GOP vs Women

[fireheart17]

They're at it again, this time in Arizona...

Yesterday, a Senate Judiciary Committee endorsed Republican Debbie Lesko’s HB2625 by a vote of 6-2, which would allow an employer to request proof that a woman using insurance to buy birth control was being prescribed the birth control for reasons other than not wanting to get pregnant. It’s all about freedom, she said, echoing everyone who thinks there’s nothing ironic about claiming that a country that’s “free” allows people’s bosses to dictate what medical care is available to them through insurance.

"You're fired for taking birth control to prevent pregnancy you slut!"

The mind boggles.

Very easy way to get around that: have the claim state that it's being used to "help menstrual cramps" or "PMS" since birth control tends to do just that. (I have no idea how you'd get around IUD's or diaphragms though)

[Rapscallion]

Very easy way to get around that: have the claim state that it's being used to "help menstrual cramps" or "PMS" since birth control tends to do just that. (I have no idea how you'd get around IUD's or diaphragms though)

One way to get around it for the pill, sure, but to force potentially half the population into a position where they have to lie? Not acceptable.

Rapscallion

[MadMike]

Wouldn't it cost less to prevent a childbirth than to raise a child to age 18?

[Andara Bledin]

I'm curious: Isn't such a bill essentially in violation of HIPAA?

^-.-^

[SongsOfDragons]

They're at it again, this time in Arizona...

Yesterday, a Senate Judiciary Committee endorsed Republican Debbie Lesko’s HB2625 by a vote of 6-2, which would allow an employer to request proof that a woman using insurance to buy birth control was being prescribed the birth control for reasons other than not wanting to get pregnant. It’s all about freedom, she said, echoing everyone who thinks there’s nothing ironic about claiming that a country that’s “free” allows people’s bosses to dictate what medical care is available to them through insurance.

"You're fired for taking birth control to prevent pregnancy you slut!"

The mind boggles.

A mate of mine posted an article about this on FB. My response was "Oh I'd love to do that! Can I tell him loudly, in front of the girls whose arses he keeps slapping, and in excruciating and disgusting levels of detail? "

[HYHYBT]

I'm curious: Isn't such a bill essentially in violation of HIPAA?

It would be, if it were a state doing it. But HIPAA is just a federal law, and as such can be modified or overridden entirely by newer federal laws.

[Cymberleah]

It would be, if it were a state doing it.

It is a state doing this, the state of Arizona. And while it is patently illegal and will be struck down in the courts, there are still women who will be affected by these shenanigans.

As far as trying to get around it by stating they are for a medical reason, you will need to have a note from your doctor, under penalty of perjury, stating that your BCP are for a medical reason only. So if your doctor lies for you s/he could lose his license to practice medicine and face fines and/or jail time.

Here's a chilling thought: you already have employers who do not want to hire women under the assumption that they will only get pregnant and leave the company to raise babies, so why waste the time training them? Now we're setting up a situation where that can be a self-fulfilling prophecy, if the employer refuses to employ women who are less likely to become pregnant.

There's another bill (also in Arizona? I could be wrong on what state) which is designed to let doctors withhold information about the development of a fetus if they believe that the information might be used to influence the mother into having an abortion. So you could go have your ultrasound and be told that everything is cool, then have a child born with flippers from Thalidomide poisoning. Because why would we want women to be able to make informed choices about their lives and what they can and cannot handle when we can force them to have babies that are a huge drain on resources, then push them out of the hospital one day after birth and provide no more help?

[radiocerk]

Admittedly, you would have to be taking Thalidomide to have a child with Thalidomide poisoning, but I wonder if a doctor would be allowed under that law to not tell a woman with an ectopic pregnancy that it will, not might, kill both her and the fetus.

[Duelist925]

Admittedly, you would have to be taking Thalidomide to have a child with Thalidomide poisoning, but I wonder if a doctor would be allowed under that law to not tell a woman with an ectopic pregnancy that it will, not might, kill both her and the fetus.

That is....a very disturbing thought.

[fireheart17]

Admittedly, you would have to be taking Thalidomide to have a child with Thalidomide poisoning, but I wonder if a doctor would be allowed under that law to not tell a woman with an ectopic pregnancy that it will, not might, kill both her and the fetus.

Or if she has an ectopic pregnancy full stop.

[blas87]

Really? You'd rather deal with having to cover for a person taking maternity leave and missing a lot of work because of having a kid.........because it's more important to find out why this person is on birth control?

My mind is boggled here.

Note that I don't have a problem in general with the way maternity/paternity leave is set up, nor do I have a problem with parents at work, but I was just trying to look at it from a management point.

[AdminAssistant]

I wonder how that Arizona bill is worded....wouldn't it also leave open the door for employers to fire women who aren't on birth control, since that means they'll be able to have babies, thus taking leave and costing more in insurance costs?

[Cymberleah]

Admittedly, you would have to be taking Thalidomide to have a child with Thalidomide poisoning

IIRC, there is a chance that daughter of mothers who took Thalidomide during their pregnancy have a chance of abnormal pregnancy, even if the daughter shows no symptoms. It's not a huge chance, but apparently the damage is genetic and pervasive. Also, there are other drugs (like for chemo) that will produce similar results if one of the partners is taking them during conception.

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

Hypocrisy defined:

The Republican National Committee is out with a new ad aimed at returning serve after Democrats made hay over Rush Limbaugh's recent inflammatory comments about Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke.

The new ad, entitled "Obama's War on Women" (and embedded below), focuses on two main fronts: the first is centered on the fact that Bill Maher, who once described Sara Palin as a "cunt," has donated $1 million to the super PAC backing President Obama's re-election; the second is a section in Ron Suskind's book Confidence Men, which described the White House as a boys' club that often left female staffers on the sidelines.

The main attraction of the 90-second spot is probably an exchange between CNN's Erin Burnett and Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod, during which the anchor questions whether there is a double standard at play given how the president's backers reacted to the controversy over Limbaugh's controversial remarks.

Source: http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/...ter_socialflow

[mikoyan29]

Now wait a minute. I thought the whole point of a Super PAC is that it isn't really affiliated with the candidate in any way. That is why it can skirt the various campaign laws. So if Obama tells the super PAC to not accept that money, it is no longer a super PAC.

Oh and one more thing, the issue is not that Limbaugh called her a slut but that he went on about it for three days. I don't know the details behind Maher but if he continued on it for three days, then I'd have a bigger problem. And then the other one that the Republicans like to bring up...Laura INgraham...she was called a talk slut....completely different context.