The Huffington Post published this article in December. Today, a friend posted the article, questioning why anyone would have voted for this, and stating that it would cause rape victims to have back-alley abortions or to leave babies in dumpsters.
“Rape Insurance” is just inflammatory language. Basically, it says that abortions are not a covered benefit unless the mother’s life is in danger from the pregnancy. It gives an option for people to buy an abortion rider, if they want the option of having health insurance that *does* cover abortion. This makes sense to me, since I don’t personally see abortion as morally licit. This way, I don’t have to pay into a group policy for something that is against my moral code, but the people who do want this option can pay into that pool for the added coverage. Just like paying extra money to have additional things covered for my car or house insurance.
I think the issue about what would happen to rape victims if they didn’t have abortions covered in their health insurance is a separate issue. Is it covered now? I think in a lot of cases it is not, which is why people who desire abortions, even if they have health insurance, seek them out from out-of-hospital locations like Planned Parenthood, where you pay a set fee for the procedure. So, if it is not covered now, having it not covered in the future isn’t going to change anything.
As far as back-alley abortions go, I think there needs to be more support programs out there and better awareness of the ones that *are* in place to give guidance, counseling and options to women who find themselves in crisis pregnancies. No one should feel so desperate as to seek out unqualified individuals to perform any kind of medical/surgical procedure on them. Think about it this way, if you *really need* to have a suspicious mole biopsied and you don’t have insurance, there’s other ways of getting this paid for besides going to someone in a “back-alley” to get it done. You can cause great physical harm to yourself by not having proper medical care and/or proper follow-up.
In regards to the “leaving babies in dumpsters” issue, there’s a policy in place that anyone can anonymously leave babies at any police station, firehouse, or hospital. No reason to be inhumane. Again, perhaps greater awareness of this policy is necessary.
With everything regarding these “touchy” subjects, I think great compassion is in order. On both sides of the issue, we should seek out understanding and solutions. There’s too much blame and hatred in the world already. People who disagree with me are not “evil”; I am not “evil”.
That is all. For now. 🙂
Okay. One more thing. If you are talking about rape… I get that making people pay more money for coverage for certain categories can be a slippery slope. For example, as my friend kindly pointed out to me, a cancer rider or a diabetes rider. This would mean that I, as a diabetic, would have to pay more for my health care because I had this condition, and that this would be unfair, and that having insurance in any case means that to an extent you are paying into a pool and are paying for treatments and medicine and care for people for conditions that you personally may not have. So the best thing is to just pay it, because you *might* need cancer coverage or diabetes coverage or what not, and plus, it’s the humane thing to do — to not put an extra burden on people arbitrarily because they have a particular disease or other. And I totally agree with that.
If abortion didn’t involve killing an innocent life (the baby), I would absolutely be for letting abortion coverage be a part of our healthcare insurance policies. However, there is currently not a way to make a woman “un-pregnant” without killing the baby, and morally, you can’t justify that death, even in the case of rape.