Friday, May 11, 2007
from the Kennebec Journal
Sport of Kings
Collins: Detecting 'home-grown terrorists' difficult
Recession over? Don't tell the hungry
Downtown remains optimistic
Health-care bill clears key hurdle
A chance to cash in
A tough way to end it
Windham pulls away to win Class A title
All of today's:
News | Sports
from the Kennebec Journal
from the Morning Sentinel
Old building gets new lease on life
Freedom brings perils along with privileges, Sen. Collins says
At food pantries, recession still very much alive
BILL CLEARS KEY HURDLE IN SENATE
FARMINGTON Volunteers take day to replace roof
OAKLAND Sewer project finishes first phase, ready for next
Black Bears fall to Wildcats in finale
Eagles rally to state title
All of today's:
News | Sports
from the Morning Sentinel
I have never understood why MaineCare pays for multiple prenatal visits and hospital delivery costs for poor women, who ultimately stay "in the system" supported by taxpayers even longer due to the financial burden of having yet another child, yet MaineCare does not cover the one-time cost of an abortion.
The women who are most adversely affected by an unwanted pregnancy are Maine's poorest women, who are on MaineCare.
Women with private health insurance don't have to deal with the cost of an abortion if they need one. But for Maine's poorest women, coming up with hundreds of dollars on short notice puts them in a position to delay paying for other bills like rent or groceries, asking for help from an unsupportive partner, or delaying the abortion until they are further along in the pregnancy, when risks and cost increase. Even worse, they may continue an unwanted pregnancy that they feel they are unable to care for, neglecting their own health while pregnant and making them a less-than-ideal candidate for making an adoption plan.
Without L.D. 1309, the right to choose an abortion is denied to certain women for financial reasons. L.D. 1309 lessens discrimination against low-income women, and makes fiscal and ethical sense.
Nicole Mathieu
Hallowell
Reader comments
Sort by: Oldest first | Newest First
1-8 of 8 comments:
Medicaid works like this, the Federal government will reimburse the State for proper medical claims under a policy that has been created. Abortion is not under any policy, so therefore it would not be reimbursed. The State must pay for the medical treatment, out of the State's general fund.
It seems funny to me that if your State has trouble balancing it's budget now (and every one is saying the State is spending too much), why would you add more spending measures on something that only benefits less than 8% of the population.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Oh, by the way, vaginal intercourse is not the only way to have sex. I can thing of at least 2 other orifices’.
report abuse
Oldguy, how about this logic?
Without (some dumb law) the right to smoke cigarettes is denied to certain people for financial reasons. (Some dumb law) lessens discrimination against low-income people and makes fiscal and ethical sense.
Since we don't have a problem with a (wo)man doing as s/he sees fit, we should have no problem allowing, say Food Stamps to be used to buy cigarettes. You may choose NOT to smoke cigarettes just as you may choose NOT to have sex and get pregnant. Or if you DO choose to have sex, you take proper precautions.
Lastly,
"If this truly is a problem and the cost isn't great it makes sense to do this instead of paying welfare benefits for children for the next 18 years."
This is exactly the logic that has gotten our society to the point where it is today that we NEED to be having this debate in the first place. Cheaper to pay for an abortion than pay welfare for the next 18 years. We CREATED the "Great Society" and now we have to live with it. Maybe... JUST MAYBE if we had more RESPONSIBILITIES and fewer RIGHTS, we'd not be in this mess.....report abuse
Any individual "rights" should end at the point where it is the responsibility of someone else to pay for it!report abuse
If you are on the public dole, you SHOULD be getting discriminated against financially!! The rest of us are paying the freight for you! You are not entitled to everything you want when you don't work to earn it yourself and, instead, mooch off the rest of us who DO work....and have our money confiscated to pay for you.
Welfare should be subsistence living, nothing more. Maybe then the freeloaders might have an incentive to get off of it.report abuse
"Without L.D. 1309, the right to choose an abortion is denied to certain women for financial reasons. L.D. 1309 lessens discrimination against low-income women, and makes fiscal and ethical sense."
What it really says....
Without L.D. 1309, the right to KILL YOUR BABY is denied to certain women for financial reasons. L.D. 1309 lessens discrimination against low-income women THAT WANT TO KILL THEIR BABY, and makes fiscal and ethical sense.
I cant fathom public money paying for this atrocity!
report abuse
I'm not sold on the need for this bill. It would be nice to see some actual stats. on what it will cost, how many women are having a problem getting an abortion, etc..
Philosophically I have no problem with a woman doing as she sees fit if she is pregnant. It's her decision and she has to live with it.
I also think there needs to be a lot more education about birth control and sex among young people. Abstinence is not a realistic solution in this day and age. Those who oppose abortion usually oppose sex education in school, the morning after pill, and discussion of birth control. Their ridiculous logic furthers the need for abortions.
If this truly is a problem and the cost isn't great it makes sense to do this instead of paying welfare benefits for children for the next 18 years.report abuse
Hey kids!
Let's do the word substitution game!
"Without (some dumb law), the right to choose (to own a gun) is denied to certain women for financial reasons. (Some dumb law) lessens discrimination against low-income women, and makes fiscal and ethical sense."
Wasn't that fun?
If abortion is merely Constitutional therefore requiring the government to pay for those who cannot afford it, then certainly the government will pay for something that is a genuine Amendment to the Constitution.
report abuse
You must be a registered user of MaineToday.com to post a comment. Register or log in.