Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota expressed her disgust at the CNN Tea Party Debate concerning the federal mandate, under the new health care bill, that requires health insurance companies to cover various contraceptive methods, including the controversial "morning-after" pill, with no co-payment required.
This emergency contraception, which does not abort the pregnancy but prevent it from ever occuring, is not only approved by the Food and Drug Administration, but allows those paying for insurance in the first place to be able to prevent an un-wanted pregnancy, giving women more power for their money. Bachmann views this is a means of control by the U.S. government, a new level of power for Obama, and therefore something that needs to be avoided. However, the fact that insurance companies are required to cover various means of contraceptives, sterilization procedures, health screenings, such as those for HPV, and this morning-after pill is irrelevant. They are still only being offered not forced onto patients, which are two very different things.
While these companies are now unable to choose if they want to cover such things, those with health insurance plans, specifically women, are able to get the medical screenings, birth control prevention methods, etc. that they need or CHOOSE to have without paying more. Therefore, the power of choice is being flip-flopped, which should be viewed as a good thing. The Obama administration even added an amendment to the regulation, allowing religous institutions offereing health insurance to their employees to choose if they want to cover contraceptive services, therefore not stepping on any first-amendment rights.
The below article further illustrates the topic of governement intervention with health insurance and coverage of birth control and is very informative concerning this current political issue. Just as a side note, I find it be extremely interesting in that even when choice is extended for the general public, there is a distinct possibility that the choice of big businesses is still being considered. And it makes me wonder: can Bachmann's drive even be out of personal views towards contraceptives?
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/09/13/truth.squad.contraception/index.html?npt=NP1
No comments:
Post a Comment