First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply lesbian couple sues over fertility treatment
Posted 8/8/16
shrugs
6638 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / USA
Offline
Posted 8/8/16
From what I read in the story they got 4 doses of fertility treatments at $11,000 a pop and no baby.

Modern medicine is awesome but sometimes it just can't work miracles. Try adoption,
52842 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
100 / M
Offline
Posted 8/8/16

redokami wrote:


JanusCascade wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


JanusCascade wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

If anything, I'm upset that this clause is here when it shouldn't, for both heterosexual couples and homosexual relations.

Because of the fact that lesbians can't reproduce.



nevermind I just checked their picture...They're not attractive bro! >.<




Lesbians never attracted me. I want the persons in question to actually be attracted to me. :(



I'm sure lot of women are attracted to you bro! Heck I'm sure you got lot of ladies on Forum in love with you heh.

Btw how the heck did you resize that image?


I wasn't gonna say anything about their looks
but LOL, I thought they were sisters


LOL, What if that were true? >.< They're Sister and now a lovers!!
8760 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Right here
Offline
Posted 8/9/16 , edited 8/9/16

JanusCascade wrote:

LOL, What if that were true? >.< They're Sister and now a lovers!!


Incest? Oh no pls. No. Pls.
1060 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / F / USA
Offline
Posted 8/10/16
It's not a serious matter, like if they wouldn't cover medicine they truly need then I would agree with them getting upset.
27230 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 8/11/16 , edited 8/11/16
It is sort of silly. A proper diagnosis of infertility ought to be enough, perhaps a few diagnoses that come to an agreement that a patient is a certain way. It should not take two years of failed attempts at unprotected sex in order to prove you're infertile. Modern medical tech has taken most of the guesswork out of this, so this just feels dated and silly.

Discrimination in this sense isn't the intentional and malicious type you normally think of. You don't have to be malicious to be discriminatory. Like if you own an apartment complex and limit the number of occupants to two per apartment despite the large size of the individual apartments, you can be discriminating based on familial status if two people living in there happen to have a baby and you try to evict them based on the two-person rule, even if they signed it and agreed to it before the pregnancy. Even if this isn't your intent and you cite business reasons, like maybe reducing wear and tear on the apartments, this isn't a reasonable thing to do since you have many other options to cover your bases that won't unduly burden anyone, like taking higher security deposits, doing more inspections, creating usage rules, doing background checks, etc.

I think we have a similar case here. Although it probably didn't intend to make things difficult for lesbian women, it in fact does, and it doesn't seem like it's a reasonable policy. A diagnosis is all that's needed to determine if a woman is infertile. Multiple diagnoses to cross-check if needed.This also seems like a more honest and reliable method than just believing that someone had sex because she said so.

Insurance companies have a right to deny coverage and to have policies, but those policies should be reasonable. But, yeah, it's not about malicious discrimination. It's probably just an overlooked thing because it's not likely very common. To blow it up by making it look intentional and evil is also silly. Just patch it up and move on.
46359 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / End of Nowhere
Offline
Posted 8/11/16

redokami wrote:

"The state mandate requires most major insurance companies to cover medically necessary treatments for infertile clients. It defines infertility as the inability to impregnate another person, the inability to carry a pregnancy to live birth or the inability to conceive after one or two years of unprotected sex, depending on the woman’s age."


ok uhm, why don't you save the money? thousands of other people do that if they are denied coverage, like me
just because you are denied coverage by insurance doesn't mean you are being treated like a second class citizen lol
or or or why don't you adopt??
what the shit its not discrimination


However, you are being treated as a second class citizen when you are denied coverage you are entitled to by the provisions of your coverage or by the law.

It defines infertility as the inability to impregnate another person, the inability to carry a pregnancy to live birth or the inability to conceive after one or two years of unprotected sex, depending on the woman’s age."

Clearly two women are unable to impregnate another person, or conceive for that matter, after one or two years of unprotected sex. One year or Five years, it will not matter. So by the law, the women are infertile, and thus entitled to coverage for infertility treatments. I will admit it seems the law is rather vague and probably not very well thought out, but that is not the fault of the women.

If you were denied coverage for a condition that should have been covered, then yes you should sue the insurance company for wrongful denial of coverage. People actually have to do it all the time.

Whether to adopt or use artificial insemination is the choice of the women, not us. The job of the insurance company is to follow the law and grant coverage to those that it is required to.
52842 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
100 / M
Offline
Posted 8/12/16

Jophar_Vorin wrote:


JanusCascade wrote:

LOL, What if that were true? >.< They're Sister and now a lovers!!


Incest? Oh no pls. No. Pls.



I was joking on sister part, I hope not (Doubt it)... Unless they're truly sick.. Of course back in Roman Empire days incest was normalize back than...I think! >.< The England King back in old day went crazy because his parents was brother and sister.. They thought that if they only have sex with family member it'll keep their blood pure.. But that isn't the case.. That what cause King of England to go insane back in old day.. Can anyone Verity this? XD

Here a joke (not intended to offend Gay people >.<) If a man tell you that he is gay, and you look at him with surprised look.. Tell him go look in the mirror.. You're too damn Ugly to be Woman, might as well stick being man..

Ok that was a bad joke! XD

8760 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Right here
Offline
Posted 8/13/16

JanusCascade wrote:


Jophar_Vorin wrote:


JanusCascade wrote:

LOL, What if that were true? >.< They're Sister and now a lovers!!


Incest? Oh no pls. No. Pls.



I was joking on sister part, I hope not (Doubt it)... Unless they're truly sick.. Of course back in Roman Empire days incest was normalize back than...I think! >.< The England King back in old day went crazy because his parents was brother and sister.. They thought that if they only have sex with family member it'll keep their blood pure.. But that isn't the case.. That what cause King of England to go insane back in old day.. Can anyone Verity this? XD

Here a joke (not intended to offend Gay people >.<) If a man tell you that he is gay, and you look at him with surprised look.. Tell him go look in the mirror.. You're too damn Ugly to be Woman, might as well stick being man..

Ok that was a bad joke! XD



The mad king!
1335 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 8/13/16
I should sue the lesbians for this thread.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.