Not the Poor Contraceptive User’s Friend Either


First Things

Go to this article

Want to understand the Catholic faith?

ABSTRACTNot the Poor Contraceptive User’s Friend Either » First Thoughts | A First Things Blog SUBSCRIBER LOGIN forgot password? | obtain login Home Visit the Home Page Print Edition Current Edition Previous Edition Archive Subscribe On the Square Latest Feature Archive Blogs Evangel Secondhand Smoke First Thoughts Postmodern Conservative Events Coming Events Recent Events Advertising Advertise on First Things Donate Support First Things About Us Masthead ROFTERS Contact Us Submissions Store Shop First Things Buy The Creed Subscribe Subscribe Customer Service Search First Things Search for: / Masthead Joe Carter Ian Marcus Corbin Meghan Duke Greg Forster Matthew J. Franck Joseph Lawler Micah Mattix Robert T. Miller Matthew Milliner David Mills Joseph Knippenberg R.R. Reno Robert Saler Russell E. Saltzman Matthew Schmitz First Thoughts Archive Monthly Select Month April 2012  (13) March 2012  (184) February 2012  (137) January 2012  (147) December 2011  (148) November 2011  (141) October 2011  (161) September 2011  (150) August 2011  (151) July 2011  (128) June 2011  (114) May 2011  (112) April 2011  (128) March 2011  (121) February 2011  (114) January 2011  (142) December 2010  (147) November 2010  (175) October 2010  (199) September 2010  (211) August 2010  (206) July 2010  (224) June 2010  (189) May 2010  (201) April 2010  (182) March 2010  (153) February 2010  (137) January 2010  (140) December 2009  (123) November 2009  (123) October 2009  (94) September 2009  (149) August 2009  (176) July 2009  (221) June 2009  (172) May 2009  (125) April 2009  (133) March 2009  (144) February 2009  (122) January 2009  (97) December 2008  (113) November 2008  (106) October 2008  (118) September 2008  (157) August 2008  (134) July 2008  (93) June 2008  (87) May 2008  (26) April 2008  (40) March 2008  (69) February 2008  (113) January 2008  (181) December 2007  (100) « Previous    |Home|    Next »          Not the Poor Contraceptive User’s Friend Either Wednesday, March 7, 2012, 11:36 AM David Mills The Biggest Beneficiary of the Contraception Mandate? Drug Companies , announces an article by Avik S. A. Roy on The Atlantic ‘s website, adding more evidence for a point I made yesterday in Big Pharma Is Not Your Friend , though he’s concerned that the Obama administration’s rule “will enrich drug companies at the expense of people who want access to basic contraception.” After explaining the effects of making the provision of contraception “first dollar coverage,” he writes: If you were surprised that PhRMA, the pharmaceutical trade group, backed Obamacare , now you can see why: the HHS contraception mandate alone will be a multi-billion-dollar boondoggle for the pharma industry. If your health insurance plan allowed you to buy a television, of any price, without any cost-sharing on your part, would you buy a 13-inch CRT or a 60-inch flat screen? Roy then notes that “the definition of insurance has lost any meaning in the context of American health care.” Insurance, traditionally defined, is meant to protect us from the risk of unexpectedly incurring catastrophic costs . Car insurance, for example, protects us against collisions, but doesn’t cover our purchase of wiper fluid or gasoline. Homeowner’s insurance doesn’t cover the cost of air conditioning. And yet, now, we have a federal law that forces health insurance to cover something that is even cheaper than gasoline or air conditioning. It’s this perversion of the term “insurance” that helps highlight the weirdness of Democrats accusing Republicans of wanting to “ban” contraception. If a politician were to oppose a mandate forcing insurers to pay for gasoline or air conditioning, would he then be supporting a “ban” of these products? Comments (19) 19 Comments Sydney March 7th, 2012 | 12:57 pm The rise in prices has already started. One of my patients complained yesterday that her oral contraceptive had increased by $20 per month when she tried to refill it this week. David Nickol March 7th, 2012 | 1:54 pm Insurance, traditionally defined, is meant to protect us from the risk of unexpectedly incurring catastrophic costs. In the year 2012, it is rather ridiculous to argue that health insurance should be modeled after car insurance! If it were, certainly prenatal care and childbirth would not be covered. Is pregnancy and hospital delivery to be considered a catastrophe? There would be no more justi.......