How do you feel about medical coverage for pregnancy?

[Mojotronica]

Is it selfish to expect medical insurance to cover pregnancy? It's a condition that costs about $30,000 (assuming all goes well) per pregnancy. That's $30,000 of YOUR insurance premiums going to help pay for some other person's kid. How do you feel about that?

It's probably less defensible than public education taxes because the pregnancy is an avoidable condition, whereas once the kid is born it's in your interest to give him or her something to do rather than home invasion or bank robbery. (So he or she doesn't invade your home or rob your bank.)

It's not like I'm saying no one can have a kid ever, just that if you want to have a kid you pay the $30,000 out of pocket.

If we must spend money on children, how about shoring up adoption services? People who want to have kids apply for it, then if their background checks out and they pass their financial acumen and positive attitude exams, they are assigned a baby from the National Adoption Service. (Which handles the inevitable accidental, unwanted pregnancies or pregnancies of people who can't pay the hospital bill.)

If you have a baby "in-network," that is you've passed your background check and exams prior to conception, then you have an improved chance of getting to keep your biological offspring, covered by the system. But it can't be a 100% chance because that would obviously lead to abuse. Czechs and balances my friend, czechs and balances.

[Elok]

It costs $30K? News to me. Our kid didn't cost a fifth of that, including delivery. Probably it costs that much if you do it in the U.S. with an unnecessary ultrasound every month or whatever whackadoo things people are doing.

[Dinner]

If I knocked up my girlfriend (unlikely to happen at this time but still) I'd want her pregnancy covered. I already have her on my policy as a domestic partner so there is no worry but what about couples whose relationship is newer? It should just be universally covered via taxation like it is done in civilized countries so that there is never a question. It's ultimately cheaper with such universal systems as well.

[Dinner]

It costs $30K? News to me. Our kid didn't cost a fifth of that, including delivery. Probably it costs that much if you do it in the U.S. with an unnecessary ultrasound every month or whatever whackadoo things people are doing.

You got a bargain from a 3rd world provider. Maybe the quality was still excellent but the cost in Peru is still a fraction of the cost of paying doctors, nurses, rent, etc... In the 1st world. You also got lucky you didn't have a premie because costs spiral up by orders of magnitude with premies (which becomes more common as women delay child baring into their 30's or even 40's).

[kentonio]

It's not like I'm saying no one can have a kid ever, just that if you want to have a kid you pay the $30,000 out of pocket.

Are you devils advocating, or has someone stolen your login details?

[Mojotronica]

My own recent experiences have got me pondering how I would feel about it if I were kind of a douchebag.

[Dinner]

Everyone has an inner douchebag. Some people are better at fighting it but we all have it in us. I try to regret my douchebag moments and not repeat them but I'm hardly a stellar success at that (the not repeating part).

[SlowwHand]

Whining about "your money" paying for a pregnancy is kind of silly. Given that position, what about all else? Why should "your money" pay for any cancer? Heart disease? Someone running a red light and t-boning a vehicle? What exactly should it pay for? The only legitimate question is with "preexisting condition".

[Dinner]

If everyone had universal coverage from birth there would be no pre-existing conditions.

[SlowwHand]

And if a frog had wings it wouldn't whomp it's ass every time it jumped.

[-Jrabbit]

It should be covered. And I would think our conservative friends -- you know, the ones who believe life begins at conception -- would fight to the death to protect that embryo, keep it healthy and bring it to term.

After the birth? Different story. Then you're on your own.

[BlackCat]

30 K$ sonuds unrealistic - it's something like 300 hours of work on average (in US probably more with the lower wages).

Edit: Forgot to say that Eloks numbers makes sense in every 1st world country except US.

[SlowwHand]

It should be covered. And I would think our conservative friends -- you know, the ones who believe life begins at conception -- would fight to the death to protect that embryo, keep it healthy and bring it to term.

After the birth? Different story. Then you're on your own.

I don't think this reads like you mean it. It reads like all childhood illnesses and immunizations shouldn't be covered?

[Dinner]

And if a frog had wings it wouldn't whomp it's ass every time it jumped.

Frogs having wings is not something possible to achieve but universal coverage has been achieved in most civilized countries. That's just a fact.

[Elok]

You got a bargain from a 3rd world provider. Maybe the quality was still excellent but the cost in Peru is still a fraction of the cost of paying doctors, nurses, rent, etc... In the 1st world. You also got lucky you didn't have a premie because costs spiral up by orders of magnitude with premies (which becomes more common as women delay child baring into their 30's or even 40's).

Adjust for the different cost of living and you get...still less than a third of the OP number. The clinic where we gave birth was in Miraflores, the swank neighborhood of Lima where rent is about normal for the US. The delivery itself cost us just under a thousand dollars.

Pregnancy happens all the time. Plenty of poor third-world villagers have plenty of perfectly healthy kids (barring nutritional deficiencies) without paying the equivalent of their whole village's earnings for ten years. Why the hell should people in rich countries have to pay a lot of money for the exact same results?