How to change law so that bilateral epididymectomies for sterilization will be covered by insurance?

[fed up]

So, maybe insurance should likewise refuse to pay for vasectomies, and for tubal ligations, and for bilateral salpingectomies, eh?

My insurance DID cover the vasectomy and it was elective surgery. Join the military and get your operation, Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Become a spy, go to military prison, get your rocks off.

 

[PA Bill]

This sounds like a pain in the ass. Just go buy a box of rubbers and *** till your heart's content.

 

[Travis Price]

Most insurance policies cover vasectomies because they're relatively inexpensive at around 1k.

They're also one of the safest forms of birth control.

Going all in on full sterilization when a vasectomy will do seems going overboard and is borderline weird. Failure rate for women is .5%, men .15%.

Furthermore, and I'm pretty sure I speak for everyone on a professional insurance forum... No one cares about your interest where you finish. All that matters is that it's covered or not.

Insurance, generally, is managed care... Which means most policies would require you go with the cheapest option first, if it were covered... Which is the vasectomy.

So, really, stop. After 5 years it's just weird.

 

[Futurist]

Most insurance policies cover vasectomies because they're relatively inexpensive at around 1k.

They're also one of the safest forms of birth control.

Going all in on full sterilization when a vasectomy will do seems going overboard and is borderline weird. Failure rate for women is .5%, men .15%.

Furthermore, and I'm pretty sure I speak for everyone on a professional insurance forum... No one cares about your interest where you finish. All that matters is that it's covered or not.

Insurance, generally, is managed care... Which means most policies would require you go with the cheapest option first, if it were covered... Which is the vasectomy.

So, really, stop. After 5 years it's just weird.

Women are sometimes or even often able to get the MUCH more effective bilateral salpingectomy FULLY covered by their insurance, no?

Also, when the consequences of a vasectomy failure can literally be the cumulative loss of tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in forced child support payments over an 18+ year time period, eliminating the remaining 0.15% risk is actually perfectly reasonable. After all, no one else is actually going to pay one's child support in the event of a vasectomy failure. Now, if they were, and such an agreement was actually compatible with public policy (doubtful), then we would be having a MUCH different conversation about this topic and issue.

 

[Futurist]

Have the state pay ALL OF people's child support in their place for 18+ years in the event of a vasectomy failure. Then we'll be having a MUCH different conversation about this.

 

[Travis Price]

Women are sometimes or even often able to get the MUCH more effective bilateral salpingectomy FULLY covered by their insurance, no?

Also, when the consequences of a vasectomy failure can literally be the cumulative loss of tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in forced child support payments over an 18+ year time period, eliminating the remaining 0.15% risk is actually perfectly reasonable. After all, no one else is actually going to pay one's child support in the event of a vasectomy failure. Now, if they were, and such an agreement was actually compatible with public policy (doubtful), then we would be having a MUCH different conversation about this topic and issue.

Risk of complications is significantly higher AND so is failure rate.

Based on your questioning... I don't think we have to worry too much about you getting laid enough for this to be an issue.

As to your second point, if you don't want kids, get a vasectomy AND use a condom. Otherwise, you really come off as scummy.

PS: In your 5 year crusade to have a relatively invasive and expensive procedure to be covered by insurance, you could have saved the $100 a month.

 

[leevena]

I am sorry I got involved in this discussion. Did not realize it would devolve into such a mess. Futurist, you should understand that if you want to complain/preach you certainly can, but do not post a question that appears to be legit.

 

[Futurist]

I am sorry I got involved in this discussion. Did not realize it would devolve into such a mess. Futurist, you should understand that if you want to complain/preach you certainly can, but do not post a question that appears to be legit.

This is a serious question. I genuinely want to change the law to force insurance companies to cover bilateral epididymectomies for sterilization purposes.

 

[Futurist]

Risk of complications is significantly higher AND so is failure rate.

Based on your questioning... I don't think we have to worry too much about you getting laid enough for this to be an issue.

As to your second point, if you don't want kids, get a vasectomy AND use a condom. Otherwise, you really come off as scummy.

PS: In your 5 year crusade to have a relatively invasive and expensive procedure to be covered by insurance, you could have saved the $100 a month.View attachment 6689

Source for the failure rate of bilateral epididymectomies being higher?

Also, don't worry, I am perfectly capable of raising the necessary funds for this.

 

[Travis Price]

I am sorry I got involved in this discussion. Did not realize it would devolve into such a mess. Futurist, you should understand that if you want to complain/preach you certainly can, but do not post a question that appears to be legit.

It totally appears to be legit. However, it doesn't make it less skeevy.

Secondly, he was answered.

Insurance agents are not plan developers. Insurance agents are not lawyers. Go to a lawyer if you want to try to change a law.

Furthermore, he's been asking the same question for 5 years. Nothing changed with the answer.

1)https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4137647/

.1 to.8% failure rate for women. Furthermore, women have a higher rate of complications.

2) Your campaign to challenge this procedure as "more effective" associated with cost vs a vasectomy is invalid.

1k for a vasectomy and other BC measures (like the pill) vs 6k for a more complex procedure.

Frankly, and this is my personal point.. Most of us would be entirely happy for private health insurance to cover a halfway decent level of care... Instead of these shennanigans.

Either pay for the treatment you want, or get what the insurance covers.

Dude doesn't want to wear a condom. That's what this is really about. It's not about healthcare concerns. It's about finishing in someone and not knocking them up. There's multiple solutions that don't require insurance companies to she'll out 6k for you. Grow up.