dagblog - Comments for "Gender Discrimination in Health Care"

"So apparently the issue

Elizabeth2 — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 20:33:45 +0000

In reply to Gender Discrimination in Health Care

"So apparently the issue isn't women, it's reproduction"

OMG - I thought you were dead! But here you are, right on TPM, Mr. Justice William "Pregnancy is a gender-neutral condition" Rhenquist!!

Makes (a kind of) sense. If you can fire women who become pregnant because you would also fire any men who become pregnant, then I guess you can charge more for those of "any gender" who are capable of becoming pregnant. Thanks for clearing that up.

It was far more blatant than

Elizabeth2 — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:23:27 +0000

In reply to Gender Discrimination in Health Care

It was far more blatant than discrimination in hiring practices -- FAR more. And far more personally humiliating: the victims were already suffering and they were being told, by those with knowledge and in authority, that is was something wrong with *them* ---- The conditions ranged from active infection to what are termed "sports injuries" when suffered by men (and "figments of imagination" when suffered by non-athletic women) --- and the providers ranged from small town GPs to Leahy Clinic in Boston and Univ. of Chicago medical center. The former were more personally abusive - not an exaggeration in the least -- than the latter, but neither gave serious, patient consideration. ---- Success in litigation is measured in many ways: a lawsuit "won" or a settlement that addresses the patient's needs and assures good treatment in the future (the type of resolution I prefer), so that's not a really valid criteria.

How about "there but for the

Elizabeth2 — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:15:29 +0000

In reply to Gender Discrimination in Health Care

How about "there but for the grace of God go I"? We can feel secure because we know that if any of us -- even I, or my child -- fall, there is a safety net.

My point, CT, is that when

Elizabeth2 — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:12:49 +0000

In reply to Gender Discrimination in Health Care

My point, CT, is that when you are selling a policy for millions of people (I work for a very *large* government entity), it all evens out: gender, age, physical condition, etc. For every chronically ill person there will be someone - or several someones - who simply never get sick.

Look -- if it makes sense for "society" and is fair for people with valuable property to pay more for school taxes than people with cheap property, then why can't people who have a higher income pay more for health care than those with low salaries? If everyone is insured, those "actuarial" differences even out, and our whole society is better off if everyone has basic good health (or basic good care if they don't).

Those who want and can pay for more, better services - i.e., private schools, "Cadillac" health policies" - can get them. But everyone in our country is assured of the basics for good, productive life: education, essential health care.

The insurers are trying to pull a fast one - well, actually they are succeeding. They pay out to the whole "mass" of their insured, where the individual differences evens out .... but they charge/provide coverage based on the individual differences. It reminds me a lot of many Repubican arguments on a variety of things: you can put it into words and there is without doubt a surface logic to it .... but it just doesn't play out if you really think it through.

The insurance companies still want to increase their profits - that's what companies are in business to do and that's great. But instead of gouging or running away specific individuals, they can invest in physical fitness programs, mass screenings, innoculations, etc. They would probably gain more that way than they do now, in fact.

sigh When men are able to

dijamo — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:26:23 +0000

In reply to Gender Discrimination in Health Care

*sigh* When men are able to prescribed contraception, let me know. Until then while contraception is a societal issue, it falls under women's health in the health insurance debate.

Good night, Orlando. Sleep

clearthinker — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:03:50 +0000

In reply to Gender Discrimination in Health Care

Good night, Orlando. Sleep well.

Why does he hate TPM?

Saladin — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:47:50 +0000

In reply to Gender Discrimination in Health Care

Why does he hate TPM?

Dude: you just said

clearthinker — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:16:42 +0000

In reply to Gender Discrimination in Health Care

Dude: you just said contraception is a non-gender issue. End of story.

And we both hope that sometime in the future it will be covered... or given away.

Dude. The insurance

dijamo — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:03:53 +0000

In reply to Gender Discrimination in Health Care

Dude. The insurance companies currently regularly engage in gender bias by denying coverage for contraception. Whatever your dream world of contraceptives raining down for all like a Skittles Rainbow, that is not what exists today. This is an example of how women are treated unfairly by the insurance companies. That if you hadn't noticed is the topic of this post. That's what you asked for, proof women were treated unfairly by the health insurance industry. You can't challenge that so you shift arguments as usual.

Truer words hath never been spoken.

Ok. I give. Discussing the

miguelitoh2o — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 07:46:20 +0000

In reply to Gender Discrimination in Health Care

Ok. I give. Discussing the issue of this post with you is like having a discussion with the paranoid schizophrenic who haunts the park where I walk my dog. Your intellectual constructs are too rich for me. Sayonara.