Current Events > Vasectomies are cheaper than tube tying. ACA covers just tube tying.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Why?

Men aren't oppressed enough
---

DarthAragorn posted...

Men aren't oppressed enough

???

LolTownz posted...

DarthAragorn posted...

Men aren't oppressed enough

???

As in men are too privileged for this to be covered
---

Because vasectomies are not uncommon for it to come undone, and are not always that effective. Whereas with tubal ligation, is virtually a guarantee, and is very rare for it to naturally fix itself.
---

Can tube tying happen for other health reasons than as a pregnancy protection?

Like, does the reason for getting your tube tied matter in insurance covering it?
---

emblem boy posted...

Like, does the reason for getting your tube tied matter in insurance covering it?

It could, yes. An insurer is far more likely to cover it if it can be proven that it would reduce risk to the person by a well enough margin to warrant the surgery's cost.
---

it's always funny watching people try to justify these double standards

emblem boy posted...

Can tube tying happen for other health reasons than as a pregnancy protection?

Like, does the reason for getting your tube tied matter in insurance covering it?

from an insurance standpoint, births are extremely expensive so they'd love to get womens' tubes tied as often as possible.
---

Caelthus posted...

Because vasectomies are not uncommon for it to come undone, and are not always that effective. Whereas with tubal ligation, is virtually a guarantee, and is very rare for it to naturally fix itself.

What source are you using? it seems like both procedures have low chances of failure according to a quick google search.
---

ChromaticAngel posted...

emblem boy posted...

Can tube tying happen for other health reasons than as a pregnancy protection?

Like, does the reason for getting your tube tied matter in insurance covering it?

from an insurance standpoint, births are extremely expensive so they'd love to get womens' tubes tied as often as possible.

Yeah. A tubal ligation is effectively a guarantee that they won't be having children again, thus why insurers will cover it. A vasectomy can be undone rather easily and isn't even 100% efficient when not undone, and is why that it is rarely paid for.
---

Because old republican men like to stick to it women as much as they can
---

I4NRulez posted...

Because old republican men like to stick to it women as much as they can

Can you read
---

DarthAragorn posted...

I4NRulez posted...

Because old republican men like to stick to it women as much as they can

Can you read

Yes, Vasectomies are an easy outpatient procedure. Of course they wouldnt be covered because old dudes dont want to risk their manhood.

Tube Tying is a expensive and dangerous procedure that most women dont want to get. The reason its covered is so women have to be the one to get the procedure done.

At least thats my speculation. Same reason why viagra is covered but not birth control in most health care plans
---

Because women have lobbied for it. Men should lobby for vasectomies to be covered as well.

Also, most of you have your facts backwards: vasectomy reversal is extremely difficult and not guaranteed to work. The majority of vasectomies take and, if you're cleared at the twelve week checkup, you essentially cannot get a woman pregnant ever again.

I4NRulez posted...

At least thats my speculation. Same reason why viagra is covered but not birth control in most health care plans

Viagra and birth control are not comparable products. If insurance companies didn't cover estrogen treatments or whatever is used for treating sexual dysfunction in women that would be a better comparison.
---