I fear that I have alienated all of my conservative readers with my political posts since the election. Are any of you still hanging around? If so, can you tell me what you think about the maternity care provision in the Republican health care proposal? If you haven't been following the discussion, they want to phase out the requirement that insurance companies cover pregnancy and birth. This will free companies up to return to the pre-ACA maternity care model, in which non-employer-provided policies with maternity coverage were substantially more expensive and typically required customers to pay their premiums for a specified amount of time before they could actually see a midwife or OB/GYN. In other words, coverage was not available to women who attempted to buy a policy while already pregnant.
It's hard for me to imagine a less pro-life legislative act. It's hard for me to look at it in any other light than "let's cut essential services for pregnant women in the interest of cost savings for industry." But at the same time, my Twitter timeline, where the outrage is universal, is carefully cultivated and I gave up Facebook for Lent. Sometimes when I encounter universal outrage it means I'm missing some information here in my bubble. Sometimes, though, it means something outrageous is happening. I'm interested in your perspective.
P.S. Did you know that before the ACA, insurance companies would deny entire claims that included a pregnancy test? So let's suppose you went to the doctor as a woman of childbearing age, and they wanted to prescribe you a medication for your UTI or take an X-ray of your possible stress fracture, but you weren't quite sure whether you were pregnant or not. The insurance company would sometimes decline to pay for any of your care, because the pregnancy test made it pregnancy-related. And sure, you could appeal (in your abundant free time), and eventually they would probably unclench their evil fingers from around YOUR MONEY and pay up. But isn't it more sensible to live in a world where your doctor's prudent decision to administer a test that probably cost $0.75 does not result in a notice that your $2000 bill isn't covered? Isn't it? Does anybody miss those days aside from insurance company CFOs?