I know, I know, I should be studying…but lecture ended early so I took a trip to nytimes online and read this appalling article:
It made me furious that insurance companies’ defense for this blatantly biased practice is basically shrugging and saying, ‘Well, women have babies, and that’s expensive.’ They further argued that since women aged 20-50 tend to visit the doctor more frequently and to use more prescription drugs (would they be referring to birth control?) than the corresponding age group of men, it’s fair to make their monthly premium for the exact same health care coverage package nearly 50% higher in some states. So…because it’s “expensive”* to have babies, and “expensive” to provide medication to prevent having babies, premiums shouldn’t be equalized because, in order to do that, men will have to pay more than they do now. Nevermind the fact that they get paid more anyway, in almost every profession.
Yes, it’s true that men use less health care services (especially young men). Of course, that might explain why they tend to expire nearly a decade before women do. I suppose it’s not surprising that insurance companies should think it perfectly acceptable that women should have to pay extra for their longevity and penalize them for their active involvement in their own health care. I find it absolutely despicable.
*Incidentally, according to my mom, doctors at her hospital get paid around $300 per baby delivered…but it costs an average of $8000 for a standard hospital birth.