Free contraceptives for women vs free Viagra for men

thetrollking · 2012-06-22T01:13:29+00:00

Well, lets start with the initial claim in these types of discussions.

Claim 1: Viagra is covered by insurance.

This is false. Viagra, and other ED meds, are not universally covered by insurance. I know my parents insurance doesn't cover it and neither does mine.

The issue is really about universal coverage. There are insurance plans that cover contraceptives for free for women but they are not universal.

There are also, probably I don't know of any, insurance plans that cover Viagra for free for men but they are far from universal.

I know that most Government based insurance plans do not cover viagra. Also, lets look at the price of OC and Viagra.

according to this Viagra ranges from about 9$ to 20$ PER PILL!

This link claims that Oral BC costs 15$-50$ per month. I have heard that it can be less than 10$ PER MONTH at Target and Walmart.

So, not only is the claim that Viagra is covered by insurance incorrect but so is that comparison on prices.

Note: I don't know how often men use Viagra, so I don't know if the average man might use as many pills as a woman uses for BC.

Here are a few links to Viagra v. HBC coverage on insurance plans:

Link 1

Quote[Emphasis mine]:

Summary Planned Parenthood is running a TV ad showing John McCain painfully groping for an answer to a reporter’s question: "It’s unfair that health insurance companies cover Viagra but not birth control. Do you have an opinion on that?"

McCain had good reason to be flustered. The premise of the reporter’s question is a myth. We couldn’t find any data that show a disparity between health insurance companies that cover Viagra and those that cover birth control. The full range of contraceptives, in fact, are covered by more than 86 percent of private insurance plans written for employers.

Analysis Early in July, a reporter on the McCain campaign bus said that "health insurance companies cover Viagra but not birth control" and asked for McCain’s opinion on that. McCain responded with an extremely long pause, finally saying, “I don’t know enough about it to give you a [sic] informed answer.” Planned Parenthood has seized on that flop-sweat moment in a new ad portraying McCain as uninformed on reproductive rights. The ad is running in Washington, D.C., and in battleground states including Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, New Mexico, Ohio and Wisconsin.

Reporter: It’s unfair that health insurance companies cover Viagra but not birth control. Do you have an opinion on that? McCain: I don’t know enough about it to give you a [sic] informed answer.

Sexist Health Care?

The ad implies there is a significant disparity between the number of insurance plans that cover Viagra and those that cover birth control. But that’s not the case. A 2004 report by the nonpartisan Guttmacher Institute found that in 2002, 86 percent of the plans that insurance companies typically wrote for employers covered the full range of approved reversible contraceptive methods (birth control pills, hormone injections, implants, IUDs and diaphragms), and only 2 percent covered no methods at all.

The worry that Viagra, but not birth control, is being included in health care plans is out-of-date, according to Adam Sonfield, who coauthored the report. He says that when Viagra initially became available and insurers began to cover it, “there was concern that this was the case and that insurance companies really were covering erectile dysfunction drugs but were not covering contraception.” This concern, he says, helped spur efforts to get contraception coverage mandated in 27 states, and contraceptive coverage rates shot up as a result. Sonfield’s study, which asked insurance companies about employer-sponsored plans, found that coverage of contraceptive methods had tripled from 1993 to 2002. Sonfield says that the number of plans covering birth control likely has continued to increase over the last six years, though he stresses that U.S. health care is still short of complete coverage.

There probably are, however, some insurers who do cover erectile dysfunction drugs and don’t cover contraception, Sonfield told us. Guttmacher estimates that about half of all Americans with employer-provided coverage work for employers that self-insure, paying their employees’ medical claims out of pocket. And it is certainly a fact that some of these employers have, at least in the past, paid for Viagra but not birth control. For instance, in 2005 Union Pacific Railroad, a self-insuring company, was sued because it covered erectile dysfunction drugs but not contraceptives. A 2007 appellate court decision ruled that the company did not have to provide birth control coverage, but by that time it had begun to offer coverage under the terms of an earlier court decision. Other companies may still cover Viagra but not birth control, although in 2000 the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that plans of this sort violate the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, an amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII applies to employers with 15 or more employees, employment agencies, labor organizations, and state and local governments.

As for Viagra, independent studies of coverage are sparse, but the ones that exist don’t show that the drug is covered more than birth control. In 2000, an article in Health Affairs reported that “[o]nly about half of all U.S. health plans reimburse members for at least some Viagra pills.” A 1999 Washington Post article reported that the drug company Pfizer, which makes Viagra, estimated the coverage rate at 40 percent. And a 2007 Mercer survey of large employers (500 or more employees) showed that about 30 percent denied coverage of erectile dysfunction drugs, and most of the remaining employers imposed limitations on coverage. A Pfizer representative had no comment when we requested more up-to-date information.

Still a Concern?

Certainly, the data on both Viagra and birth control coverage is incomplete. But while it may be accurate to claim that there exist insurers who cover erectile dysfunction drugs and not birth control, it is not accurate to imply that this disparity is common. The reporter’s question was out of date at best. Planned Parenthood, a major advocate for reproductive rights, should know this.

When we asked Planned Parenthood whether insurance companies were denying coverage for contraceptives, the group pointed us to the text of a 2003 amendment introduced by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), which would have prevented insurance companies from denying such coverage. The text of the amendment includes the claim that "half of traditional indemnity plans and preferred provider organizations, 20 percent of point-of-service networks, and 7 percent of health maintenance organizations cover no contraceptive methods other than sterilization." This could be referring to a 1993 Guttmacher study showing that 49 percent of indemnity plans did not cover contraceptives, and that less than 20 percent of large-group indemnity plans and PPOs and less than 40 percent of point-of-service plans and HMOs covered the full range of reversible contraception options. By the time the Murray amendment was written, that information was 10 years out of date. Now, it’s 15 years old and irrelevant, given Guttmacher’s more recent findings.

So not only is HBC and other types of BC covered more than Viagra but Viagra costs more and more of the cost is placed on the individual and not covered by plans. On top of all of that, feminists have forced companies to subsidize female sexual choice and BC due to pregnancy discrimination. Would pregnancy discrimination be de facto discrimination against men? Since men can't get pregnant?

Link 2

Edit: Also, Viagra is taken for more than just ED concerns. It was originally developed without Erectile Dysfuntion in mind. It was developed to help with cardiac and artery diseases, that is why is works as a ED med because it stimulate blood flow and what not. Link with info on blood flow and arterial considerations

thrway_1000 · 2012-06-22T00:17:39+00:00

There is one slight problem with your argument and that is that hormonal contraceptives are used to regulate and control a woman's period. Many times women use these contraceptives not for the original purpose but to make their periods consistent and reduce both PMS and make a lighter flow. These are valid uses and many women need this to be viable in the workforce. If their period is unpredictable or so heavy that they're loosing too much blood it can cause them to miss work or even become a danger to themselves and others (depending on their position). Also, controlling mood swings is better for coworker relationships.

mrgoldbe · 2012-06-22T00:00:18+00:00

I think this argument came about because of people on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh equating the coverage of birth control to "paying women to have sex." In that case, it is comparable to coverage for Viagra, which enables men to have sex.

2012-06-23T01:33:14+00:00

1) I think you underestimate how often contraceptives are prescribed for medical reasons. For many women, "normal" periods can be absolutely debilitating, and birth control is a necessity if they want to be able to consistently go to work/class.

2) It's a stretch to say that men take Viagra for women. They take it for themselves, and also for their partners. It's not a completely selfless action. Which is okay. It's the same as birth control--women take it for themselves, and also for their partners.

It would be an even bigger stretch to say that Viagra benefits women more than contraceptives benefit men. If we're taking into account how much each medication benefits the other gender, contraceptives win by a landslide.

If MR takes a side regarding insurance covering contraceptives, it should definitely be on the side of women who want BC. Because when they finally develop a good male contraceptive option, shouldn't it be covered by insurance?

khaosxxkels · 2012-06-22T01:17:46+00:00

(2) Viagra enables men to give their partners the pleasure of vaginal intercourse, which many women want. It's therefore a benefit for women. But Viagra carries risks for men who use it - so in effect it's men who are making an (admittedly small) sacrifice for the benefit of women.

And female contraceptives enable women to give their partners the pleasure of vaginal intercourse without the woman (and perhaps the guy) getting worried about pregnancy. Moreover, every single birth control pill as far as I know has side affects - ranging from headaches, nausea, messes with the mood to a increased rate of strokes, breast cancer, etc etc etc. So it's women who are making an (admittedly small) sacrifice for the benefit of men.

But what we must remember is that viagra is also for the benefit of the man (not just the woman) and BC is for the benefit of the woman (and not just the man).

(1) Fertility is not a disease or a dysfunction. With a few exceptions, contraceptives are not used to correct a medical problem, but a social one. Erectile dysfunction is a failure of the body to act normally, therefore treating it is a medical procedure.

This is more like it, but there are more than just a few exceptions. I've known women who take it to regulate their periods, which is needed quite a lot in the busy modern lifestyle as periods can be heavy, irregular, painful - women just can't afford to be out of action for a week if they have a bad period (or two weeks, even. I knew a woman who would have a heavy period for two weeks a month). And there are many other medical conditions besides that in which birth control is useful for women.

I personally think this is discrimination against women. Viagra gives men the ability to enjoy sex normally. Female contraceptives (even disregarding the health reasons a woman might take it) allows women to enjoy sex normally - without the worry of pregnancy.

Women are the ones who get pregnant. Whether we, or they, like it or not.. they are the ones with the most responsibility. They cannot enjoy sex with the constant worry of getting pregnant - even if a man has his worries about 'getting a woman pregnant', he is still not the one whose body has to go through all the changes, who may have to have a traumatic medical procedure (abortion) or give birth (plus I may add that the majority here, including me, are fighting for men to have more BC options and also the option of some form of legal paternal surrender).

Viagra helps men enjoy sex normally, as he should be able to. It corrects a problem, and that helps them enjoy a luxury in life (sex is NOT a necessity). You wont die from having no choice but to keep it in your pants.

Birth control allows us to enable women to enjoy sex normally, by todays standards, as they should be able to without worry of pregnancy. It's not correcting a problem, but it IS helping them in being able to enjoy that same luxury in life. They wont die from having no choice but to keep their legs closed (for fear of getting pregnant).

But we have ways to help both these people enjoy a luxury. So thats cool beans. But we can't only help ONE sex enjoy it, but not the other. That is, indeed, discrimination.

Both should be covered, or neither at all (bar contraceptives that correct life threatening/major life altering issues, which an happen). I think the feminists have a point here.

Edit: It is also important to point out that pregnancy is a medical condition. Birth control is preventing an unwanted (and detrimental in general) condition for most women. Pregnancy is hard on the womans body; a wanted pregnancy is worth it. An unwanted pregnancy may have long lasting negative affects for a lot of women.

Le4chanFTW · 2012-06-21T23:52:26+00:00

Erectile dysfunction is a failure of the body to act normally, therefore treating it is a medical procedure.

That's really all there is to say. The only way I can see contraceptives being covered is if, like you said, they are used to treat legitimate medical problems. Contraception for the sake of contraception? Doesn't really fit the bill.

solinv · 2012-06-22T00:31:37+00:00

There are certain disorders that require birth control for a woman's body to function normally. PCOS being the most common. In these situations, birth control is covered by insurance. This would be the best analogy for viagra. If birth control was not covered for a legitimate medical condition such as PCOS, then that would be very wrong, but it is. It's not that viagra benefits women, its that ED is a legitimate medical condition as much as PCOS. There are drugs available to remedy both of them. Insurance covers them.

Will insurance cover my condoms? No. Why should insurance cover your birth control (assuming you don't have a legitimate medical reason to take it)? Insurance covers things where there is a legitimate medical problem. It does not cover things that are not medical conditions.

Should it cover more? That's up for debate (personally, I believe contraceptives should be subsidized). But as it stands, given current policy on the issue it is totally logical to not cover the pill without a medical necessity.

genuinemra · 2012-06-22T03:36:19+00:00

I think you're full of shit, dude. I am perfectly fine with boner pills being covered for men, but please don't act like they are somehow moral while contraceptives are amoral slut pills. Controlling fertility is very important for both men and women. Contraceptive coverage is important for both men and women.

2012-06-21T23:41:39+00:00

[permanently deleted]

rightsbot · 2012-06-21T23:24:27+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

2012-06-22T16:47:51+00:00

Viagra is needed due to the number of male genital mutilations carried out on boys in NA. ED as a direct result of childhood mutilation sponsored by the State SHOULD be covered, but isn't.

Just another way Government looks out for mens interests...

Title	Free contraceptives for women vs free Viagra for men
Author	EvilPundit
Upvotes	8
Comments	34
Date	June 21, 2012 11:23 PM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/veomf/free_contraceptives_for_women_vs_free_viagra_for/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/free-contraceptives-for-women-vs-free-viagra-for.1019328 https://theredarchive.com/post/1019328

Comments