Find » Society » History » Military Health Insurance: How Abor...

Military Health Insurance: How Abortion is Unfairly Limited for Military Members

By Jamie K. Wilson, published Apr 23, 2007
Published Content: 277  Total Views: 327,196  Favorited By: 98 CPs
Embed:  
Rating: 3.0 of 5
There are people who disagree with any abortion, and others who think all abortion should be available to anyone on demand. Most of us, including me, fall in the middle; we believe that abortion for certain limited situations should always be legal, but have differing views about where the limit to abortion falls.

Suppose - you knew you were carrying a baby that could not live. Could not. A baby with no brain, a baby with gross deformities, a baby that would grow inside you for the remainder of your pregnancy, be born, and die within minutes or days.

Or - suppose you were raped and became pregnant. Or - you found out that you had a physical problem that made it dangerous for you to carry a baby to term.

In the ordinary civilian world, you might be able to pay for such an abortion yourself. But young military members and their families often don't have that luxury. Moving from place to place, it's difficult for the spouse to acquire and keep a job above minimum wage. Many young military families are eligible for food stamps. The spouse is often in the same position as a single parent: when her husband is out to sea or on deployment, she is the only person caring for children and home. Military members often make less than half what their civilian counterparts would earn, even when you figure in military benefits. So the free health coverage they receive is important.

Yet in 2002, a young Navy wife found out that the baby she carried was anencephalic - it had no forebrain or cerebellum. It would most likely live only minutes after she gave birth. At 4 months into her pregnancy, the most sensible and least painful thing for her to do would be terminate the pregnancy.

But Tricare, the insurance company covering military families, would not allow that. Its policy is written in such a way that ONLY in cases where the mother's life is at risk should abortion be paid for. This young family faced a $3000 medical bill, or the pain of going through another four months carrying a baby that would die.

Takeaways
  • Military health insurance limits abortion coverage to pregnancies that threaten the mother's life.
  • Military families are among the most financially vulnerable populations in America.
Did You Know?
In another anencephalic fetus case, the young military spouse was asked what she said when people asked when her baby was due. She said, "I always told them 'the day before his funeral.'"
Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 15 of 15
 
 
I had no idea that military health benefits were so different. Thanks for an educational read.

Posted on 05/03/2007 at 9:05:00 AM

 
Great article!

Posted on 04/26/2007 at 9:04:00 PM

 
great article. you made some excellent points about the people trapped in the middle of both sides of the abortion debate.

Posted on 04/25/2007 at 10:04:00 PM

 
Another thought provoking article. I won't comment with my personal opinion, as I don't want to be slammed or bashed by either side, but you present some very interesting and compelling thoughts on a difficult topic.

Posted on 04/25/2007 at 6:04:00 PM

 
Here's a question: would you rather die by having your brains suctioned out, or in your mother's arms? How about this...would you rather your child die by having its brains suctioned out, so that you never see his face as it would have been...or in your arms? We all have the right to answer that question ourselves and to make decisions based on our individual answers, and it's okay for two people to have two different answers. No matter what we all think is right or wrong we don't have the right to force it onto others. They have the right to decide as well.

Posted on 04/25/2007 at 1:04:00 PM

 
I agree with PTLeena. Many times a child is misdiagnosed with a fatal defect or illness in utero, only to be born just fine. I also don't believe abortion is painless. I've also heard of babies being diagnosed with having no brain and then being born with a perfect brain, so I know it happens. All that being said, it should be a woman's right to have an abortion up until the point the fetus is viable outside the womb, at which point they could always just remove the baby with forceps (as with partial-birth abortion) but NOT suction out the brain and give it a chance. It's wrong that military women are limited in this area, but unfortunately it's not just abortion. We have to pay 20% copays on dental work and optometry, even though these things are just as crucial to our health, and that means many who need dental work go without it (like me). We also don't have any coverage on chiropractics, which can be so helpful say after a car accident. The whole system needs improvement.

Posted on 04/25/2007 at 1:04:00 PM

 
Thank you, CR -- had it not been for things that happened in my family, I would probably be PL 100% too. But the difference in coverage -- that's exactly the thing that bothers me the most.

Posted on 04/25/2007 at 12:04:00 PM

 
at = as*

Posted on 04/25/2007 at 11:04:00 AM

 
I'm pro-life 100% as well. I get the problem of the Tricare Medical Insurance not providing the same benefits at federal health coverage though. Interesting article.

Posted on 04/25/2007 at 11:04:00 AM

 
Very interesting read, Jamie. And well written as always. ;-)

Posted on 04/25/2007 at 8:04:00 AM

 
I see what you're saying. My thoughts are "let nature (or God) take its course, not us". Nothing will ever be completely fair or equal because we allow for ourselves to MAKE the choices of deciding who is important enough to live and who should die. Know what I mean?

Posted on 04/23/2007 at 8:04:00 PM

 
The question, I suppose, is where you draw the line. I was mad as heck at the Terry Schiavo case's result -- but a lot of people thought I was wrong and pulled her feeding tube. None of us really know where to interfere, where to not interfere, etc. We just do our best. My main complaint is that equity should be applied when and where possible. No family should be put through the torment and hardship these military families endured.

Posted on 04/23/2007 at 7:04:00 PM

 
I am just a "crazy neo-con lifer", that's all. Life is life and I don't think it's up to us to decide who comes and how they come into or leave this world.

Posted on 04/23/2007 at 7:04:00 PM

 
An anencephalic baby doesn't have much of a brain to suck out; if you see the pictures, it looks like the skull has been sliced off from the eyebrows up. It will die, period, almost always within a day or so of birth. The tests for this, including amnios and sonograms, provide indisputable proof of the condition. A 4-month abortion isn't a partial birth, but rather a surgical abortion. If I were carrying a baby like that -- I don't know what I would do. I consider myself about 99% pro-life as well, but it is cruel and wrong to deny military members the same medical coverage other government employees are granted.

Posted on 04/23/2007 at 7:04:00 PM

 
Jamie, I am pro-life 100%. And I can understand your thinking about not carrying out a 4 month pregnancy...but I do NOT agree that "the baby IS going to die". I have heard of many cases where a would be baby was thought by doctors to have a deformity or life threatening case, and was born perfectly healthy. Also, you say that "aborting at 5 months causes the mother less pain and the baby less pain"...? What about 10 years down the road when the regret and emotional pain sets in? And actually, at 5 months, a baby can definitely feel what is being done to it during an abortion, so it probably suffers more through its brains being sucked out than from dying naturally on a hospital table.

Posted on 04/23/2007 at 6:04:00 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 15 of 15
 
Most Commented On