patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Contraception

Monday, July 16, 2012

Gov. Jay Nixon Vetoes Contraceptive Services Bill: Agree or Disagree?

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed a bill that would have allowed employers to deny insurance coverage for contraceptive services if they have religious or moral objections. What do you think of his actions?

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed a bill that would have allowed employers to deny insurance coverage for contraceptive services if they have religious or moral objections. Nixon, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, said Missouri law already provides "strong religious protections" that let employers and employees abstain from paying for contraceptive coverage based on their beliefs. From the report: Nixon said the bill would undermine the current protections because it would let an insurance company "impose its will, and deny inclusion of contraceptive coverage, even if that position is inconsistent with the rights and beliefs of the employee or employer." At a news conference in his Capitol office this morning, Nixon said he vetoed the…

Christine R

7:20 am on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

It is sad, to me, that people cannot or will not grasp this issue. It is about personal liberty. If you own a business, you should not be forced to do things if not doing them does not break a law and is not unethical. I am amazed someone so truly dumb as Sandra Fluke was accepted into Georgetown. I truly believe that she is too intellectually lazy to have found where to purchase affordable …   more ›

Thursday, March 29, 2012

Should Contraceptive Services be Optional for Missouri Employers?

The Missouri Senate gave an initial thumbs-up to legislation that would allow employers to deny coverage for contraceptive services. Do you agree?

In the wake of a massive Jefferson City rally over the issue, the Missouri state Senate this week gave initial approval to legislation that would allow employers to deny insurance coverage for contraceptive services if they have religious or moral objections. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch covered the issue this week with a story that quoted several St. Louis-area residents who attended the rally in the Missouri Capitol. Area residents such as John Jost from Chesterfield and Terri Booher from Florissant framed the issue as one of religious freedom: "Congress shall pass no law prohibiting the free exercise of my religion,” the Post quoted Jost as saying. “End of story. Stay out of my religion.” Sen. John Lamping, R-Ladue, the legislation's …

Comment_arrow

Sensible? I think so

10:25 pm on Monday, April 2, 2012

Some guesses as to why prescriptions are still required: 1) Inertia: there hasn't been demand to change. 2) Profits are greater for prescription drugs. The costs in Latin American are about 1/17th the cost here ($0.25 vs. $4.24). Sure, there are other factors involved, but I can't believe that most of the difference isn't a result of the prescription requirement. 3) Some people would throw a …   more ›

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Vasectomy Law Gets Support of Richmond Heights' Stacey Newman

The Missouri lawmaker is one of nine co-sponsors of the bill, which is a response to recent controversy about insurance coverage of birth control, the Kansas City Star reported.

A Missouri legislator from Richmond Heights has co-sponsored a bill aimed at limiting vasectomies, the Kansas City Star reported Friday. The legislation from Rep. Stacey Newman, a Democrat, and eight other lawmakers is a response to recent controversy about whether insurance coverage of birth control should be mandatory. Quoting from the Star: "Newman's bill is similar to anti-vasectomy legislation filed in Georgia after an anti-abortion bill was debated in that state's legislature." Read Newman's comments on the bill and see excerpt from the legislation in the complete Star article.

Got a Hot Tip?