Monthly Archives: December 2013

Abortion Insurance: Optional?

There are some issues that kind of just crawl up my butt and sit there, dedicating their lives to irritating the crap out of me. More often than not, these are women’s health issues – I am SO tired of the misogynistic crap that passes for politics when it comes to women’s health. More often than not, it’s a bunch of people spewing ideological talking points without really thinking about the consequences.

For example: abortion.

Now, when people are ideologically against abortion, I get it – it’s not illogical to me. While I wish you would keep your private beliefs out of your politics and focus on the constituents, I understand the ideological arguments against abortion. But then, these SAME PEOPLE who, mere months ago, were arguing that abortion should not be legal, should not be covered by insurance, because it is BAD, are saying “well, if you’re willing to pay for it, it’s fine.”

I’m sorry…what? Let me start over.

There is currently an abortion insurance bill on the Michigan house floor that would prohibit employers from including abortion coverage in standard insurance plans. People who wished to purchase abortion insurance would be permitted to do so separately. Employers who choose to offer abortion insurance would need to let all of their employees know about it. Right to Life of Michigan has played a pretty big role in recommending this measure to the public as a way to ensure that abortion coverage is not included amongst the taxpayer subsidized policies that are a part of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).

Right to Life is, therefore, lauding a bill that would allow abortions, a move that’s pretty strictly at odds with their policy statement, that states that it is “unalterably opposed to abortion.*” Their President, Barbara Listing, said, “Michigan citizens do not want to pay for someone else’s abortion with their tax dollars or health insurance premiums.” While she followed this up with a quote about how abortion is evil, the fact is that the organization is supporting a measure that wouldn’t actually outlaw abortions (although it would definitely make it harder to get them) which seems pretty contradictory.

It would seem like Right to Life of Michigan is more closely aligned with their own pocketbooks than with any pro – life agenda they may have touted previously.

Leaving that aside, however, the biggest problem with this bill is that it once again refuses to allow women to control their own health – unless they’re able to pay for it. This is the very condition that the Affordable Care Act sought to remedy; people who currently cannot afford health insurance would not be able to afford independent abortion insurance either. It forces women to insure themselves against unplanned pregnancies, and places all of the responsibility solely on their shoulders, removing the men (or sperm donors) from the equation entirely. This is especially troubling when you consider the fact that many unplanned pregnancies, such as those cause by rape or incest, would not be exempt from this policy. Women, and the parents of growing girls, would have to make the decision to insure themselves against rape and incest – if they even had the wealth and resources to do so.

I feel like there are MORE than enough examples of male privilege in our legal infrastructure without adding this particular measure to the mix.


All factual information for this post was found here:

Read the rest of the policy statement here: