The costs of giving birth in America
Posted by Cambion
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 08, 2020 | Registered: 9 years ago Posts: 3,708 |
Quote
Techie
Quote
mumofsixbirds
I don't begrudge people medical care, but it is becoming a problem
I hope Biden can help with it.
I don't have much faith in either side. In my opinion, the only thing that Democrats and Republicans are good for is to turn people onto each other and fight over politics while politicians do what they want and how they want it.
Let us not forget that people went to jail for smoking a joint under both parties. To me, it is irrelevant who paid lip service to what. What matters is that both parties have little support for the people.
We have started 2 wars underRetardBush, did Obama actually do anything to end those? Not really. I don't have any reason to believe that Biden is going to do a whole lot of good stuff.
Me either. The parties are all about the corporations, not the people. Both parties spread BS to try to win votes.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 12, 2020 | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 1,735 |
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 13, 2020 | Registered: 16 years ago Posts: 3,454 |
Quote
selidororous
Am I the only person who thinks health insurance should not cover sprogging?
Being that health insurance does not cover elective stuff, such as face lifts, boob jobs, etc, I personally don't see why sprogging is covered at all.
I do support 100% tax payer funded coverage for abortions and birth control.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 13, 2020 | Registered: 9 years ago Posts: 3,708 |
Quote
selidororous
Am I the only person who thinks health insurance should not cover sprogging?
I think there could be a Cadillac plan that could cover sprogging and other non-cosmetic but optional services. The pool (people paying into it) would be 100% voluntary. Let the overall risk determine the cost. Addiction programs (which are incredibly expensive and have a very low rate of success) could also be in this insurance.
The documentary: NOVA: Addiction is worth seeing. After watching I agree that safe injection sites are a necessity.
It keeps addicts off of dangerous dirty streets, out of jails and emergency rooms. The employees also test the drugs which prevents overdoses and bad substances from being injected. There is also discussion of some kind of drug that can be given by a D.O. or M.D. that cures addiction. More background is needed on that. What I didn't agree with is the idea they pushed at the end, which is to pay for housing, food, etc. for addicts. Depending on the source, between 1 in 7 of 1 in 10 people in the USA will face an addiction. https://americanaddictioncenters.org/rehab-guide/addiction-statistics
https://drugfree.org/drug-and-alcohol-news/new-data-show-millions-of-americans-with-alcohol-and-drug-addiction-could-benefit-from-health-care-reform/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/11/17/surgeon-general-1-7-us-face-substance-addiction/93993474/
There is no way the country can afford to take on all these costs for addicts. And if all their costs are covered where is the incentive for former addicts to go back to the workforce and potentially live worse off than they did when they were getting everything for free?
Premiums increase as more care is expected to be covered by insurance. I'm all for preventative and catastrophic events being covered.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 14, 2020 | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 1,367 |
Quote
Techie
Quote
selidororous
Am I the only person who thinks health insurance should not cover sprogging?
Being that health insurance does not cover elective stuff, such as face lifts, boob jobs, etc, I personally don't see why sprogging is covered at all.
I do support 100% tax payer funded coverage for abortions and birth control.
In 1978 Congress required employers who provided medical insurance to include maternity benefits for employees. Costs were getting out of hand even then. Insurers likewise had viewed pregnancy and birth as elective, and most did not cover those.
There's a lot of griping now because many insurance plans exclude sprogging expenses for adult dependents. That means these parents who are keeping their adult kids on their plans till age 26. When those kids have kids, the plans don't pay for that.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 14, 2020 | Registered: 16 years ago Posts: 3,454 |
Quote
kman
Quote
Techie
Quote
selidororous
Am I the only person who thinks health insurance should not cover sprogging?
Being that health insurance does not cover elective stuff, such as face lifts, boob jobs, etc, I personally don't see why sprogging is covered at all.
I do support 100% tax payer funded coverage for abortions and birth control.
In 1978 Congress required employers who provided medical insurance to include maternity benefits for employees. Costs were getting out of hand even then. Insurers likewise had viewed pregnancy and birth as elective, and most did not cover those.
There's a lot of griping now because many insurance plans exclude sprogging expenses for adult dependents. That means these parents who are keeping their adult kids on their plans till age 26. When those kids have kids, the plans don't pay for that.
The whole health insurance scheme in USA is a different one from the rest of the developed world. It originated when hospitals could not keep enough beds full in order to sustain themselves. Having a group a of people pay a set amount at set intervals of time allowed hospitals to sustain while those who ended up in a hospital, their costs were predictable. Good idea, at first glance. But road to hell is paved with good intentions. Because no particular individual was paying a bill, hospitals could charge as they seemed fit. That caused rates to go up, but only somewhat. Fast forward to today, we still don't really have an individual who negotiates a price for service. Insurance does to an extent but again, there are surprise charges and bills. With ACA making a full comeback, things like IVF and surrogate pregnancy are getting added to the list of things being covered. Which will also add to the cost.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 14, 2020 | Registered: 16 years ago Posts: 3,454 |
Quote
freya
I think there could be a Cadillac plan that could cover sprogging and other non-cosmetic but optional services. The pool (people paying into it) would be 100% voluntary. Let the overall risk determine the cost. Addiction programs (which are incredibly expensive and have a very low rate of success) could also be in this insurance.
That sure would be nice but breeder mindset is very different. They are completely content with and even are expecting someone else to pay. Think of public schools. We don't use them yet we pay for them. Same for health insurance. Those who don't use it but are forced to pay into it are not exactly happy campers. Then, there is low income housing which pays more when there are more kids. Those kids are also covered by subsidized insurance at someone else's expense.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 14, 2020 | Registered: 11 years ago Posts: 3,572 |
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 14, 2020 | Registered: 18 years ago Posts: 9,962 |
Quote
selidororous
Am I the only person who thinks health insurance should not cover sprogging?
Absolutely not. Until insurance covers cosmetic/elective surgery, then it shouldn't cover breeding expenses either. Having brats is optional and voluntary, much like getting breast implants and tummy tucks, so it should be treated as elective to breed too. Childbirth comes with risks, but hey, so doesn't surgery.
Man I bet insurance premiums would hit the fucking floor if nobody covered pregnancy and birth-related costs, and it might make breeders think longer than two seconds about whether or not they should be crapping out kids in the first place. If they can't afford ten grand to make the kid, then they can't afford to keep the kid either. This doesn't even factor in the possibility of extended hospital stays, invasive treatments, life-saving measures for heifer and/or calf, life support for micro-preemies, emergency surgeries, and so forth. Again, calving is a gamble and if the breeders' pocketbooks were at a greater risk, they might start to think that termination is a much wiser choice.
But then things like birth control, sterilization and abortion are all also technically elective reproductive procedures/medications as well, so not covering pignancy costs might mean that nobody would be able to cover anti-pignancy costs either just to keep it fair. Sterilization, abortion and birth control are rarely considered to be medically necessary, so they could be on the chopping block too if insurance providers decided that reproductive care outside of standard exams is ineligible for coverage. After all, nobody needs to have sex, so sexual healthcare may be deemed "unnecessary" too.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 15, 2020 | Registered: 16 years ago Posts: 3,454 |
Quote
craftyzits
I personally believe low income parents aren't fit parent therefore their kids should be removed.
I tend to agree with you there. In mother nature, only the best survive. If we take that principle to humans, having low income is being weak financially. Do weak procreate in mother nature? Not usually
One thing that is worth noting is that if someone is super poor and they do want to breed, USA is a good place to be. Compared to 80% of countries out there, USA does take good care of poor breeders. Just tax funded programs alone are better than many other countries. Add non-profits that are voluntary and I think USA is hard to beat.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 15, 2020 | Registered: 16 years ago Posts: 3,454 |
Quote
Cambion
Quote
selidororous
Am I the only person who thinks health insurance should not cover sprogging?
Absolutely not. Until insurance covers cosmetic/elective surgery, then it shouldn't cover breeding expenses either. Having brats is optional and voluntary, much like getting breast implants and tummy tucks, so it should be treated as elective to breed too. Childbirth comes with risks, but hey, so doesn't surgery.
Man I bet insurance premiums would hit the fucking floor if nobody covered pregnancy and birth-related costs, and it might make breeders think longer than two seconds about whether or not they should be crapping out kids in the first place. If they can't afford ten grand to make the kid, then they can't afford to keep the kid either. This doesn't even factor in the possibility of extended hospital stays, invasive treatments, life-saving measures for heifer and/or calf, life support for micro-preemies, emergency surgeries, and so forth. Again, calving is a gamble and if the breeders' pocketbooks were at a greater risk, they might start to think that termination is a much wiser choice.
But then things like birth control, sterilization and abortion are all also technically elective reproductive procedures/medications as well, so not covering pignancy costs might mean that nobody would be able to cover anti-pignancy costs either just to keep it fair. Sterilization, abortion and birth control are rarely considered to be medically necessary, so they could be on the chopping block too if insurance providers decided that reproductive care outside of standard exams is ineligible for coverage. After all, nobody needs to have sex, so sexual healthcare may be deemed "unnecessary" too.
I am not 100% certain when the change took place, but it used to be that a person had to be on a policy for 1 year before child birth was covered. I don't know if ACA changed that. I do know that ACA did mandate birth control and sterilization coverage of 100% for women. Rule did not apply to men, so vasectomy was not covered. While unfair at first glance, vasectomy is way cheaper than tubal ligation, so setting aside $1000 to $2000 is not an unreasonable thing to ask, considering how much child support payments are.
What did piss me off was "religious exemptions" to covered birth control. Really? What kind of crooked shit is that? Many people oppose war, they still have to pay taxes that are used for war. Many people oppose public education, they still pay taxes for schools... Why is there a free pass to not pay for birth control is perplexing to me. Why is there not a public outcry over it, that really grinds my gears.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 15, 2020 | Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 9,195 |
Because birth control has a failure rate, and access to BC and abortion are more tenuous by the day, I cannot get on board with medical insurance not covering pregnancy. However, other genuine medical issues for women should have parity: contraception and abortion should also be covered. (not IVF)
My beef is, looking at our system of medical insurance, you would think Breeding is the most IMPORTANT medical condition, due to all the pregnancy and birth related shit that is covered.
Breeders have been permitted to fuck with the medical insurance system, and politicians are too scared to tell them no. Whining infertiles petitioned state legislatures in many states to FORCE insurance companies to pay for fertility related expenses, which is a fucking travesty and it directs medical resources from studying reproductive diseases like PCOS and endometriosis. Ask anyone who has a reproductive disease....because IVF is often covered by insurance, it directs the course of "treatment." When I still had my parts and had endo and PCOS, I had more than one doctor tell me to come back "when" I wanted to get pregnant.
So many pignancy expenses that are really items of choice are covered: doulas, breast feeding coaching and paraphernalia related to tit feeding.
It's the same with awwwtism. My state has a special law that mandates insurance companies pay all these awwwwtism expenses for children (I suppose adults can rot when they are no longer cute) but regular insurance will not cover TMJ, which is a bonafide, painful condition. At one time you could not get a prostetic device covered under insurance. People do not choose to get in an accident and lose a leg, but having a kid comes with risk. You could have an autard and you'd better be prepared to deal with it and not expect others to pay every time you have an out of pocket expense.
My beef is, looking at our system of medical insurance, you would think Breeding is the most IMPORTANT medical condition, due to all the pregnancy and birth related shit that is covered.
Breeders have been permitted to fuck with the medical insurance system, and politicians are too scared to tell them no. Whining infertiles petitioned state legislatures in many states to FORCE insurance companies to pay for fertility related expenses, which is a fucking travesty and it directs medical resources from studying reproductive diseases like PCOS and endometriosis. Ask anyone who has a reproductive disease....because IVF is often covered by insurance, it directs the course of "treatment." When I still had my parts and had endo and PCOS, I had more than one doctor tell me to come back "when" I wanted to get pregnant.
So many pignancy expenses that are really items of choice are covered: doulas, breast feeding coaching and paraphernalia related to tit feeding.
It's the same with awwwtism. My state has a special law that mandates insurance companies pay all these awwwwtism expenses for children (I suppose adults can rot when they are no longer cute) but regular insurance will not cover TMJ, which is a bonafide, painful condition. At one time you could not get a prostetic device covered under insurance. People do not choose to get in an accident and lose a leg, but having a kid comes with risk. You could have an autard and you'd better be prepared to deal with it and not expect others to pay every time you have an out of pocket expense.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 15, 2020 | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 1,840 |
After all, nobody needs to have sex, so sexual healthcare may be deemed "unnecessary" too.
Go to some other message boards, even on Quora and ask why people have children they cannot afford and the answer is "You WILL have sex and your sex drive WILL take over and your sex drive does not care about how poor you are. Kind of like the body snatchers take over and WILL make people have sex. I guess some of us are sex mad Jim Bobs and people who use their brains don' t exist.
Go to some other message boards, even on Quora and ask why people have children they cannot afford and the answer is "You WILL have sex and your sex drive WILL take over and your sex drive does not care about how poor you are. Kind of like the body snatchers take over and WILL make people have sex. I guess some of us are sex mad Jim Bobs and people who use their brains don' t exist.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 16, 2020 | Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 9,195 |
Quote
Go to some other message boards, even on Quora and ask why people have children they cannot afford and the answer is "You WILL have sex and your sex drive WILL take over and your sex drive does not care about how poor you are. Kind of like the body snatchers take over and WILL make people have sex. I guess some of us are sex mad Jim Bobs and people who use their brains don' t exist.
Perhaps I truly do have a functioning cerebral cortex. No matter how hot a guy was, or how horny I was, even the thought of a possible pregnancy killed my libido DEAD. When I was on the Pill I NEVER missed a single pill, nor did I ever "forget" to put my diaphragm in, nor did I "forget" to use it properly, and that includes applying more spermicide.
And if one's brain short circuits and says SEX RIGHT NOW, and that's your excuse for having a kid, when you are ill-prepared to do so? What happens when your brain says I'M GONNA SHAKE THAT LITTLE MOTHERFUCKER UNTIL IT SHUTS THE HELL UP, BECAUSE IT'S CRIED ALL NIGHT LONG FOR FIVE NIGHTS STRAIGHT AND I JUST WANT SOME FUCKING SLEEP!
We know what happens.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 16, 2020 | Registered: 11 years ago Posts: 3,572 |
Quote
bell_flower
Perhaps I truly do have a functioning cerebral cortex. No matter how hot a guy was, or how horny I was, even the thought of a possible pregnancy killed my libido DEAD. When I was on the Pill I NEVER missed a single pill, nor did I ever "forget" to put my diaphragm in, nor did I "forget" to use it properly, and that includes applying more spermicide.
Most breeders have nonfunctional brains, it is just subtle enough to get by.
+++++++++++++
Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 16, 2020 | Registered: 16 years ago Posts: 3,454 |
Quote
mr. neptune
After all, nobody needs to have sex, so sexual healthcare may be deemed "unnecessary" too.
Go to some other message boards, even on Quora and ask why people have children they cannot afford and the answer is "You WILL have sex and your sex drive WILL take over and your sex drive does not care about how poor you are. Kind of like the body snatchers take over and WILL make people have sex. I guess some of us are sex mad Jim Bobs and people who use their brains don' t exist.
That's funny. So what they are basically saying is that they have no brains that they intend to use and that their very basic animal instinct is just going to take over and be allowed to run wild. That makes a whole lot of sense, for a dumb breeder. I wonder who are these people who write stuff like that. It reminds of people who claim they could not stop eating something. What? You mean you could not put the food back into the fridge? Was there a dude with a gun there that said to eat that entire 10,000 calorie cake or else?
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 16, 2020 | Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 129 |
Quote
Techie
Quote
craftyzits
I personally believe low income parents aren't fit parent therefore their kids should be removed.
I tend to agree with you there. In mother nature, only the best survive. If we take that principle to humans, having low income is being weak financially. Do weak procreate in mother nature? Not usually.
Actually, the weak still procreate in mother nature unless they’re infertile or die before adulthood. That’s why evolution usually takes many generations to significantly change a population. Survival and reproduction require much less than wellness.
I still agree that people should not be allowed to keep children they can’t afford. Unfortunately, governments like strength in numbers, so they reward the parents instead of charging them with child neglect.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 16, 2020 | Registered: 11 years ago Posts: 3,572 |
Quote
misskitty
Quote
Techie
Unfortunately, governments like strength in numbers, so they reward the parents instead of charging them with child neglect.
This is especially so with the GOP who love to send those children off to fight the endless wars they so love.
+++++++++++++
Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 17, 2020 | Registered: 18 years ago Posts: 4,087 |
Quote
Techie
One thing that is worth noting is that if someone is super poor and they do want to breed, USA is a good place to be. Compared to 80% of countries out there, USA does take good care of poor breeders. Just tax funded programs alone are better than many other countries. Add non-profits that are voluntary and I think USA is hard to beat.
Pretty sure Canada is worse. Breeders are basically paid to breed! They get moo leave (a whole YEAR), duh leave (a couple of months), tax breaks and refunds, cheap day care, monthly kiddie checks for 18 years (which get bigger the more brats they have)...
They even get one free round of IVF! The former government had rightfully abolished that shit, but it's back now. And breeders have the nerve to bitch that it's not enough and/or complain about the requirements, of course.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 17, 2020 | Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 9,195 |
Breeders who think Children Are InevitableTM because sex drive almost always have the mindset that poor people shouldn't be excluded from Breeding and suggesting someone wait until they can afford a kid is "racist" or smacks of eugenics.
The other day on r/antinatalist, someone posted a picture of a woman on TikTok who looked as if she couldn't have been more than 20.
Apparently she was doing the TikTok dance(?) with a belly shot and wrote her kid was due in a few months and she had $4.00 in her bank account. When people made the predictable comments of how super it is to bring a child up in poverty, some wanker waded in and wrote a long diatribe chastising everyone for their "racist" and "eugenic" mindsets because people were saying she was too poor to have a kid.
I almost waded in and said, great observation, Einstein, particularly when TikTok girl was WHITE, but the Bot Admin removed the post before I could. (The Bot Admin said the comment was "hostile to childrun," which I thought was funny.)
It does not matter if you are white, black, purple, etc. If you cannot afford a kid, you shouldn't have one. Where is the "think of the Childrun" battle cry for this topic?
The other day on r/antinatalist, someone posted a picture of a woman on TikTok who looked as if she couldn't have been more than 20.
Apparently she was doing the TikTok dance(?) with a belly shot and wrote her kid was due in a few months and she had $4.00 in her bank account. When people made the predictable comments of how super it is to bring a child up in poverty, some wanker waded in and wrote a long diatribe chastising everyone for their "racist" and "eugenic" mindsets because people were saying she was too poor to have a kid.
I almost waded in and said, great observation, Einstein, particularly when TikTok girl was WHITE, but the Bot Admin removed the post before I could. (The Bot Admin said the comment was "hostile to childrun," which I thought was funny.)
It does not matter if you are white, black, purple, etc. If you cannot afford a kid, you shouldn't have one. Where is the "think of the Childrun" battle cry for this topic?
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 17, 2020 | Registered: 18 years ago Posts: 9,962 |
"I can't help having sex" is a piss poor excuse for reproducing while broke. Yeah, being horny can be insanely overwhelming, but why does it have to end with unprotected sex? You know how many times I've gotten off in the bathroom at work or the grocery store bathroom because I was too horny to think straight? More than I can count. Do these people all have broken hands or something that they can't masturbate when the mood strikes and get on with their lives? Why is it dick/pussy or nothing?
I'm also the most forgetful motherfucker I know, but I have never once missed a birth control pill. Breeder women are fucking DUMB when it comes to hormonal BC too. I used to think birth control pills had a super high failure rate because of all the "I got pregnant on the pill" stories I'd read, but after looking more closely, the details eventually come out and I learned these women would only take their pill 1-2 times per week because they're just so forgetful, teehee! So instead of saying "I got pregnant because I'm stupid," they blame it on the pill itself or claim to just be so damn fertile that a blue pill was no match for their frothy loins.
Apparently breeders are nothing more than animals acting on their most basic instincts. Well, if they're going to run around behaving like unaltered cats, maybe we should have a catch-neuter-release program for poor horny people since these retards obviously can't be arsed to use their brains. It would probably cost less than letting them use Medicaid pay for their goddamn brats. Also, I get my pill for free with insurance, so they can't possibly claim birth control is too expensive either.
And why do accidental pregnancies resulting from irresponsible sexual antics need to be carried to term? Let me guess, abortions are too expensive? Makes you wonder what reality these morons live in where a child costs less than a $500 medical prodecure. But then someone who feels "I can't help fucking" is a reasonable excuse for breeding while broke probably also feels that abortion is murder.
I'm also the most forgetful motherfucker I know, but I have never once missed a birth control pill. Breeder women are fucking DUMB when it comes to hormonal BC too. I used to think birth control pills had a super high failure rate because of all the "I got pregnant on the pill" stories I'd read, but after looking more closely, the details eventually come out and I learned these women would only take their pill 1-2 times per week because they're just so forgetful, teehee! So instead of saying "I got pregnant because I'm stupid," they blame it on the pill itself or claim to just be so damn fertile that a blue pill was no match for their frothy loins.
Apparently breeders are nothing more than animals acting on their most basic instincts. Well, if they're going to run around behaving like unaltered cats, maybe we should have a catch-neuter-release program for poor horny people since these retards obviously can't be arsed to use their brains. It would probably cost less than letting them use Medicaid pay for their goddamn brats. Also, I get my pill for free with insurance, so they can't possibly claim birth control is too expensive either.
And why do accidental pregnancies resulting from irresponsible sexual antics need to be carried to term? Let me guess, abortions are too expensive? Makes you wonder what reality these morons live in where a child costs less than a $500 medical prodecure. But then someone who feels "I can't help fucking" is a reasonable excuse for breeding while broke probably also feels that abortion is murder.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 17, 2020 | Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 2,057 |
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 17, 2020 | Registered: 9 years ago Posts: 3,708 |
Quote
kman
There's a lot of griping now because many insurance plans exclude sprogging expenses for adult dependents. That means these parents who are keeping their adult kids on their plans till age 26. When those kids have kids, the plans don't pay for that.
THIS is the issue with extending any kind of benefit. It causes the very people benefiting from it to demand more and more. Perfect example. Not to mention, adult kids under 26 who are under the insurance of a parent shouldn't consider having brats.
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 17, 2020 | Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 353 |
|
Re: The costs of giving birth in America December 17, 2020 | Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 129 |
Quote
bell_flower
It does not matter if you are white, black, purple, etc. If you cannot afford a kid, you shouldn't have one. Where is the "think of the Childrun" battle cry for this topic?
Word! But that inpig TikToker’s bank account will go up in no time.
Her pignasty entitles her to WIC to get a huge amount of extra groceries on top of her SNAP benefits until the sprog turns 5. She’ll get so much that she can sell the excess. After that, kiddo gets free breakfast and lunch in school even though Moo collects SNAP money for a household of two and didn’t have to spend any of it on the kid since birth. Once her bank balance goes up, she’ll spend it on her nails and hair instead of the kid.
If she ever wants to give the kid something nice, she’ll try to “borrow” money from everyone around her with a sob story about being a single moo. That’s when “think of the childrun” always comes out - rules for thee and not for me.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.