"As part of the project I’m looking at contraceptive coverage. A few years back, I discovered that female sterilization (tubal ligation) was covered without cost under the ACA, but male sterilization (vasectomy) was not. Even though it is cheaper, safer and more effective. "
;;; Female sterlization is notoriously harder to obtain. Try being a 30 year old woman with no kids attempting to get a tubal ligation. At any rate, vasectomies should be covered, and encouraged. They are reversable, afterall. And with the whole Dobbs thing maybe the government finally wised up and realized that men need to become sexually responsible.
Interesting read, and looking forward to the paper. Regarding vasectomy I'm personally hoping for vasagel to make advancements and be approved for human use. (Vasagel is a male contraceptive where a gel like substance is injected into the vas deferens to block sperm. As opposed to a vasectomy, which is not easily reversed, it is simply removed by another injection that dissolves the blockage)
Great news...tho no longer relevant for me, still married and faithful at the age of 83! But a great step forward, not just for men, but for equality and more, for recognizing that (at least for heterosexuals) contraception is a mutual issue!
Fascinating, and as someone in healthcare, no less shocking to read. Looking forward to the paper on vasectomies to see what remained after any snipping.
Well done and the part about vasectomies needs even more attention. You might have mentioned, however, that condoms, in practice, have a pretty high failure rate compared to other forms of contraception. Offsetting this, they do protect against sexually-transmitted diseases and they are a lot better than nothing.
Excellent research and thanks for the fantastic article -- stunning that condoms can only be gotten for free by women who are prescribed them under ACA, if I understand you. Wow! I'm looking forward to the full report.
Here in California, there was a similar issue -- the state now provides free feminine products in high schools since the passage of the "Menstrual Products for All" act. However, a bill that would have paid for condoms in California for all high school students was shot down. Here's a link: "California’s Gov. Newsom vetoes bill to make free condoms available for high school students" https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/californias-gov-newsom-vetoes-bill-to-make-free-condoms-available-for-high-school-students
"As part of the project I’m looking at contraceptive coverage. A few years back, I discovered that female sterilization (tubal ligation) was covered without cost under the ACA, but male sterilization (vasectomy) was not. Even though it is cheaper, safer and more effective. "
;;; Female sterlization is notoriously harder to obtain. Try being a 30 year old woman with no kids attempting to get a tubal ligation. At any rate, vasectomies should be covered, and encouraged. They are reversable, afterall. And with the whole Dobbs thing maybe the government finally wised up and realized that men need to become sexually responsible.
Who the hell wants to wear a rubber anyway?
Incredible discrimination against men. How exactly did this happen when men are a majority of politicians?
Am I reading that right.. that condoms are covered but only women can obtain them?
Interesting read, and looking forward to the paper. Regarding vasectomy I'm personally hoping for vasagel to make advancements and be approved for human use. (Vasagel is a male contraceptive where a gel like substance is injected into the vas deferens to block sperm. As opposed to a vasectomy, which is not easily reversed, it is simply removed by another injection that dissolves the blockage)
I remember back in the old days when a central push of feminism was to centrally involve men in contraception. Not so much any more...
Great news...tho no longer relevant for me, still married and faithful at the age of 83! But a great step forward, not just for men, but for equality and more, for recognizing that (at least for heterosexuals) contraception is a mutual issue!
Fascinating, and as someone in healthcare, no less shocking to read. Looking forward to the paper on vasectomies to see what remained after any snipping.
Interesting! Really seems like covering the cost of condoms/providing them for "free" to people is smart public health & economic move all around too.
If I didn't know any better I'd say it looks like women are trying to control men's bodies and sexual health.
Well done and the part about vasectomies needs even more attention. You might have mentioned, however, that condoms, in practice, have a pretty high failure rate compared to other forms of contraception. Offsetting this, they do protect against sexually-transmitted diseases and they are a lot better than nothing.
Excellent research and thanks for the fantastic article -- stunning that condoms can only be gotten for free by women who are prescribed them under ACA, if I understand you. Wow! I'm looking forward to the full report.
Here in California, there was a similar issue -- the state now provides free feminine products in high schools since the passage of the "Menstrual Products for All" act. However, a bill that would have paid for condoms in California for all high school students was shot down. Here's a link: "California’s Gov. Newsom vetoes bill to make free condoms available for high school students" https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/californias-gov-newsom-vetoes-bill-to-make-free-condoms-available-for-high-school-students