Universal Health Care and Abortion

It has been in the news lately with the new amendment being proposed to the Healthcare bill to deny coverage on abortion proceedures.

Now it has seem that there is this divide in regards to - does one support a bill that could indirectly (or directly) fund abortion proceedures or allow an amendment that impedes on that "choice" (assuming that it is not a life threatening situation).

Thoughts?

Source

I'm not totally behind the whole, "no federal funds for abortion," thing. The whole argument is that people who are against abortion don't want their money being used to fund abortion, but what about the people getting the abortions and those who don't mind or even want their money to be used for that? They pay taxes too, but I guess that only matters in terms of restricting how money cn be used. Hey, guess what, I don't want my taxes to be used to pay for anything related to the military,but it's still T.S. for me.

It has been in the news lately with the new amendment being proposed to the Healthcare bill to deny coverage on abortion proceedures.

Now it has seem that there is this divide in regards to - does one support a bill that could indirectly (or directly) fund abortion proceedures or allow an amendment that impedes on that "choice" (assuming that it is not a life threatening situation).

Thoughts?

Source

Sajedene

Abortion is definitely not a right, nor is taking a unborn baby's life, so I am in full support of said amendment

With some extreme circumstances being the exception, abortion isn't a necessary medical procedure. I would balk at that being covered under a unified health care system.

EDIT: I am pro-choice, by the way...

I'm not totally behind the whole, "no federal funds for abortion," thing. The whole argument is that people who are against abortion don't want their money being used to fund abortion, but what about the people getting the abortions and those who don't mind or even want their money to be used for that? They pay taxes too, but I guess that only matters in terms of restricting how money cn be used. Hey, guess what, I don't want my taxes to be used to pay for anything related to the military,but it's still T.S. for me.

theone86

With some extreme circumstances being the exception, abortion isn't a necessary medical procedure. I would balk at that being covered under a unified health care system.

EDIT: I am pro-choice, by the way...

spazzx625

But if universal health care is the only care available it means abortion is never covered, drives up the out of pocket expense, and makes abortion, once more, an issue of wealth.

If it isn't life-threatening, it shouldn't be covered by a medicare system. Same thing goes in Canada. I won't get into the abortion issue.

No, Abortion is not a necessity (unless of course it actually is a life threatening situation) The only time I would say abortion is justifiable is if someone's life is in danger. So I back no federal funds to abortion, unless threats to another person's life.

Your first abortionshould be free, second one is half off and the third one is not covered at all. Everyone makes mistakes but you eventually need to be responsible for youself.

[QUOTE="spazzx625"]

With some extreme circumstances being the exception, abortion isn't a necessary medical procedure. I would balk at that being covered under a unified health care system.

EDIT: I am pro-choice, by the way...

theone86

But if universal health care is the only care available it means abortion is never covered, drives up the out of pocket expense, and makes abortion, once more, an issue of wealth.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

I'm not totally behind the whole, "no federal funds for abortion," thing. The whole argument is that people who are against abortion don't want their money being used to fund abortion, but what about the people getting the abortions and those who don't mind or even want their money to be used for that? They pay taxes too, but I guess that only matters in terms of restricting how money cn be used. Hey, guess what, I don't want my taxes to be used to pay for anything related to the military,but it's still T.S. for me.

Sajedene

We own the largest military in the world, it does far more than protect me, which in my opinion is not a good thing. That's also not my point, my point is that no one really knows where THEIR taxes go. Some people don't agree with the bailouts of the banks but agree with the money sent to the auto industry, they can't walk up to their congressman and say they want their money to go strictly to one and not the other. I don't mind military protection but I don't agree with the wars we're fighting, I can't ask my senator to make sure my taxes go only to military spending that I approve. And like I said, if you took the collective taxes of all the people who either want their money to fund abortion or don't mind if it does, then compare it to the people who don't want it to what would happen? Do you say, "oh, this group over here gets to decide how the ohter group's money is or isn't spent, but it doesn't go the other way?"

Even with the bill, universal health care is not the only option. Even so, I don't think abortions are covered by insurance right now, so the cost shouldn't rise at all...spazzx625

[QUOTE="spazzx625"]Even with the bill, universal health care is not the only option. Even so, I don't think abortions are covered by insurance right now, so the cost shouldn't rise at all...Engrish_Major

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="spazzx625"]

With some extreme circumstances being the exception, abortion isn't a necessary medical procedure. I would balk at that being covered under a unified health care system.

EDIT: I am pro-choice, by the way...

spazzx625

But if universal health care is the only care available it means abortion is never covered, drives up the out of pocket expense, and makes abortion, once more, an issue of wealth.

Well the plan going through congress right now isn't even universal, so I'm talking more in a hypotetical sense about, say, a single-payer system. Abortions are covered by some private plans, just google it and you'll find some.

My issue is that even if you make people buy supplemental abortion coverage it still turns it into a wealth thing. That's one aspect of the abortion debate which I think is integral but never gets talked about, is that anti-abortion laws or practices never stopped abortion, they just forced it underground. Rich people could afford safe procedures, but poor people just ended up going to so-called back-alley abortionists where teh chance of harm to the mother is greater. And again, I think if you appease one group you have to appease the other. If you say that people who don't want to pay for abortions don't have to, then you also have to appease the people like myself who want their money going towards abortions.

Your first abortionshould be free, second one is half off and the third one is not covered at all. Everyone makes mistakes but you eventually need to be responsible for youself.

_BlueDuck_

If only life were that easy. Taking part in adult activities comes with adult responsibility. No one should be given a "oops, I made a mistake card" just because they were stupid.

foxhound_fox

I'm pro-choice, so I don't oppose a woman's right to have an abortion, although obviously I'd like to see as few as possible. But the NHS doesn't even cover dentistry or glasses. I have to pay 40 pounds to go have a checkup at the dentist. If that is too expensive for a national healthcare system, then something like an abortion shouldn't be covered. Unless its essential medical treatment - in which case it would be covered anyway - abortions should not be paid for by the government. Its the same as cosmetic surgery. Unnecessary medical treatment like that should come out of your own pocket.Bourbons3

Thatmakessense, I just don't think abortions should be something that people in a certain income bracket can afford and others can't. If there's affordable supplemental insurance to buy I'd be fine with it, and I also think that people who are getting abortions should get some of the money they put into a nationalized health care system back maybe as a credit to help pay for it.

Why not? That's the whole point of abortion in the first place.Engrish_Major

Call me a bad person, but it's a womans choice if she wants to have an abortion or not medical emergancy or not. I could care less if they start to cover abortion under a universal health care plan, I'm an idepentant I have no party.

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"]I'm pro-choice, so I don't oppose a woman's right to have an abortion, although obviously I'd like to see as few as possible. But the NHS doesn't even cover dentistry or glasses. I have to pay 40 pounds to go have a checkup at the dentist. If that is too expensive for a national healthcare system, then something like an abortion shouldn't be covered. Unless its essential medical treatment - in which case it would be covered anyway - abortions should not be paid for by the government. Its the same as cosmetic surgery. Unnecessary medical treatment like that should come out of your own pocket.theone86

Thatmakessense, I just don't think abortions should be something that people in a certain income bracket can afford and others can't. If there's affordable supplemental insurance to buy I'd be fine with it, and I also think that people who are getting abortions should get some of the money they put into a nationalized health care system back maybe as a credit to help pay for it.

I'm not getting into it. There is a major issue in the world if people think they should be able to just pay and make all their "problems" go away.

foxhound_fox

@Bourbons3: Cheers for reminding me, dentistry should definitely be covered IMO. Oral hygiene is essential and we Brits have a pretty bad rep when it comes to it so a bit of cover would be nice. £45 for my checkup next week:?

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

If only life were that easy. Taking part in adult activities comes with adult responsibility. No one should be given a "oops, I made a mistake card" just because they were stupid.

Engrish_Major

Not necessarily. Many of the second term abortions and most of the third term abortions are because some birth defect is detected that would cause a painful death during birth to the child. This is my problem with people who oppose abortion, is that many times they seem to have this one idea of what's going through the mind of people getting abortions and they generalize that to every woman that gets an abortion. It's not always this, "oops, I had a kid, let's kill it," mentality people seem to think it is, in fact women who identify as such are a minority. Abortion should be between a woman and her doctor, no one else needs to know about it unless one of them deems it necessary. And again, it's not like everyone else is paying for these women's abortions. These women put money into the system too, why aren't they entitled to use it as they see fit the same way that anti-abortionists are?

[QUOTE="_BlueDuck_"]

Your first abortionshould be free, second one is half off and the third one is not covered at all. Everyone makes mistakes but you eventually need to be responsible for youself.

foxhound_fox

it's a card only the better off should get. i mean why should the lives of the better off have to suffer like the poor.

@Bourbons3: Cheers for reminding me, dentistry should definitely be covered IMO. Oral hygiene is essential and we Brits have a pretty bad rep when it comes to it so a bit of cover would be nice. £45 for my checkup next week:?

Loonie

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"]I'm pro-choice, so I don't oppose a woman's right to have an abortion, although obviously I'd like to see as few as possible. But the NHS doesn't even cover dentistry or glasses. I have to pay 40 pounds to go have a checkup at the dentist. If that is too expensive for a national healthcare system, then something like an abortion shouldn't be covered. Unless its essential medical treatment - in which case it would be covered anyway - abortions should not be paid for by the government. Its the same as cosmetic surgery. Unnecessary medical treatment like that should come out of your own pocket.LJS9502_basic

Thatmakessense, I just don't think abortions should be something that people in a certain income bracket can afford and others can't. If there's affordable supplemental insurance to buy I'd be fine with it, and I also think that people who are getting abortions should get some of the money they put into a nationalized health care system back maybe as a credit to help pay for it.

[QUOTE="Loonie"]

@Bourbons3: Cheers for reminding me, dentistry should definitely be covered IMO. Oral hygiene is essential and we Brits have a pretty bad rep when it comes to it so a bit of cover would be nice. £45 for my checkup next week:?

Bourbons3

We have abortions available for free on the NHS in the UK, and rightfully so too.

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"][QUOTE="Loonie"]

@Bourbons3: Cheers for reminding me, dentistry should definitely be covered IMO. Oral hygiene is essential and we Brits have a pretty bad rep when it comes to it so a bit of cover would be nice. £45 for my checkup next week:?

Sajedene

We have abortions available for free on the NHS in the UK, and rightfully so too.

poptart

[QUOTE="Sajedene"][QUOTE="Bourbons3"] It used to be covered. But in 1950, the government said we had to gear up for the Korean War, so something had to be cut. Dentistry and glasses were cut from the NHS to pay for the rearmament, and they were never put back. :(Bourbons3

Sorry did you say dentistry was cut from the NHS in the 1950's??? My last NHS visit to the dentist was in 2000. Also NHS glasses were widely available when I lived in the UK.

Anyway, the problem is post war the NHS was a fantastic concept and worked wonderfully during the affluent 60's. Alas with UK's steady decline and little money in the bank it's nigh on impossible to uphold a quality service without a significant strain on the countries resources.

FYI Psychiatric treatment is also available on the NHS. Psychological treatment however maybe a different story - I'm not sure about that...

[QUOTE="poptart"]

We have abortions available for free on the NHS in the UK, and rightfully so too.

Bourbons3

If you don't want the child, you can have the abortion. My ex-girlfriend did for starters, alongside 3 other friends I have (actually more come to think of it). We were all at college, aged 16 – 17 at the time. Of course counseling is part of the service, however it was fairly straightforward and getting sign off for an abortion is a formality.

Incidentally, did you now that 10,000 Polish women came to the UK last year for free abortions on the NHS? The dish them out like sweets to Children over here.

If it's an emergency, then I have no problems with it being funded. But otherwise, abortion should be payed by the person having said abortion.

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"][QUOTE="Sajedene"] If we argue hygiene as a necessity - then one can argue that cosmetic surgery for some people who's personal appearance causes them emotional distress could claim for the same necessity. (I really should have been a lawyer)poptart

Sorry did you say dentistry was cut from the NHS in the 1950's??? My last NHS visit to the dentist was in 2000. Also NHS glasses were widely available when I lived in the UK.

Anyway, the problem is post war the NHS was a fantastic concept and worked wonderfully during the affluent 60's. Alas with UK's steady decline and little money in the bank it's nigh on impossible to uphold a quality service without a significant strain on the countries resources.

FYI Psychiatric treatment is also available on the NHS. Psychological treatment however maybe a different story - I'm not sure about that...

If I was silly and thought it was "murder" I'd probably be against it in the bill. However I am not silly so I'm for it being in the bill.

It just came to mind that everyone's taxes allready do pay for abortions, whether we like it or not. Any government money from government employees pay to disability checks to the recent stimulas checks could be used for abortion. I guess there's no avoiding it for the time bieng.

[QUOTE="Sajedene"]

It has been in the news lately with the new amendment being proposed to the Healthcare bill to deny coverage on abortion proceedures.

Now it has seem that there is this divide in regards to - does one support a bill that could indirectly (or directly) fund abortion proceedures or allow an amendment that impedes on that "choice" (assuming that it is not a life threatening situation).

Thoughts?

Source

peter1191

Abortion is definitely not a right, nor is taking a unborn baby's life, so I am in full support of said amendment

Depends on the situation itself. For the most part, if I'm remembering my statistics correctly, abortions are not life-threatening emergencies, so....