Mom Houston

News, tips and fun stuff for savvy Houston parents.




The Institute of Medicine panel is recommending that the government require insurance companies to cover birth control, making it completely free of charge. The contraception would be provided on the basis that pregnancy is a preventable condition.

The Institute of Medicine is a nonprofit, independent organization that serves as an adviser to Congress on issues related to health.

The coverage would help families like the Leyvas, who after the death of a child struggled to cover bills and expenses on their remaining two children. The family skimped on birth control and ended up welcoming another baby, according to NPR.

The recommendations are sure to draw criticism from some, such as religious and conservative groups that don’t agree with birth control, not to mention those who are hesitant to put pregnancy on par with preventable diseases such as those covered by immunizations.

According to the Associated Press, there may not be much anyone can do to block the recommendations short of repealing the health care law, however.

“We are one step closer to saying goodbye to an era when simply being a woman was treated as a pre-existing condition,” said Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., who sponsored the women’s health amendment told the AP. “We are saying hello to an era where decisions about preventive care and screenings are made by a woman and her doctor.”

While this country debates on whether insurance companies should be required to cover pregnancy as a preventable condition, in Israel they’re taking a different tactic altogether.

There, the government provides free unlimited in vitro fertilization for at least two babies until the woman reaches age 45. Even single women are electing the procedures, which are sanctioned by their rabbis. The country has now become the IVF capital of the world, according to the New York Times.

“Anyone who lives here is expected to have children,” Sigal Gooldin, a Hebrew University medical sociologist who has studied IVF regulation in Israel says. “In casual conversation you will be asked how many children you have and if you say one, people will ask why only one, and if you say two, why only two?”

KJ Dell Antonia at Slate questions how woman-friendly the policy really is. While Israel’s maternity leave is a bit longer than the United States, (14 weeks as opposed to 12), paternity leave is not required. If a man does decide to take paternity leave, the maternity leave is shortened. The IVF policy is like government-subsidized peer pressure, pushing women to get pregnant and then be the main caretaker. The U.S. requiring women to be responsible for their own reproduction may sometimes lead to backward policies but is also a silver lining, Antonia argues.

Two countries with very different policies leading to very different outcomes: The question is should insurance companies be required to cover the cost of birth control? (Mandating that insurance companies cover the cost of IVF is probably too much to even be thinking about in this country right now.)

Francisca Ortega

43 Responses

  1. Catherine Ritter says:

    Yes – I believe they should be made to pay for birth control. Birth control not only allows women to be in control of their reproductive decisions but it is also used to treat a number of real health issues such is fibroids in the uterus. There is also the issue of fairness. Every drug put on the market that helps men i.e. Viagra is automatically covered by most insurance companies. However they want to back pedal on contraceptives because some providers may have a moral issue with their use. I question why it is ok to pay for and make available to men a drug that allows them to continue to have sex even after the body is physically incapable of it but we can’t allow women to make a simple decision like when to or if to have children.

    • Mike G says:

      Keeping th lower limbs closed also allows them to stay in control of their reproductive decisions. It’s not a moral issue. It’s an issue of cost. Eventually when you spend other people’s money, you eventually run out of it. And if you think your premiums won’t go up, you’re sadly mistaken. Obamacare may force insurers to keep premiums at a certain level, but when they go insolvent, guess who’s there to pick up the pieces? That’s right–uncle sam. You thought the big insurers were slow to make decisions? Just wait until the government is in charge of making decisions regarding whether they’ll pay for your healthcare bills or not…

    • Radgirl says:

      Mike G don’t make me put on my man hater hat. Pregnancy is a preventable condition. Birth control is cheap. Generic birth control pills are 9 dollars a month at Walmart. A noncomplicated birth costs thousands of dollars and complicated one even more. It is cheaper for the taxpayers to provide birth control than to cover care of pregnancies, WIC, welfare, free lunches, public education and the problems that are associated with unwanted children. If you are truly a “prolife” advocate and then this is a good thing. It is better to prevent a pregnancy than have an abortion.

  2. Steve-O says:

    Israel offers IVF for religious reasons due to them wanting to bolster the Jewish population. In America, the people who are having a lot of babies tend to be the ones requiring the most government assistance…..which costs taxpayers A LOT. Free birth control is a lot cheaper than more babies who can’t be cared for without taxpayer assistance.

    • Mojitos4All says:

      Steve-O is 100% right.

    • tboyinhouston says:

      Stev-O. You really believe this stuff you type? The last three women I know who had children are professionals earning around 100K. It is really stupid to allege that people who have children are on government assistance.

  3. cll003 says:

    Some people will have money and insurance to manage births, others won’t and will have to turn to other things to prevent unwanted pregnancies, i.e. abstinence, condoms, good decision making, etc. It is called LIFE and the government will never be able to prevent it, manage it, or equalize it for everyone, but I don’t see our nation realizing this anytime soon…

  4. LibertarianNotLiberal says:

    Government needs to stop meddling with insurance.

    That said, one of the few government handout programs I would support is free sterilization for anyone who wants it. Especially for anyone who is on welfare. And there should be a cap on welfare. We need to stop making indiscriminate breeding a revenue stream for the lazy.

    • tboyinhouston says:

      I agree, the government should provide birth control. Abortions we would never get to pass but I wouldn’t mind subsidized abortions. Look, that choice is between the woman and her maker and it is not my business. That said, the government does not need to stop meddling in insurance. Without government meddling consumers would not have the protections enjoyed today and even more to come in 2014. On the welfare cap thing… first of all, AFDC (cash money to families) has dropped 75% since 1997, likely because of welfare to work. Secondly, food stamps currently account for .9% of the federal budget but enrollment has surged since the great recession began. So you want a cap, that is fine but what if Joe and Sue still have a hard time finding decent work after being laid off at the plant six years ago and their kids still need to eat and they have sold everything that can be sold for more than 5 dollars? You going to say to Joe and Sue’s kids they can’t eat tonight because the federal government is punishing mommmy and daddy because they failed to find better jobs?

    • MsRadoo says:

      Someone who goes six years without a job isn’t trying. If they can’t care for their children, take the kids away and apply the free sterilization program. I’m very tired of paying for other people’s bad choices.

  5. luckyone says:

    Everything is free so why not? This will hasten the demise of Insurance companies and then we go straight to single payer. This is the end game for ObamaCare anyway. Nice work Comrades.

  6. denmond says:

    When will folks learn there isn’t a FREE anything and insurance companies won’t be MADE to pay for birth control, it’ll be paid for through increased insurance premiums.

    • Dr. Dave says:

      How true. Nothing is free. Of course, insurance companies don’t have to “raise” premiums. They can just cut other benefits. Since we would be getting less than what we paid for, that would still be the same.

  7. Peter says:

    I would think that it is in the insurance companies best interest to provide birth control since it’s surely cheaper than a delivery.

    That being said, most people who have health insurance most liketly have jobs, so it’s not like they can afford it. Additionally, they still end up paying for it in slightly higher premiums. I can guarantee you the insurance companiers will increase them to pay for the additional cost. But now, there is the added overhead to the cost of the same birth control. When it comes down to it, people like me – married and fixed – will be supplementing others via our higher premiums, but I’m actually ok with that.

    What I’m not really ok with is the government mandating, once again, what private companies are forced to sell and what citizens are forced to buy. Yes, I’m being forced to buy birth control for others through my raised premiums.

    Since it’s going to be either my subsidies through the government or the insurance companies, I guess I’ll choose that it goes through the insurance companies.

  8. CaptSternn says:

    Well, there is another 25% increase in insurance premiums. Besides, why should I have to pay for coverage of birth control when I will not be using it. As a guy, it would probably cause my body all kinds of harm.

    You know, besides that, it might just be me, but it sure seems like paying $100 per month for a catastrophic plan and another $100 per month for birth control pills than paying $1,200 per month for a governemnt approved health insurance plan to cover the $100 per month prescription. Just sayin’.

    • Aunt B says:

      CaptSternn says:


      –hence the issue… many men believe the contraception is the woman’s responsibility. CaptSternn, unless you are celibate, you should be “using” birth control….even it if is an oral contraceptive taken by the woman with whom you are fornicating.

  9. Tomas says:

    Catherine- You made an ignorant statement above. MOST INSURANCE COMPANIES
    DO NOT pay for Viagra, Cialis, or other such products. I challenge you to prduce data showing otherwise. Please become more informed, and quit your ‘male bashing.’

  10. Tomas says:

    Most insurance companies DO NOT cover Viagra, Cialis, and such. When those products ARE used, it’s not just for the benefit of men.

  11. denmond says:

    If insurance companies are made to cover birth control, shouldn’t condoms be a covered item as well?

  12. JimH says:

    There is no such thing as a free lunch. You will pay for birth control in the form of increased premiums. I should not have to pay a higher health insurance premium for something I will never use.

    • Lizard says:

      On the surface that sounds like a plausible argument. The only problem with it is that birth control pills are relatively cheap, while delivering a child and the other medical costs associated with it are very expensive. If mandating coverage only reduces the number of women getting pregnant by a small amount, say 10%, that will actually probably result in a reduction in overall medical insurance costs, which is what this is all about. Many insurance plans already cover contraceptives, with a small co-pay, such as $5/month. So, I doubt this will be a very radical change for most.

  13. Bobo Jones says:

    All this government regulation is simply designed to bring about Single Payer socialist healthcare. Thanks Obama and Democrats … Communists.

    • tboyinhouston says:

      Okay bobo, or boo boo or whatever your name is. Let’s clear something up. The Affordable Health Care Act for America is a plan based on buying insurance through private, say it with me … private, insurance. Yes, private insurance. There is no government insurance option. So please enlighten us on what makes the affordable health care act for America socialist or communist, not that you really understand the difference between the two I can safely guess. There will never be a single payer system in the US, the sole reason being our infrastructure and the sheer amount of money tied up in private health insurance prevents it. That said, I think the state run health insurance exchanges are a great idea. Check it out.

    • Mike says:

      When corporations centralize purchasing in order to lower cost and improve quality, is that communism? What single-payer proposal for health care called for government seizure of private assets (which is what communism actually is)?

      My sympathies to whoever was responsible for educating you.

  14. NavyOne says:

    This “require insurance companies to cover birth control” should read “Tax payers required to cover birth control for Entitlement junkies who can not control themselves”.

  15. Dan says:

    How about trying the proven ‘birth control’ method … just keep your pants on?

  16. pdh42 says:

    More lies from the NPR and the left…. What they are truly after is more social engineering that requires the slaughtering of the innocent babies…. What is truly amazing that no one seems to bring out is that Margret Sanger hated the poor and the minorities…. Why do you think that the slaughter houses that house PP are ALL located in minority areas????

  17. maddie says:

    Of course insurance companies should cover birth control pills and devices. Please. They cover Viagra! So what is the message here? Men can have sex and women are their own for protection from pregnancy and if they should decide to abort (which I really understand is a very painful decision for most ever woman faced with making it) that would be against the law. Does anyone see the irony here and the absolute scale of justice tipping towarads the male???? Jesus weeps.

    • george says:

      No. Once pregnancy occurs, men have absolutely no choice in the matter. Women have all the options. It is far more in a man’s benefit to take an active role in birth control. That men do not is something that continually perplexes me to no end. That they haven’t demanded the male birth control pill, shown to work more effectively and with almost no side effects (unlike the side effect laden women’s pill) is also perplexing. Men as a group don’t seem very smart.

  18. pinnywoodsrooter says:

    This is good for women. If it irritates the wingnuts, it’s a bonus.

  19. Heather B says:

    I am certain that if I wanted to “Play” and went to planned parenthood with a pay stub, I would walk out of there with affordable birth control.

  20. saved says:

    We are seeing the rapid growth of socialism in this nation and once it gets its grip it will finish destroying us as the once great nation we were.

  21. Helen says:

    Birth control costs much less than pregnancy and delivery of another child or children. It makes no sense that insurance can cover Viagra and not birth control. There are women who are under doctor’s orders/warnings that an additional pregnancy could prove fatal, yet birth control is not covered under their insurance policy? Insanity and discrimination.

  22. maddie says:

    OMG, I cannot believe some of these posts: “keep your legs closed,” a “free lunch”????

    You people are going backwards in time. Soon you will be burning “witches” at the stake. I’ll bet you are all faithful churchgoers as well, and good republicans who never have affairs or cause unwanted pregnancies.


  23. Zilch says:

    If low income people were given free birth control it would save massive amounts of money in the long run.

  24. Kodosmama says:

    Steve-O–yes, but all Israeli citizens are eligible for this benefit, that means Arabs, Christians, jews, etc. Plus, all traditional, religious societies value lots of children: Catholic, Arab, Jewish, whatever.

  25. moniquebahe says:


  26. BackDoorBob says:

    There, the government provides FREE unlimited in vitro fertilization for at least two babies until the woman reaches age 45.

    “FREE” not true, American tak payers pay for Israel’s Socialism – and that’s fine as long this socialism doesn’t care for Americans.

  27. Israeli single white male says:

    It’s true that Israelis are under social pressure to procreate, but we also get practically free and unrestricted abortions. “Day after” pills are advertised on TV and basic contraception is not hard to come by, though it may not be cheap for someone under the poverty line.

    It hardly needs to be mentioned that we have univeral healthcare, partly privatised a decade ago.

  28. Catherine Ritter says:

    Tomas – United Healthcare and Aetna I know for a fact pay for Viagra or other ED drugs. You should ck your facts.

    And to the person that stated they should just keep their lower limbs together do you understand a lot of married women take birth control as a family planning tool? Are you saying married women should only have sex to procreate? Or that they should be forced to become pregnant because you don’t agree with birth control. Several of the people posting here seem to think this is a welfare issue. This is a fairness issue. Insurance companies pay for all kinds of questionable drugs for all types of preventable medical issues. All this does is requires insurance companies to pay for a drug that is safe and prevents unplanned pregnancies. Yes women on welfare would benefit from this but so will your wife or girl friend if she’s on birth control.

  29. michelle says:

    I think this is a good idea. It would drastically reduce the number of unwanted babies, and abortions, too.
    I think it should go a bit further, though. It should make sure that people who want to be sterilized, CAN get sterilized. When my hubs and I married in 91, we didn’t want kids. We knew we didn’t. But we were told by every single Dr we saw, “No, you’re too young.” Im sorry, but really!? I was 25 years old, and knew my own mind quite well, thank you very much. My hubs was 23, and he felt the same way. We went EVERYWHERE…even to Planned Parenthood. Finally, the last gynie I talked to told me, “You won’t be able to find a doctor to do this. Our insurance company forbids it. They’re afraid that if you change your mind, get a reversal, and it doesn’t take that you’ll come back and sue…saying we should have talked you out of it.” We doubled up on birth control, and guess what? We have 14 year old proof it doesn’t work 100% of the time living under our roof, with her fathers eyes, swimming talent, and my voracious appetite for the written word.
    And as for you deluded people who say, “Don’t have sex if you don’t want babies..” yeah right. Sex is ONLY for people who want a kid. It has nothing to do with showing your mate how much you love them. It’s called ‘making love’…not ‘making a baby’. I feel sorry for your spouses if that’s the ONLY reason you have sex.

  30. strawhat says:

    If someone would invent a quick and 100% reversible sperm block in the testes, and then put a world wide media campaign focused on young men to be able to control their destiny, make it free both ways. And then make it mandatory that if you have a child…one or 10, you have to give up 50% of your income for as long as the children are under 18 years to give men a real incentive to control their sperm, then the world population would fall. Men would decide when and if the wanted children. Put the control in a man’s hands. Change the destiny of humanity and help our planet survive the plague of man. It is the only answer to our many problems.