If you’re reading this, you probably have a pre-existing condition

And, if the TrumpCare repeal of ObamaCare is approved tomorrow in Congress, your state may be able to allow insurance companies to charge you more or even deny you coverage for it.

Many people in the US population suffer from health concerns that can be classified as pre-existing conditions: asthma, diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, heart disease, and yes, even pregnancy and infertility.  Unlike our Mullerian anomalies, which are congenital (meaning we were born with them), some of these pre-existing conditions may have come about from environmental conditions – such as secondhand smoke or contaminated water – or from personal choices one has made – such as smoking or those supersized fries.  Sometimes cancer or heart disease happens to the “healthiest” people.

I’m not going to let someone turn me into a nameless number and decide I don’t deserve coverage because my parents smoked in the car.

I’m not going to stand by while children with neuroblastoma or leukemia awaiting expensive treatments like chemotherapy are told they can’t get life-saving treatment because they can’t afford the premiums, were placed in a high-risk pool and priced out of coverage.

I’m asking you to call your representatives and find out where they stand on this latest TrumpCare bill.  If they are opposed, thank them for protecting your right to affordable coverage.  If they support TrumpCare, tell them about your pre-existing condition and why it’s important to you – and your (potential) family – that pre-existing conditions continue to be fully protected under any new healthcare law.

You might also want to find out where the $600 billion in tax breaks in the law are going – and how lawmakers intend on making up for that $600 billion deficit?

Need to find your representative?  Here’s an easy finder.

The Affordable Care Act and Infertility, Revisited

Several years ago, during the heyday of this blog and my adventure as an infertilite, I wrote a little ditty about how increasing Americans’ access to health care was a good thing, and that the law that would become known as “Obamacare” was particularly good for women.  Little did I know that post would become one of the most read and searched for of all the posts in this blog.

So I’m going to do it again.

On the “verge” of “repealing and replacing” the Affordable Care Act (ACA, aka Obamacare), we face a lot of unknowns about what will actually happen.  A draft of the first version of the bill was circulated just 24 hours ago (notably to news outlets that have been denied entry into the White House Press Room), but it’s still just a draft and there may still be many battles to fight.  Therefore it would be a waste of my time to simply go through the draft and say all the problems that are wrong with it.  Instead, I’d like to give you the information to take to your representatives – local, state, and national – so you can tell them how you, fellow infertilite or concerned citizen, are personally impacted by the benefits of the law.

Are you a woman with health insurance?  If so, you’ve probably noticed that your annual visits to your OB/GYN, mammograms and other screening procedures, and birth control contraceptives are covered.  If you have been pregnant in the last few years, all of your visits pertaining to pregnancy, whether to your general practitioner, a midwife, or MFM specialists, are covered.  The birth is covered, too.  Providing for well-care visits and pregnancy-related care is a national mandate of ACA.  The proposed repeal and replace bill removes the national mandate for insurance companies to cover pregnancy, meaning that it will be up to your state and/or the marketplace to determine how much coverage is provided for and how much you would have to pay out of pocket.  Which means that, should you happen to only have access to plans with minimal coverage, you might have to choose between keeping your electricity on and paying for your hospital stay.  Tell your representatives that providing for pregnancy-related care is a basic human right.

Do you have a pre-existing condition, such as, I don’t know, infertility caused by a uterine abnormality?  Under ACA, an insurance company cannot deny you coverage based on pre-existing conditions.  The draft bill released yesterday keeps most of this part of “Obamacare,” but does limit the kinds of conditions allowed under protection.   Tell your representatives to keep this protection of coverage for all people regardless of pre-existing conditions.

Do you want to wait a few more years to have a child just so you can get a bigger tax break on your insurance?  Currently, the ACA provides subsidies to cover some of the cost of an insurance plan based on your income, so that the burden of coverage is more evenly distributed.  The draft bill proposes that older people, who generally are sick more often and have more medications, would get a bigger tax credit than a healthy 30-year old – almost twice as much.  But where is the equality in this situation when the 30-year old might more likely have one or more dependents who need coverage, and family-level insurance plans aren’t exactly a bargain.  Tell your representatives to keep tax credits for health insurance based on need, not on an arbitrary factor such as age.

Do you think your property taxes are too high?  You might be wondering what property taxes might have to do with health insurance, so let me explain.  Services such as Medicaid are provided by your county in part from federal money that they are granted.  Republicans have talked about creating “block grants” of money, essentially capping the amount of federal money states have access to, which leaves states, counties, and cities in a terrible predicament: do we cut services to people on Medicaid – for instance, do we close nursing homes which would displace seniors and increase unemployment in our community for the doctors, nurses, and workers who worked there – or do we find another way to pay for it?  And they’ll likely find another way to pay for it through your property taxes.  Tell your representative to keep Medicaid expansion.

Finally, I’m going to address the issue of Planned Parenthood, which under the Republican bill would lose all federal funding.  Supposedly because, and solely because, it provides access to abortion services.  What they don’t tell you is that the other 97% of services provided by Planned Parenthood to men and women across the country include preventative health exams, providing contraception, tests and treatments for STIs, Pap smears, breast exams, and outreach to schools and college campuses.  One in five women have reportedly visited a Planned Parenthood at least once in her life (see the link here).  I know abortion is a highly personal topic and questions about life run so morally deep I can’t even begin to illustrate the range of them here.  But I do know that this country was settled by a brave group of individuals at Plymouth who were considered outlaws in their home country for their beliefs and who sought to find a place where they could live as they chose in peace.  Tell your representatives to let us continue to live our life as we choose, to keep our choices for what we do with our bodies our decision, not decided for us by lawmakers, and keep the funding in Planned Parenthood.

I will continue to update the blog as progress on the health care bill continues.

Participate, educate, and be heard

Yeah, so that Affordable Health Care Act review isn’t going to happen. I have a million excuses to use, most of which include my kids, but which also includes the daunting website itself. I underestimated the amount of free time I would have. But free time starts out as a fantasy with a newborn and increases exponentially as they get older.  And it’s only worse with another toddler added into the mix. So it’s a no-go… at least for now.

Fortunately we are only less than two years away from choosing the next president. This is a chance for you, as a voter, to ask whether policy makers will support your reproductive rights, support funding for treatment of your diagnosis, and support ARTs.  For an idea of where potential candidates stand on this issue – because for most politicians, and probably for a great deal of the general public, “reproductive rights” is a euphemism for right-to-life/abortion rights – you’ll probably have to dig a little deeper into their speeches and voting histories.  I just Googled “where does Marco Rubio stand on infertility treatments” and got a big fat nothing, though there is already some chatter about whether he’ll stick with the Catholic Church’s doctrine on that.  But it’s early in the campaigning and if someone, somewhere, asked anybody about anything it’s probably going to be documented somewhere…

…And it might also be spun somewhere.  So while we’re learning about what Hillary is going to do for the little people (aka. the village raising the children), or how Dr. Paul is going to get government out of the way for people, remember that there are few independent unbiased voices in the fray.  Media outlets – conservative and liberal alike – don’t always tell the entire story.  Candidates – heck, even senators, representatives, and probably your mayor if s/he’s running for reelection – are coached to say words that sound like answers but are really vague statements that are either so eloquent or so obtuse that we forget what the original question was in the first place and by the end we are ready to move on.  It’s kind of like looking at a Jackson Pollock.

One: Number 31, 1950

It’s substantive.  It’s impressive.  And it might even make you feel something, although this one makes me feel dissonance, like my eyes are listening to static.  Then you feel, “But is it art?”  And then you wonder if that was his message all along, and we’ll never know, because once art is viewed it becomes an experience shaped by both the viewer and the artist alike.

…See what I mean?  Back to the point – voting is only democratic when it happens in the aggregate.  Like choosing organic at the supermarket – alone you might feel like it doesn’t make a huge difference, but if enough people do it we begin to see change in choices.  Voting with your money is yet another way to use your voice. And infertilites already have voices on the outskirts of the mainstream.

Participate, educate, and be heard.

 

Update: Paul Ryan supports gay adoption

In practically the same breath earlier this week, Former Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan upheld his belief that marriage should remain between a man and a woman but admitted that he would support same-sex couples adopting.  So it’s okay for same-sex couples to have children but not be considered a committed couple in the eyes of the law?  <confused>  What am I missing?  If you were so conservatively stuck on marriage being defined by only a man and a woman, is the family unit not so sacred that you’d allow it to be far more liberally defined?

In the run-up to the elections, I brought up how the candidates might have supported or hindered issues relating to infertility.  There wasn’t a lot to go on, since infertility doesn’t exactly have the same lobbying power as, say, gun control.  But there had been questions about Romney and Ryan both having a softer stance toward infertilites than some of their other GOP competitors, and perhaps they had to swing further to the right than they wanted to maintain solid Republican base and Tea Party support.  Without being in the spotlight, maybe now they feel more secure in admitting how they truly would vote…

Or maybe the Republican party is warming up to being less conservative with family values in an effort to win votes…  Sheesh, all they’d have to do is support gay marriage before the Democrats do and the line between Democrat and Republican would have to be redefined entirely.

Either way, I’m all for living in a country that is more inclined to embrace alternative lifestyles, including alternative journeys to parenthood.  Kudos to you, Paul Ryan, in all your P90X glory.