Wal-Mart Discriminates Against Women By Denying Insurance Coverage For Birth Control

[0roo0roo]

neither is life threatening. the same reason why fertility treatments are not covered.

 

[tm37]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
neither is life threatening. the same reason why fertility treatments are not covered.

Actually fertility isn't covered becuase it's expensive and has a low rate of return.(it does doesn't work all the time)

 

[JetsFanatic]

Originally posted by: AU Tiger
Someone needs to tell these women that Insurance is a benefit, not a right.

If they don't like the benefits that the company offers, find another job.

I know it use to be that the pill was only covered at regulate a cycle NOT as a birth control. But things change daily in the benefit world. 😕

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

I hate feminists.

nik

 

[Turin39789]

in advance, im feeling like a prick this morning

Now having said that lets say I am a bussiness owner who is catholic and I believe birth control is "sinful". WHy should I be required to pay for it? The fact is I shouldn't for any reason, even if I just do it to cut costs.

Why should what a business owner believes religously have anything to do with anything. Why should the buisiness owners beliefs affect their employees bodies? Some people in this world believe that being a catholic is sinful, many terrorist believe that all Americans should die. Just because you believe something does not make it right, and it doesnt make it a smart idea. Should Mormon business owner offer insurance taht covers liver transplants, they believe taht drinking alcohol is sinful, and that is surely the main reason we have so many liver transplants.

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: Turin39789
in advance, im feeling like a prick this morning

Now having said that lets say I am a bussiness owner who is catholic and I believe birth control is "sinful". WHy should I be required to pay for it? The fact is I shouldn't for any reason, even if I just do it to cut costs.

Why should what a business owner believes religously have anything to do with anything. Why should the buisiness owners beliefs affect their employees bodies? Some people in this world believe that being a catholic is sinful, many terrorist believe that all Americans should die. Just because you believe something does not make it right, and it doesnt make it a smart idea. Should Mormon business owner offer insurance taht covers liver transplants, they believe taht drinking alcohol is sinful, and that is surely the main reason we have so many liver transplants.

Considering that employers are not obligated to provide benefits, it is completely at their discretion as to what may or may not be covered.

It doesn't matter how that is decided, whether it be religious belief or coin toss, there is NOTHING obligating them to provide ANYTHING.

Viper GTS

 

[Yeeny]

OC can help in several health problems for women, like irregularity, controlling severe bleeding, helping with endometriosis, acne, etc, so on. I take it, and believe me, with my sex life for the last year, it is not to control pregnancy. 😉

And anyone who says that Viagra is a real medical need, bah. Being able to get it up is as important as being able to have sex without worrying about having children. And another thing, those whining about how men should get coverage for condoms, come on. You don't think half the women take the stuff because of their men? OC can be a blessing to both sexes in that aspect.

 

[tcsenter]

And anyone who says that Viagra is a real medical need, bah. Being able to get it up is as important as being able to have sex without worrying about having children.

Its not a medical necessity, but if you want to determine coverage along lines of medical necessary to preserve life and limb, health insurance then wouldn't and shouldn't cover 50% of what it normally does today. You want to go down that road? I didn't think so.

Fertility is by definition perfect health and function. Impotence is disfunction, a medical problem. Apples and oranges.

I agree with the person who stated that impotence is a normal part of aging, so I feel the coverage for Viagra should be prorated according to age: 100% under 40, 80% under 50, 60% under 60, 40% under 70, 20% under 90, 0% 90 and over. Something along those lines, anyway.

 

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: ffmcobalt
I hate feminists.

nik

I'm sure the feeling from women to you is mutual.

Lemme guess, any woman who doesn't want to be domineered is a feminist to you.

 

[amdskip]

Hmmm, the company I work for will win this case I'm pretty sure. I could understand for medical purposes but not for pleassure.

 

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: GirlFriday
And another thing, those whining about how men should get coverage for condoms, come on. You don't think half the women take the stuff because of their men? OC can be a blessing to both sexes in that aspect.

Those guys probably don't have a woman, let alone one who would take birth control for them. 😉

 

[amdskip]

FYI: If you were hired at Walmart before January 1, 2002, you are grandfathered in as 28 hours being considered full time for walmart. The new standard is 34 hours for full time which is pretty good IMHO for offering health insurance. They recently discontinued some parts of coverage like chiropractic and raised the rates some. I don't have the insurance because I live with my parents but I could get it if I really wanted to.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Maybe in Bum Fsck Indiana WallyWorld holds a place near and dear to the locals hearts but here in Merced it's just another Big Corporation that moved in and ran a bunch of local shops out of business.

Stop talking about Bedford like that!

Seriously though, I don't see how contraceptives are necessary. The argument of "well, it's that or Welfare babies" points to a deeper issue that should be taken care of. This is a stupid thing to sue over.

 

[Yeeny]

Originally posted by: tcsenter


Fertility is by definition perfect health and function. Impotence is disfunction, a medical problem. Apples and oranges.

No, its not apples and oranges. Neither is a life threatening condition, and both apply to PERSONAL sexual issues. Maybe the woman doesn't feel comfortable having sex without it, and as such, cannot get stimulated enough to have sex. The women will win this lawsuit, simply for that very reason. You cannot be sexist, and define who gets what drugs paid for, simply because he has a penis and she does not.

And impotence is alot of the time caused by mental issues, and insecurities, its not always a health issue. So, lets make it like OC. If its because of mental and not physical, then it doesn't get covered. Fair enough, right?

 

[tcsenter]

No, its not apples and oranges. Neither is a life threatening condition, and both apply to PERSONAL sexual issues. Maybe the woman doesn't feel comfortable having sex without it, and as such, cannot get stimulated enough to have sex. The women will win this lawsuit, simply for that very reason. You cannot be sexist, and define who gets what drugs paid for, simply because he has a penis and she does not.

Discrimination only in effect but not in intent or purpose is permissable discrimination. Like auto insurance companies are perfectly within their rights to "discriminate" against younger drivers by charging them higher premiums. The basis for charging them more isn't because they are young drivers, its because they are an identifiable group who is at higher risk. The "discrimination" against young drivers is in effect but not in intent, thus it is no discrimination at all.

Same here. Women don't get any brownie points simply because they're women. Well...on second though...they do all the time, ad nauseum, but that's besides the point, we shouldn't encourage more of it.

Health insurance is supposed to cover legitimate MEDICAL or HEALTH "problems", not malcontent emotionalism. By your logic, if Suzy has low self-esteem because she feels her boobies aren't big enough then her insurance should cover elective breast implants so she can feel better about herself in public. Her smallish boobies 'detracts' or 'prevents' her from enjoying her life to the fullest extent, though by any objective or rational standard, her boobies are 'normal'.

You're standing on its head what is means to have a 'medical problem' in a way which not only is an insult to those who have legitimate medical problems and would be forced to 'cost share' with women are too cheap or lazy to pay for their own contraception, but would pave the way for all the Suzy's boobies out there who can claim to suffer loss of lifestyle because of some fickle emotional hang-up.

I can't go out in public because I'm not happy about my body, though I'm perfectly healthy, therefore my medical insurance should pay for a Bally's membership.

Or, hey, I don't get out much because I can't afford it, and any mental health expert would agree that 'getting out' is "vital" for mental and emotional health, therefore, my health insurance plan should treat me to dinner and a movie once a month. Weeeee!

Again, fertility is not a medical problem, fertility is by definition perfect health. It is absurd to claim that perfect health can detract from one's ability to enjoy life and we should not permit it.

Women have enjoyed a fair amount of success in making everyone else pay (and make exceptions for them) because they're pissed off over the biological realities of being a woman. Take it up with God if you're pissed off over your fertility, not your insurance company. Or, better yet, accept that you're a woman, embrace it, and get over yourself? Probably asking too much there, eh?

If you're pissed off that you're fertile, take it up with God, not your insurance company, or go buy a damned condom, or the sponge, or hey, have sex with yourself if you're that obsessed about getting pregnant. Can't get yourself pregnant, but you can give yourself what any health or sexuality expert would agree to be a substantial level of gratification, an option that isn't even available to impotent men.

Impotence is a medical problem. Health insurance is intended to cover medical problems, not fickle emotional hang-ups.

 

[Yeeny]

Impotence is a medical problem. Health insurance is intended to cover medical problems, not fickle emotional hang-ups.

No, its actually not alot of the time, like I said earlier. Its alot of the time do to a mans lack of confidence in his own abilities, fear of someone laughing at his size, being stressed, etc, so on. And if you are pissed that you can't get it up, don't waste the insurance companies money, get some popsicle sticks and twine, problem solved. 😉 If they don't have to help you prevent getting pregnant, then why the heck should they have to help you to try to reproduce in the first place? That is the main reason that impotence would be a problem right? The inability to reproduce? Don't give me the line that a man should get help so he can be gratified sexually. Just like its not the insurances companies due to pay for pregnancy prevention, its not theirs to make sure you can get off regularly either.


You cannot pick and choose who you will cater to, merely based on what sex organs they have. As for women getting "brownie points ad naseum", well that is neither here nor there, and I'm not sure why it was even brought up . Someone a bit bitter?

 

[Jfur]

let me guess: all the naysayers would bitch mightily if the same woman bore your child and requested child support? 😛

 

[tcsenter]

No, its actually not alot of the time, like I said earlier. Its alot of the time do to a mans lack of confidence in his own abilities, fear of someone laughing at his size, being stressed, etc, so on. And if you are pissed that you can't get it up, don't waste the insurance companies money, get some popsicle sticks and twine, problem solved.

Problem is, you're not remotely qualified to make that determination, only a physician can. And just so we all understand how desperate and bitter you're argument is becoming, or how fantastically ignorant about health matters you really are, I'm not sure which, but did you actually just suggest that an effecitve remedy to impotence is to wrap twine around a penile splint made of popsicle sticks? Should we expect this miraculous new treatment to grace the pages of the New England Journal of Medicine any time soon?

However, there is no such diagnosis in the world as "unable to perform due to reasons of perfect health" in women, none whatsoever. This, not surprisingly, is a figment of your imagination.

If they don't have to help you prevent getting pregnant, then why the heck should they have to help you to try to reproduce in the first place? That is the main reason that impotence would be a problem right? The inability to reproduce? Don't give me the line that a man should get help so he can be gratified sexually. Just like its not the insurances companies due to pay for pregnancy prevention, its not theirs to make sure you can get off regularly either.

Why? You're giving me the line that OC should be covered for women so they can have consequence and worry free sex (i.e. gratification). Is that not the crux of your position? Again, women who worry about pregnancy can gratify themselves if sex with others is too great a worry for them, an option that is not available to impotent men.

This is not about one sex or another, it is purely about treating a medical problem which prevents normal function by RESTORING it. What you're asking for health insurance to cover is a woman's desire to PREVENT normal function, to IMPOSE a disfunction, to remove perfect health, not to treat a disfunction. Are you getting any of this, or are we having one of those estrogen induced stupors?

You cannot pick and choose who you will cater to, merely based on what sex organs they have.

Nor is this policy about organs. One is disfunction, the other is not. One is a medical problem, the other is not.

As for women getting "brownie points ad naseum", well that is neither here nor there, and I'm not sure why it was even brought up.

Of course you know why it was brought up, don't play stupid. It was brought up because this just happens to be yet another example.

I want my Bally's membership, my monthly dinner and movie, and my breast implants.

 

[tcsenter]

And as an unequivocal counter to your suggestion that one party is being favored due to the organs they posses, while there is no such diagnosis as "unable to perform due to reasons of perfect health" in women, there are other diagnosis such as 'unable to perform due to painful intercourse' in women, or dyspareunia. Well, dyspareunia is actually a symptom, the diagnosis is an underlying anatomical or inflammatory cause.

Would it surprise you to learn that virtually every health insurance plan in fact covers the treatment of dyspareunia, even if the necessary remedy requires surgery? Most if not all health plans cover a number of female DISFUNCTION which can make sexual intercourse unbearable if not impossible. Fertility just happens to not be any sort of disfunction.