriminate against employees who obtain birth control through outside coverage or out of pocket. Basically, it says that a person would first need to pay out of pocket for birth control and then submit it as an insurance claim where it could be denied if it is not considered medically necessary. No where does the bill say that you have to supply your employer with medical information different than you normally would from any other insurance claim.
The text of the bill is available on the Arizona website. I don’t agree with it, but in fairness it should be discussed based on what it actually says not just how the media wishes to interpret it.
#48, which would you rather pay for; Costs that fund Insurance for Birth Control or costs that fund Insurance for Unintended or Complicated Pregnancies?
Birth Control Pills seem a whole lot cheaper than Pre-natal vitamins, ultrasounds, pre-natal check-ups, hospital stays, hospital check-ins, possible extra care for babies with medical difficulty… etc…
What a dumb notion it is to remove the idea of birth control. Birth Control, Birth Rates, and Prosperity are all closely linked and directly proportional.
I always wondered what social conservatives would go after if they were finally able to ban abortion outright. Even with abortion still legal we are beginning to see the answer to that question. Most social conservatives are too hung up about sex to see how much this is hurting their larger cause. Saying, “Everyone who disagrees with me that premarital sex is wrong and women who engage in it are sluts is a stupid Liberal” is totally out of touch with the rest of society in 2012.Some of the real issues as I see them are:
-Do people have a right to have medicines not required to maintain their health to be paid for by their insurance companies? If so, what is OK? Contraception? Viagra? What about medical marijuana in states it is legal in?
-Should insurance companies get a say in what is covered or should the government control this? If the government decides to make these decisions how will it impact affordability of insurance?
-If contraception is cheaper than paying for a pregnancy and child birth shouldn’t greedy insurance companies be pushing hard to cover this?
hokie24,
The problem is The Pill is itself an abortifacient.
I think the GOP should change it’s symbol from an elephant to a coat hanger.
Suzie,
Nope, the pill is not an abortifacient. The pill prevents the pregnancy before it happens. So if there’s no pregnancy, there’s no abortion.
Kristen, I think they should change their symbol to an eye looking through a bedroom door peephole.
They had better outlaw cars with backseats too. That’ll keep those horny teens straight.
I like the black and brown pack of BC pills in the photo. Looks like a ‘C’. Maybe it stands for ‘Catholic’.
57.”I think the GOP should change it’s symbol from an elephant to a coat hanger.”
You really are funny.
While we’re at it, I nominate the sheep for the Democrat’s new symbol.
Nope, the pill is not an abortifacient. The pill prevents the pregnancy before it happens. So if there’s no pregnancy, there’s no abortion.
One of the ways the pill works is to prevent the attachment of a fertilized egg on the uterine wall. That’s tantamount to abortion.
I WANT abortions to be relegated to the back alleys along with the pimps and druggies.. That’s where seamy vile shadowy trashy behavior belongs. Let’s take away ALL societal sanctions of these barbarous acts.
Just too stupid for words. Hope somebody in Arizona has a copy of “The Constitution and Bill of Rights for Idiots” that they can drop off at the front desk of the legislature.
How many times do we have to point out that you have no idea what the word “Abortifacient” means?
Every time you use it, it’s like you’re making it up as some sort of $3 word to sound smart, when it makes you sound like you’re trying to “Irregardlessly Refudiate” something.
If fertilization = pregnant you might have a point.
But pregnant = implantation of a fertilized egg. So you don’t.
So, John Wilburn, are you willing to go on record supporting the GOP’s legislation requiring trans-vaginal ultrasounds and conscience clause regarding contraception? Do you agree with Rush Limbaugh that any woman having sex outside of marriage is a “slut” and a “prostitute”? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Art,
No, and no respectively.
#63 So since you consider the pill the same as an abortion, one can only assume you want to outlaw the pill. Thank you.
If fertilization = pregnant you might have a point.
But pregnant = implantation of a fertilized egg. So you don’t.
Life begins at fertilization, not attachment.
How many times do we have to point out that you have no idea what the word “Abortifacient” means?
Every time you use it, it’s like you’re making it up as some sort of $3 word to sound smart, when it makes you sound like you’re trying to “Irregardlessly Refudiate” something.
It’s not really that complicated, Scott. An abortifacient is something that causes an abortion. Even an uneducated rube leftwinger can get that.
You’re right, Miriam. No woman on here envies Suzie, except maybe pammala. I wouldn’t wish Suzie’s obviously miserable life on my worst enemy.
LOL. I suspect you could get used to it.
Now I agree you probably aren’t cut out for what it took to get here. Few leftwingers are. Most of it has to do with their worldview.
#72 You mean the miserable housing you had to live in before you could get the double wide with a john?
gdad
Whho says it has a john? Maybe a path and a two-seater.
Contraceptive is the word you’re missing.
From the Free Dictionary:
contraceptive [ˌkɒntrəˈsɛptɪv]
adj
(Sociology) relating to or used for contraception; able or tending to prevent impregnation
n
(Medicine) any device that prevents or tends to prevent conception
Abortifacient is usually a chemical cocktail that causes an abortion.
With the proper use of a “Birth control pill” Contraceptive, it is rare that eggs are even released, if they are, the ability for them to be fertilized is even more rare, and even if that happens the fertilized egg will even more rarely still attach itself to the uterine wall. At that point the pill has failed.
Sadly though, Life doesn’t begin at fertilization. Cell mitosis begins at fertilization, but you can’t put those in a petrie dish and whammo, it will turn into a baby.
Next week, we will talk about Menopause.
Nothing like watching an 8th grade health class being wallpapered on a supposedly adult blog. Maybe we should just provide a link to Bill Nye the Science Guy and be done with it.
“Now I agree you probably aren’t cut out for what it took to get here”
Comment by Suzie — March 16, 2012 @ 7:45 am
If “getting here” would mean becoming the daily ray of sunshine that you are, you’re right, I’m not cut out for it. It’s something that I would never want to get used to.
Debbie @ 32 writes: “As far as employment goes, you would think that employers would gladly cover contraception. Helping their employees avoid pregnancy, helps them avoid work time missed for medical visits and assorted things after the child is born.”
I am exceedingly grateful that I work for men who realize this. Previously, we had to add a contraception coverage rider to our policy, which my boss gladly endorsed. I recall when I told him I was pregnant 4 years ago, he nearly had a heart attack. At the time, it was just the 2 of us in our office, so the prospect of me being out for 8 weeks of maternity leave freaked him out. While our office has grown since that time, any mention of my having another child still sends him into near cardiac arrest.
Birth control is also used to help women who are anemic, by controlling the duration of their periods or stopping them altogether. The hormones regulate conditions like Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycystic_Ovarian_Syndrome) which is a common disorder in women.
Suzie, I am finding it harder and harder to believe that you are a woman. You ignorance of women’s health is astounding.
@75 Hooray to Scott for that post! @79 Lori, of course Suzie isn’t a woman! Suzie is a misogynist troll and everyone knows trolls are genderless. They are just either “it” or “shim”.
Debbie @ 77: +1
Miriam – I just find it rather amazing that the men of this blog are more knowledgeable about female reproduction that the “woman” who posts as Suzie.
@81 Lori, I agree that it is amusing…right up until the point you pause and consider the remote possiblity that Suzie is a woman and truly believes what she says. Then it is very depressing.
However, since the likelihood of either of those considerations to be true, we can just laugh. Happy weekend!!!!!!!!!!
Miriam is correct, Lori.
“That’s where seamy vile shadowy trashy behavior belongs”, and yet here you are.
“If you want to avoid getting pregnant there is only one surefire way: be a man.” — Stephen Colbert http://on.cc.com/AvOAZ9
“No, and no respectively.”
Baaahhhhh….