It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Insurance Companies Prefer Abortion as Cheaper than Giving Birth

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
This is dispicable. They've come right out and said it; it's cheaper to kill than it is to bring a life into the world. I'm so glad corporate America is keeping it's eye on the bottom line.




Life Site News


Insurance Companies Prefer Abortion as Cheaper than Giving Birth

BALTIMORE, Maryland, January 8, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A local Planned Parenthood official has bluntly admitted why health insurance companies are increasingly comfortable with covering abortions: because the choice to kill an unborn child is cheaper than giving birth.

"A first trimester abortion is $300 to $450," Baltimore Planned Parenthood CEO John Nugent told the national business magazine Forbes Thursday. "But if the gestational age is higher you're paying for a surgical suite. That's why the insurance companies think they should be offering it. It's cheaper to terminate an unwanted pregnancy rather than taking it to term."

The Forbes article points out the cost estimates offered by the Health Care Blue Book: it lists a typical abortion in a physician's office costing $397, while a vaginal delivery costs $5,992, and a caeserean section is $8,558.

The issue of private abortion coverage has been spotlighted by the abortion-funding debate swirling around President Obama's health care overhaul, which was originally structured to begin quietly funding abortion with government funds by default. Abortion advocates are lobbying full-force against an amendment in the House version of the bill that applies Hyde-amendment restrictions for federal abortion funding. Because the Hyde language restricts taxpayer dollars from funding any private plan covering abortion, customers would have to purchase the abortion coverage in a separate, supplemental plan.



It's now official, your insurance company would have been happier if you had never been born.




posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


But I thought unabashed capitalism was the holiest form of economics. Wasn't Jesus basically spreading the word of lassiez-faire??

When are the people going to stop spreading their cheeks for corporatism?? We have been brainwashed into thinking getting reamed is equal to 'freedom?'


Best,
Skunknuts

[edit on 1/9/2010 by skunknuts]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
That does make sense. I'm surprised the insurance companies are not promoting some kind of elective death pill as well, who knows maybe they are. Pretty messed up times we live in.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by skunknuts
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


But I thought unabashed capitalism was the holiest form of economics. Wasn't Jesus basically spreading the word of lassiez-faire??

When are the people going to stop spreading their cheeks for corporatism?? We have been brainwashed into thinking getting reamed is equal to 'freedom?'


Best,
Skunknuts


Oh, by the way:

SINGLE-PAYER AS SOON AS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WAKE THE HELL-UP!!



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Oh, by the way:

SINGLE-PAYER AS SOON AS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WAKE THE HELL-UP!!



Right on.

Capitalism dehumanizes, simple as that. Classic Marxist idea of alienation - we are alienated from the aspect of our true human nature. A key alternative would have to serve to re-humanize us.

we have a world of pleasures to win, and nothing to lose but boredom
-Raoul Vaneigem, The Revolution of Everyday Life



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   
"A first trimester abortion is $300 to $450,"

Now this I find shocking!..

I paid over $600 all three times!!.. all from Planned Parenthood too. Next time the (free) plan B pill fails me, I'm sending the next what's her name to baltimore (on a bus, 1 way ticket.. after she cooks me dinner..lol..).

Of course that medical procedure is cheaper, it requires fewer resources and results in less long & short term expenditure.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   
While the insurance companies continue to show their true colors I now, more than ever before believe that the insurance companies need to be regulated into doing what they wont do. This nation is in dire need of a comprehensive review of how insurance companies do business as it relates to any viable health care bill. Insurance companies are just one of many too big to fail, out of control corporations that have established a monopoly by use of our legislators and have literally bribed everyone that serves in an elected position to do the bidding of the insurance companies in an effort to ensure that profits come their way with no discernible bad press for how they make profits.

Corruption, greed and abuse of power are at an all time high. Not until we hold corporations accountable for their actions and regulate them into doing what they wont do on their own is the only way to begin cleaning up the health care fiasco that currently faces America.

Whether its abortions or treatment for cancers and other specialized treatments, the insurance companies should not be in the role of dictating to Americans what is good for America. If the insurance companies want to make health decisions for America then they should be regulated to ensure that what they do is a benefit to Americans and not a burden based on profits and what makes profits for the insurance companies.

To add insult to injury, we should know that the Health Care Bill was written by the insurance and pharmaceutical companies to benefit them alone. This is what has to stop. It would benefit the nation to have the best health care bill possible but to think that by giving the insurance companies everything they want they will do what we as a nation need is deluding themselves, because at present the insurance companies are proving over and over that they only care about profits and the bottom line.

If our long life prospects or health care treatment interferes with that goal, then you can bet that the insurance companies will never do what is of benefit to those insured. We see this sad fact every time we read about insurance companies placing profits over people.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Thank you for posting that interesting extract & your comments, FortAnthem.

Having some knowledge of all this, I agree the health insurance Co's are of great concern.

On the one hand, it is always to be applauded when health care managers of any description are trying to spend health care funds in the most efficient manner. This is a complex, emotional area of decision making.

On the other hand, it is of great concern to see the health insurance Co's getting in between the patients & the Dr's & having an undue influence on clinical decisions.

Can you provide a link to the whole article?

I feel it may be useful if we have a little more context for this extract.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Can you provide a link to the whole article?

I feel it may be useful if we have a little more context for this extract.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not


A link to the entire article is provided in the opening post.

Here is a link to the editotial mentioned in the article.



The Senate passed their version of the health care bill with an amendment by Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) that requires health insurance issuers to provide coverage for “preventative care” for women and bars the issuers from imposing cost-sharing requirement on such care.

If the final bill includes the Mikulski amendment, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) will be able to define abortion as “preventative care” in either all or some cases.

Though it may seem far-fetched that abortion could be considered preventative care, it isn’t the case. This year the National Abortion Federation stated in “Providing Abortion Care” that, “APCS [Advanced Practice Clinicians] are especially well positioned in the health care system to address women’s need for comprehensive primary preventative health care that includes abortion care.”



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Thanks for posting your link again, FortAnthem.

That helped me understand the context of your thread a little better.

Whilst it is absolutely necessary to keep looking very critically at the most efficient way to spend healthcare $ in the manner that has the greatest benefit for the whole community, it leads into some extremely sensitive areas of debate & discussion.

Being in the medical "business" in the area of introducing new technology & new procedures, I see this strong ongoing debate on an almost daily basis, across a broad range of healthcare areas.

I think the most important thing for people to do is to try very hard to get an understanding of all the complex facts & arguments, without being totally distracted by one's own emotions & prejudices.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem

This is dispicable. They've come right out and said it; it's cheaper to kill than it is to bring a life into the world.


Most will also pay for Viagra but not birth control.


(you and I disagree on the topic of abortion so I'm not going there)



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join