An increase in birth control prices on college campuses. - Page 3

I probably should let a sleeping dog lie, but I have to throw in my 2 cents worth.

First, I don't agree with our health system. It definitely needs a makeover so everyone is treated equal (I've thought about moving to Canada!)

That being said, why should my tax dollars go toward college students who what to have a good time, while I'm paying outragous insurance premiums because I couldn't get any of my tax dollars back as assistance even if I tried? People have said "adults will have sex". Well, "adults" also know how to be responsible so they can use other forms of birth control if they can't afford the pill...or, if they are REALLY responsible adults, they can keep their legs shut!

I'm tired of paying all these taxes to help other people when I don't get any help at all. Everybody should be responsible for their own actions. If they can't be then that isn't my fault that they're immature or stupid.

Now, if it is for medical reasons other than strictly BC, that is another thing. It don't understand why a doctor can't write a special prescription for that and have it at a lower rate. And, I don't think it's fair that only the price of BC went up....but, also you have to think about what the pharmacutical companies are doing. What is probably the best selling drug on campuses? BC. So, of course they will raise the price to make more profit. What should the HD on campus do? Raise the cost of antibiotics for someone that really needs to it get over strepthroat so a college girl can still have her fun on the weekend without getting pregnant?

Ok. Rant done. Sorry if I just reopened a can of worms.

I don't think people really understand how on-campus health care works...

Subsidizing one thing (or not) is independent of other things. Often, it is the pharmaceutical companies themselves who are offering BC to colleges at a reduced cost, because when the girls graduate they usually keep taking the same one.

Secondly, having girls who are sexually active be on the pill is directly in a school's interest. Girls who get pregnant (talking about standard 18-22ish yr olds) are far more likely to drop out, which hurts the school's retention rate, which hurts their status, which hurts their funding.

Lastly, once again, health care is NOT about morality.

I agree birth control should be affordable for everyone. I get it about $10 cheaper then the usual price because i am looking for work. But even the full price is only $16 for 4 months. Which i can still afford. The only thing is as i am losing weight my blood pressure is sometimes high, especially when i am nervous going into the doctors. If she says my blood pressure is too high, i can't get a prescription and i have to come back in a month or something to re-check it. I don't trust condoms alone and it p*sses me off that i wouldn't be able to get the pill because of this. I think any kind of birth control here in Oz isn't free.

Even though there are some people who really should not be having sex, if they cannot afford it, it should be the school/governments responsibility to provide it somehow. Unfortunately sex-ed does not always work and some people ignore the need for condoms even if they can afford them.

My birth control costs me $54 per month because I have an expensive one with low estrogen because of my bipolar disorder. BC in the past has been known to turn me into an axe-wielding homicidal maniac. My insurance doesn't cover it, either.

My meds for my bipolar cost me $60 a month and my insurance covers about $30 of that, which is ok. I need them both, so it's an expense I have to cover. But when I was a LOT poorer it was much harder.

Max pays for half of my BC. He feels that, after all, it is half his responsibility.

You're right. It's not about morality...it's about responsibility. If a college student can't afford an increase in price on BC, then why can't she, as an adult be responsible and use another form, or just not have sex? It has nothing to do with morality, it has to do with common sense.

And, you're right. Pharmaceutical companies probably do give colleges a deal...and then raise the price. What is the college to do then?

Maybe it is like, in Japan, Japanese cars cost more. Drugs are our cars.

lol that what been saying, But oh well

Saying that is a moral judgement itself. That same attitude, applied to any other aspect of health care, would be completely unacceptable. Oh, they have lung cancer because they smoke, let's charge them extra for their hospital stay.

Judging people's actions is not what medicine is about. What medicine is about, is providing care for everyone, not just rich people. Most people don't have common sense about their health. Look at our country-- the majority of us are overweight, nearing a majority of us are obese. Do we judge those people, say they should have the responsibility to get in shape, the common sense not to overeat?

What you are basically saying is that it's the girl's fault she can't afford it. That is the wrong way to look at it.

Did you know if a person needs a liver transplant because of Cirrosis of the Liver BECAUSE of being a heavy alcohol drinker they cannot get one.

Because THEY abused their body by drinking alcohol and it is their fault they ruined their own liver. Liver transplants go to people with bad livers through no fault of their own.

This really doesn't apply here but I thought I would throw it in anyway.

But I do feel, if you are to destitute to afford BC, you best find another solution as it is YOUR responsibility and no one else's.

Yes, I do know that. But your reasoning is not the same as the people on the boards making the decision. It isn't "Oh, it's their own fault, they just have to live with it".
The reason those people do not get livers is because they have a disease-- alcoholism-- which is likely to cause the same problem to occur with the new liver. There is a short supply of livers or any organ because so many people aren't organ donors, and organs have to be triaged. A young, otherwise healthy person will get a new organ way before an old, sickly person if they get one at all. Would you say it's the old person's fault they're old?
Pre-existing conditions and overall health =/= a value judgement affecting a medical decision.

And everyone's health is their own responsibility. I'll agree with that-- sex ed would be a good start. But. My point in this thread has been that the university usually does take a degree of responsibility for your health (as it is in their interest to do so) and that arguing against subsidizing BC is actually an argument for making it a special case and excluding it from the way the university normally handles medical matters. In other words, I'm saying BC should be treated like all the other medications the university health center prescribes, and some of you are saying it should be treated differently.

I don't see anyone arguing that antibiotics' prices should be raised if you get an sti, but not otherwise. That doesn't make sense, and neither does charging extra for contraception.

IMO, a woman being smart enough to take oral contraceptives if she is sexually active and not trying to have children, in addition to practicing safer sex, IS taking responsibility for herself.

If the university is raising prices on everything, it's a different story, and that is happening, and I think it's foul. At my old school, I could get a doctor's appt for free and all medications and services (x-ray, etc) at a good price, billed to my student account. Even 'rent' crutches for free. Here, I can't even go to the health center because my insurance doesn't cover it. I think that is the saddest, most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, and I was mad as a wet cat when I found that out.

My dad died of lung cancer. Did he get ANY help from the state? Some, from what medicare paid (which he paid in to the whole time he worked), but they only covered a portion. The rest came from supplimental insurance that he had to pay out of his own pocket from his social security check, which was next to nothing even though he worked for almost 40 years. He made what he could from part time jobs while he was still going through chemo treatments and trying to work part time jobs to keep food on the table.

Don't compare having cancer with getting birth control. My mom died of cervical cancer. Neither one of them chose to get cancer, especially my mom. A woman has a choice to get pregnant. I stand by the statement...if she can't afford it, don't open her legs. How hard is that?

I am very sorry about your parents, I wasn't comparing the two in the slightest. I said that the same attitude applied to something like that would be unacceptable. I know how crappy it is to not get the health care people deserve. General health care, though, is a different thread. This is about college health care, which is a different beast entirely.

"If she can't afford it, don't open her legs" I don't think I can even respond to that without just repeating myself. Moral judgements have no place in medicine, and this sort of knee-jerk, judgemental thinking is no justification for raising health care costs for the segment of society that doesn't share your particular moral code.

I did misread your post about cancer, and I apologize. I do see what you're saying about that.

But, do you think tax payers should pay for smokers to go on the patch? What is the difference between that and birth control? They are both preventive medications. Smokers have a choice not to smoke, and college students have a choice to either not have sex or find another form of birth control if they can't afford the pill.

To me, health care is antibiotics for strept throat, bronchitis, etc, or any time you need medication to get better.

This isn't a moral issue for me. I had sex in college and didn't end up pregnant. There was a time I wasn't on the pill because I didn't have the money. I just didn't do "it".

Again, this isn't about morality...it's responsibility.

No, it's understandable that you interpreted my post that way, don't apologize! I probably could have picked a less emotional issue.

I know at my school at least there was a program you could pay about 20$ for smoking cessation and they did give you the patch. So that was subsidized. My counselling sessions were free, because of my family's income level.

One of the major problems with our health care system is that we don't do as much preventive care and we spend so much fixing problems after they've started. Why? It's more profitable for the HMOs. How disgusting is that? This is just one example of colleges becoming more like the general American health care system, and it should be the other way around.

Health care includes taking care of your overall health and well-being. Not just putting band-aids on your cuts and Amoxicillin.

I will admit I have not taken the time to read the whole thred but I do know a few things. Campouses raising the price of birth control is not as shocking as we think it is. Most campus health care systems are privately funded by the school. They are haveing to raise prices on everything from tuition to books to food.

Now with that being said. With a little reaserch anyone who is willing to take the time they can find much cheaper if not free programs. Planned Parenthood be one. They have many options for people who can not afford birth control. Here in California, as long as you are a resdent of the state you can get birth control for free. I have what is know as the green card. It is issued buy Health and Human Sevices to woman who can not other wise aford birth control. All my Gyn appointments are covered plus all test if needed, even mamogrames. I also get my prescription covered for free. I do have health insurance through work but even with it the pill would still cost between 20-40 a month depending on the brand. That amount of money is enough to eat off for a week. Now I did have to spend most of the day dealing with the beuracracy end of it. Sitting in office after office having to prove my income and show that I was unable to aford the care even with insurance. I did get approved and for the last year have been on the program. I found out about it through my doctor. I spent time with him and telling him how I need the pill but could not afford it and he gave me the number for the agency. He is still my doctor and has been the best one I have ever had. Even if he is a state paid doctor.

Most states have similar programs, you just need to look.

Basicly what I am saying are there are options, a person just need to know where to look.

What i dont get is the people who CAN afford it, but say 'oh but condoms get in the way, it feels so much better without them' and then they get pregnant. Apart from preventing unwanted birth, there are actually other benifits of using both forms of BC together..

But i'm getting way off, we've had this discussion a while back


/endhijack