Women Have The Most To Lose if Health Reform Fails

Imagine that you recently had a baby through a cesarean section and had planned on taking off a few years to stay at home to care for your new baby. Now with the economic recession forcing many women back into the workforce, you find that you too need to re-enter the workforce to help your family make ends meet. The problem? Good luck finding health insurance. Insurers in most states are permitted to consider gender when determining both individual and group rates and therefore women are frequently charged much more than men for premiums. www.nwlc.org. Moreover, a C-section can be viewed as a "pre-existing condition" and insurers can now refuse to pay for future C-sections or deny a woman who has had a prior C-section from health coverage entirely. Equally abhorrent, in eight states and in the District of Columbia, insurers can legally deny a woman's health insurance application if she has been the victim of domestic violence.

In actuality, the impact on women from our current health care system is even worse than just the odious discriminatory practices mentioned above. Skyrocketing health care costs and a lack of access to affordable health care have had a greater impact on women than men according to a Commonwealth Fund study that examines how our current health care system affects women in this country. The statistics cited in the study are staggering: seven in ten women have no insurance or are underinsured, face medical debt or are facing a cost-related issue affecting their access to health care. More than half of all women in the Unites States have had to refuse necessary care due to cost. Many women are simply not able to find coverage for maternity care at all.

One of the main problems facing women in obtaining health care is that women still earn 78 cents for every dollar that men earn. Yet women use more health care than men, in large part because of women's reproductive care needs. Exacerbating the situation are the higher premiums many insurers charge women and thus the impact is that women have more trouble than men obtaining the critical health care that they need and therefore more women than men end up being underinsured.

When women make the majority of health care decisions for families (which they do) and when women are more likely than men to visit the doctor more frequently and be proactive about their health (which they are), we as a society are making a grave mistake in not putting quality, affordable health care for women at the top of the agenda in the health care debate.

Women are a majority of the country's population (52 percent) and constitute more of the overall vote nationwide than men (in every Presidential election since 1980 more women than men proportionately have voted-8million more in the 2000 election and 9 million more in the 2004 election.) Yet where are the advertising campaigns in the health care debate targeted to women or the grass roots mobilization of women's groups? I have never seen such a blizzard of ads in a non-Presidential election year as we have seen in this current health care debate, yet I have yet to see an ad geared to women. Women have the most to gain by a passage of a health care bill (a prohibition against insurance companies charging more for premiums for women than for men as many currently do, a reversal of the policy allowing insurers to deny coverage based on a prior C section or domestic violence incident, universal coverage of maternity care, premium subsidies which will make health care more affordable for women and families.) Women also have the most to lose if heath care reform fails yet you wouldn't know it from the paucity of dialogue on this issue.

The messaging from the Obama Administration on what women stand to gain and lose in the health care debate has been terrible. We are the only industrialized nation in the West that does not provide universal health care, and yet, the dialogue out of Washington has focused on everything but the impact to women. The President should stand up and say how can we as a society tolerate a system that so blatantly discriminates against a group that comprises over half of our country and that clearly is not putting women's health on equal footing. If the Administration fails to pass a strong plan for universal health care, our nation's chance at ever doing so will be severely comprised for years to come. We are overlooking one of our best assets to get the message out--women--who will raise their voices loudly as they have for generations to protest the perpetuation of a system that does not properly treat women equally and that blatantly does not put proper value on maternity and a women's overall health.

 

Follow Julie Menin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/www.twitter/Jul

Comments

[lar62]

Having a child is a joint responsibility of both parents and should not fall solely on the shoulders of the mother, who ultimately carries the child, gives birth to this baby, and carries the major burden for bringing the child to adulthood. So, too, the cost for insurance to secure the safety of both mother and child should be a shared family responsibility. This is a reality call.

[ron46032]

This is why people get married and share the costs. I don't believe anyone disputes that. The problem is that the discussion so far has been that women in general should be in essence given reduced cost health insurance that is subsidized by men.

My point is that the couple pays the price together for having children. Women in general should have to pay for what they use just like men.

[cqyates]

To all the right wingers on this thread let me let you in on a little secret.....When you hurt women, you hurt the children. When you hurt children, you destroy the future. Duh!

[ron46032]

So you are saying that you can hurt men and not hurt children? Women want equality except when it comes to paying their fair share?

[brewcity]

Good to see the different comments on here...

The thing that surprised me most were the conservative comments: Women have a choice to get pregant - thus they should pay more for health insurance. Women want to be treated equal - so why should they get their health insurance lowered. I can definitely see where you are coming from with that point of view.

HOWEVER, these comments would have made more sense coming from liberals. I'm shocked (but not really) that these words are coming out of the mouths of conservatives. How can you believe that an unborn child is worth more than the moon and stars; and then say the the womb that unborn child lives in is worthless? NOW all of the sudden when it comes to the cost of health insurnance women have a "choice" to get pregnant or not?

I never learned anything from a man who agreed with me...but then again I never learned anything from hypocrites that want it both ways. Just pick a stance and stick with it, Okayyyy? Yeesh, same thing with pro-lifers who are pro-capital punishment...I'd have more respect if your logic was a little more "logical"

[ron46032]

If you want to have children, your going to have to pay. Might as well get used to the idea. And yes if a women gets fixed so that she cannot have a child, then her premiums should be lowered.

[Alethea]

I just want to mention that I find it very disheartening that are some on this thread that don't believe that woman should get maternity coverage because having children is a choice. Rather, they seem to be perfectly ok with the idea of letting these women be thrown to the wolves for the "crime" of wanting a family. Meanwhile they disregard the idea that HALF THE POPULATION is important enough to give AFFORDABLE healthcare to.

And here I was thinking that we've moved beyond the "it's all the woman's fault/resp­onsibility­" mentality.

I would hope that these days men see themselves as part of that choice, accepted their share of responsibility, and see it as a worthwhile endeavor.

Boy was I wrong. Especially seeing as how the insurance company seems to agree with these selfish, shortsighted men and take out their misogynistic leanings on millions of women every day.

To them I say: grow up. Your mothers, daughters, sisters and friends need you to stop making lame excuses and take personal responsibility FOR YOUR COUNTRY. Not just for the tiny bit YOU think is important. You and yours don't live in a vacuum. You and yours is a part of this country just like everyone else is. So stop being so childish and help us work towards giving affordable access to healthcare for ANYONE who actually needs it.

Who knows, you and yours might need the help someday too.

[ron46032]

How can you have equality when some think they are more important than others? Women should get maternity coverage, but they should pay for this service.

It's simple. The same coverage costs the same for a man and a woman. If the woman wants more coverage (i.e. maternity coverage), then pay the extra costs. This is fair and equal treatment.

If on the other hand, women feel that they should be treated differently, then men should also be treated differently.

[vim876]

Ok, but women's premiums should never be applied towards prostate, penile, or testicular difficulties ever again. While we're at it, let's take into account men's higher risk-taking stats. Oh, and their increased risk of heart attack.

[Alethea]

What part does the child play in this little game here? Don't they matter?

Do you really think that women are asking for something SPECIAL on top of what they normally get just for funzies?

No dum.my. The whole reason why women are asking for maternity coverage is for their CHILD'S sake. When the women are healthy during pregnancy the chances are that their child will be healthy. And that's the ultimate goal. It's that simple. Otherwise what the he// is even the point of getting pregnant?

I would think that you understand that there is actually more than one person involved here - the child. And seeing as how women are actually taking care of NOT ONLY THEMSELVES but their born/unborn children, you would be fine with putting out a little extra. Becuse there IS extra stuff to deal with. You talk about equality, but what is equal about expecting someone to take care of 2 people, but only be able to afford enough coverage for 1? Don't you think that hurts the child's chances too?

Look I understand you're cheap and don't wanna pay for it. Fine. That's a very shortsighted, selfish and uncaring stance, but it's one you're entitled to.

I'll keep fighting for the moral thing nonetheless. And P.S I wouldn't mind paying for viagra coverage if it meant I could get good maternity coverage. I'm of the belief that anybody should be able to get the stuff they want for a decent price.

[AJH]

explains why your a journalist and not a political consultant.

Ad's don't target the group whose vote you have secured.

You don't focus on issue area's that can be sidetracked (Abortion not being covered debate would have been a much larger issue if your track was followed.)

Their strategy has been to talk about it as a universal human right (So as to not offend anyone of a targetted add segment but also to prevent segmenting of the bill to a narrower focus).

Danger of focusing on a subset is you get some last moment compromise that addresses womens issues branded as healthcare reform. Which it wouldn't be.

Now what is needed is the womens advocacy groups to get out and talk about how reform is needed for women to their demographic while the rpesident manages the entire ball game. Let the president cover big picture and you mobilize your grassroots. Or should democrats like republicans start manufacturing PR grassroots advocacy and support.

It isn't a womens issue it isn't a mens issue it's an american issue.

[ron46032]

Why is it that some people want other people to pay for them? Do they think that they deserve this? Why shouldn't people pay their own way unless the other person chooses to help them?

Women want equal rights and at the same want to have special privileges. It used to be that usually men would pay for a woman's meal on a date. Then it became proper for each to pay for their own food. Now with health insurance, women want men to pick up at least part of the check.

[Cherie King]

women the same age as a man will pay anywhere from 20 to 40% more and have a vastly healthier lifestyle. what separates them is her uterus and it ability to carry life.

[BxGurl0813]

Exactly right, Cherie. Why is it whenever someone obviously never a victim of discrimination of any kind throws in their 2 cents, it's always about other people getting "special privileges". What's so "special" about wanting to earn the same wage for the same work, or wanting to be treated fairly?

And I don't know where Ron read about "people wanting other people to pay for them". It certainly wasn't in THIS article.

[ron46032]

Which means that they will require more health care services. If you use more services, shouldn't you pay more money? If you don't believe this, then you believe that others should subsidize you. You should also be against young men paying more for auto and life insurance.

[Cherie King]

a non smoker within a healthy weight range could pay more than $100 a month a man on the other hand will pay not much over $67a month. women see the GYN once or twice a year no more. why should we not fight for equality. We can't keep depending on Medicaid to pick up the balance if a woman is making too much (i.e. as little as $50 too much a month) to get Maternity coverage or is Married.

[ron46032]

This is easy to explain. The smoking man isn't likely to use health care services until much later in life which is when his insurance prices will go up significantly. The woman on the other hand is more likely to use health insurance younger because of pregnancy.

Again, shouldn't you pay for what you use? If you want to be privileged because of your uterus and only pay what a man of the same age pays, then shouldn't you also expect that the man gets other privileges such as higher wages?

If you want to be equal, then pay for what you use.

[Alethea]

Don't men have a role in the raising of children?

Or are you perfectly happy to let women do all the work with no help from you?

[ron46032]

This is why you get married. Then the family pays for children. It's a cost of doing business so to speak.

[TeeLolly]

Without a robust public option available to everyone, the insurers may "equalize" coverage not by reducing women's premiums or adding services women need without any extra fees, but by raising men's premiums to the level that women pay. After all, we're talking about insurers--do you really think they'll take a cut in profits when they can accomplish mandated parity by raising their profits (and executive compensation, bonuses, stock prices, and thus the number of BMWs in each of their seven or eight garages)?

[ron46032]

BTW, isn't it fair for women to pay for more of a service that they use? If you say no, then you should also complain about paying too little for auto and life insurance.

If you want to pay equal amounts (i.e. have men subsidize a woman's health insurance), then you must reciprocate with the other situations where women have an advantage. It's only fair.

[vim876]

If this were really about babies, infertile women would be paying lower rates.

[ron46032]

For the majority of Americans, they get their health insurance through their employer. There is NO discrimination at that level. However, the Dems want to destroy that relationship and impose their own thinking on what is ok and not ok.

With private insurance, we have choices. When the Government takes over, the choice is none. Women should freak out over the possibility of Government run health insurance.

[Moniqueue]

There will be no government takeover. That is a fantasy propagated by right-wing nutjobs. With a public option, there will be MORE choices, not fewer. Insurance companies will not go out of business. Even in England, where there is nationalized health care, private insurance companies exist for those who wish to purchase those policies. The majority of people choose not to. Not to say we should be like England, but I mention it because that tired old fear-mongering, government-takeover argument is completely false. Insurance companies will continue to exist with or without a public option. Many people will benefit from having this option, and it will not be any less affordable than what we're paying per capita now. With the public option, power will be given back to the people, bargaining power will be given to the public (finally), and everyone's costs will be lower. Medical devices, health care costs, etc will go down with a public option. Anyone against this is either seriously misinformed (a tragedy) or stands to gain monetarily by not allowing a public option to exist (morally reprehensible). End of story.

[ron46032]

In England, they were (maybe still are) trying to make private insurance illegal. The have-nots trying to make sure that everyone is equally miserable.

Have you known any Government program that makes costs go down? Shall we start sharing on every Government program that costs more than expected, has unintended consequences, and drives out private companies?

[TeeLolly]

When employed by a metropolitan legal aid society, I worked in an outlying office that was required to procure its own group coverage because the insurer that covered the metropolitan-area offices refused to cover our office. My mostly male colleagues voted for a plan that charged women almost double what it charged men unless a woman agreed to NO maternity care--even if she was raped but otherwise had no intention of becoming pregnant. I got permission to opt out and found individual coverage through a professional organization that did not discriminate against women at that time (but later did, forcing me to go elsewhere).

[ron46032]

You know that you do have a choice on where you want to work. Not all benefits are directly salary related.

[Cherie King]

some employers don't provide group policies but contract with brokers or a company direct so you buy it yourself but its still taken from your paycheck. i didn't qualify for health insurance for having a blackout and going to ER, i don't drink btw and did not have a seizure. Its likely food toxicity that caused abdominal pain and loss of consciousnesses. happens like every few year once or twice. mostly while i am not eating much of anything.

[ron46032]

Chose an employer who gives you want you want and need.

[Alethea]

Since when does having additional choices = no choices? Yay Republican logic!!

Option = something you can CHOOSE to have............. or not. Learn your definitions man!!

Why should I have to rely on my employer to keep me alive? How is that a healthy working relationship? Why shouldn't I be able to work where I want to, how much I want to, or go off and start my own business without FEARING THAT I'LL GO BANKRUPT OR DIE if I do?

Why shouldn't we help out our fellow human beings and make sure they get access to the care they need at a reasonable price? Isn't keeping people from becoming disabled or bankrupt good for the economy?

What's wrong with telling insurance companies who are in the business of providing health insurance coverage THAT THEY ACTUALLY NEED TO PROVIDE HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE.

What's wrong with letting the Government compete just like they do in higher education? Isn't competition a good thing for consumers?

You guys seriously need to think about this stuff a little more thoroughly. There really is no downside to having healthcare reform. Unless you're an insurance company exec that is.

[ron46032]

Let me put it in a way that you can understand. A community has lots of mom and pop stores and some small grocery stores. Walmart builds a new store in town. More choices right? All of the mom and pop stores and small grocery stores close. Now there is 1 choice.

Got it?

[RightWingMarine]

Ms. Menin makes a lot of claims. She claims that women earn 78% of men. Based on what study? What were the controls? There are plenty of studies that state the opposite and most people can recognize this as true. Does the person in the desk next to you with the same job and same experience make more, less or about the same as you? If a company could pay women 22% less than they pay men and get the same productivity, why would anyone hire men?

Ms. Menin complains that women are charged higher premiums for healthcare and then acknowledges that women see a doctor more often for more expensive procedures. Why shouldn't they pay more? Men pay higher car insurance premiums because they get in more wrecks and receive more tickets, they should pay more.

Ms. Menin complains that women may be denied coverage for childbirth if they had a C-Section in the past. My understanding is that a prior c-section increases the liklihood that another will be needed for future births and these procedures are expensive. Since a woman goes into this situation with her eyes open why should national healthcare be reformed because she isn't covered for a procedure when she knew that she wouldn't be before she got pregnant?

Ms. Menin complains that insurance companies might deny coverage for domestic abuse but doesn't cite any situations where this has happened. it may be true but without evidence it's hard to take it seriously.

[TeeLolly]

When I worked for a toy company whose primary consumers were women, my male colleague requested and received a raise on the ground that his wife, who worked elsewhere in another field entirely, made more than he did and it was too stressful for him to bear. I was paid half what he was paid, even though our qualifications were comparable and we did the same job.

As a law clerk during law school, I found twice that male colleagues with mediocre grades (I was in the top 5%) were being paid from one-fourth more than I was paid, to twice what I was paid. Again, we did the same job, except the supervising attorney never had to alter or redo my work as was the case with the males.

[Cherie King]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/14/when-getting-beaten-by-yo_n_286029.html the door is open for domestic abuse to be used to discriminate in many states.

[Alethea]

Men don't DIE if they can't afford to get their car fixed.

Think about that for one second.

[ron46032]

We all die. The question is when. What do you think kills more people per year: auto accidents or women who can't afford health insurance? Think about that for 2 seconds.

[Cherie King]

C-Sections are not cheap, and this woman didn't want a one when it happened, but because giving birth is unpredictable she had to get one. It can costs upwards to $12k for delivery alone for a C-Section and non-surgical is about $8K, and the co-pay can be about $400-$800. So hospitals I think have systems set up where you can prepay for delivery.
Getting a C-Section can up your chances of having another one and could be a reason for discriminating.

[Cherie King]

• In 2007, the World Health Organization
reported that 40 countries have lower
maternal death rates than the U.S.

[kat1944]

This is another of those pesky personal responsibility problems.
You choose to become pregnant.
You choose to quit working to do it.
You apparently choose not to have health insurance prior to getting pregnant.
You have to have a C section and have to have a job. Not choices but necessities, apparently not given a thought when making your first decision.
You decide that it is someone's problem and they should provide you insurance and pay for it.
All this because you are a woman.
Sorry. No deal.

[Cherie King]

I believe she had insurance when she had c-section it was the new policy that discriminated.

[Alethea]

You don't get it do you?

Do you really think that a woman CHOOSES to have a Csection? You know they have to pull your intestines out to do that right?

If every woman could choose to have a healthy pregnancy don't you think they would? And don't you think that women are smart enough to know that if they take off work, things will be more expensive?

The point of the article is that women who have EVER had complications (or even a functioning uterus) are at a higher risk for costing the insurance companies more money. And if they are a higher risk then they get charged more IF they can even get it. While that makes sense from a business standpoint the fact of the matter is that PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY NEED HEALTHCARE CAN'T GET IT.... and that's an oxymoron.

After all, what is the point of covering someone who doesn't necessarily need coverage? What is the point of denying care to people who DO need it? It's totally backwards, totally defeats the point of providing healthcare, and it's totally immoral when people go bankrupt or DIE because of it.

Trust me, if women could get access to affordable healthcare in order to have a baby then they would. Women aren't stupid.

[kat1944]

I never said that she chose a C-section.
Health insurance for women is priced higher because their health care is more extensive and expensive.
You get what you pay for.
This is true in all things and health care is no different nor should it be.
I am very willing to pay for the health care of those who cannot get insurance but not for those who can but feel it is too expensive and want me to pay for theirs as well as my own expensive care. I am already paying for senors, the poor and their children and the illegal and their children. I can't afford anymore dependents and pay for my own family, too.

[Cherie King]

as someone who worked for an insurance company i can tell you few things.

1. Maternity coverage is an extra policy many times than none that you have to pay into for up to 12 months before trying to get pregnant.
2. Good luck after 35 years old getting a maternity policy if not offered in your group insurance, you too old.
3. Men cannot buy a policy in some markets if they currently have a girlfriend, wife, or woman pregnant by him.
4. Women can be making too much money to get Medicaid in their state to get prenatal care.

http://rememberthemothers.net/ Maternal deaths are under reported in the US It was reported that for every 100,000 births 15.1 women die but the CDC say that it could actually be as much as 3 times that. One thing that could nip at that number would be health care reform.

[GoingRogue]

"Imagine that you recently had a baby through a cesarean section and had planned on taking off a few years to stay at home to care for your new baby....The problem? Good luck finding health insurance. "

Wouldn't it be more logical to find insurance BEFORE the having the baby?

[Alethea]

Don't you think women would if they could?

Give us a little credit buddy. It's cheaper to have insurance to have a baby than to pay for it out of pocket. I mean, we are not entirely stu.pid.

The point of the article (if you cared to read it) is that many women can't even GET insurance even if they wanted it. A little reading comprehension goes a long way........

[h0tr0d]

Yes...women use healthcare much more than men....but who's paying for it ? I think women should be paying MUCH more toward healthcare and stop pretending it's a god given right that dropped from heaven. You want healthcare services...pay for them and stop asking the government or men to fund it.

[Alethea]

Okay........... then hows about we stop using tax payer dollars to fund research into men only things like Viagra? And why does my insurance company cover Viagra but not birth control pills?

Birth control pills are actually useful and prevent even more expensive pregnancy. But I suppose it's cheaper to not cover ANYTHING a woman might actually need..... you know....... to keep the species going...........

But I suppose it's too much to ask YOU to help out with that little endeavor. As long as it doesn't affect YOU then why should YOU help take responsibility for the health of your fellow human beings? After all, it's not like the health of HALF THE POPULATION would affect YOU now would it? Oh wait, it actually would.

People who need healthcare should actually get it at a reasonable price. That's called morality you know. And since women need it more than men then women should have plenty of access to it. Frankly I don't care if you are too selfish to pitch in. That's what taxes are for. And yes the government DOES have the responsibility to make sure HALF THE POPULATION is healthy and productive because it ultimately affects EVERYONE. Including you geni.us. One way or another, it includes you.

But I suppose you don't feel it's your God Given right to exist. After all, according to you, your mother didn't NEED to give birth to you........

[RightWingMarine]

you complain about taxpayer dollars funding research into viagra and we can agree on that, I too believe that the govt should not be involved in any drug research. You also claim, however, that viagra is a male use only drug. I suspect that most men that consume viagra do not do so alone.
You complain that your insurance company will pay for viagra and not birth control pills. That's a problem between you and your insurance company, not a reason to change how I receive my coverage.

I don't follow your line of reasoning in your second paragraph about how birth control keeps the species going.

Why should it be my responsibility to provide healthcare coverage for myself and my family and half the population? Why can't this half of the population pay for their own insurance? If some aspects of coverage are too expensive or because of a person's age or medical history the insurance company declines coverage, then either do without or come up with the money. If the insurance won't cover a c-section and a woman's history suggests she would probably need one should she become pregnant, then don't get pregnant! It's not like catching the flu.

[h0tr0d]

Equal dollars should be spent on gender specific drugs....just like equal dollars should be spent on gender specific illness. Women dont need healthcare more than men, they just use it more.....which is fine as long as they are willing to pay for it. The wealth distribution from men to women is over...get use to it. You can have whatever you want....as long as your willing to earn it. I'm willing to pitch in to pay for my healthcare and my wife's and my kids...and my parents....I just dont want to pitch in for lazy people that aren't willing to pay their own way. Half the population (women) should be accountable for paying HALF of what's required. ore healthcare than men...

PS My mother did not ask the government to pay for my birth.