ED Meds. Who should pay?

[epan]

I’m just curious what people think.

There are a number of treatments for erectile disease (sometimes called erectile dysfunction, or impotence). Many medical insurers will not pay for these treatments or drugs. Some who will assist with the expense of oral ED meds will limit the quantity to 7 pills per month, or 10 pills per month.

Do you think that insurance should assist with the expense of treating this medical condition, or not?

 

[po18guy]

If they pay for them, will they also pay for contraceptives?

 

[RPRPsych]

I’m just curious what people think.

There are a number of treatments for erectile disease (sometimes called erectile dysfunction, or impotence). Many medical insurers will not pay for these treatments or drugs. Some who will assist with the expense of oral ED meds will limit the quantity to 7 pills per month, or 10 pills per month.

Do you think that insurance should assist with the expense of treating this medical condition, or not?

No.

It’s been my experience - in a country that has “socialized medicine” as its official policy - that when it comes to ED medications, even those who want “free medications” for everything else are more than willing to pay. There’s a moral in there somewhere, but I’ll stop for now.

 

[epan]

If they pay for them, will they also pay for contraceptives?

I would point out that a married man with this health problem cannot engage in procreative relations without medical assistance. For example, some young men with certain injuries are unable to engage in conjugal relations with their wives, otherwise. The population that I am thinking of is returning war vets who have been wounded. But this also applies to some other conditions, particularly men with cardiovascular disease.

I do not see that as analogous to contraceptive help, since contraception enables committing a sin.

 

[nodito]

I think ED should be covered by insurance the same way treatment for any other disease is covered. If an organ of the body isn’t functioning correctly, it is good for an individual take steps to address the problem.

 

[zenith15]

Why would it not bother people who object to paying for others’ birth control due to religious beliefs, to have to pay for ED drugs for unmarried men?

 

[Listener]

As far as I know, pills such as Viagra are not covered by medical insurance. A bottle of 10 pills can run as much as $200.

If insurance plans pay for birth control pills for women, why aren’t they paying for these pills for men (in cases where the men really need them)?

I also have no idea if there is anything in Obamacare that will correct this situation.

The men should be screaming that they are being discriminated against! After all, isn’t it considered discrimination against women if their birth control pills aren’t paid for?

 

[epan]

Why would it not bother people who object to paying for others’ birth control due to religious beliefs, to have to pay for ED drugs for unmarried men?

So, then would you be in favor of these meds being covered for married men?

 

[nodito]

Why would it not bother people who object to paying for others’ birth control due to religious beliefs, to have to pay for ED drugs for unmarried men?

Because whether or not a person will choose to do something sinful with his health should have no bearing on whether or not his disease should be treated.

 

[Z_Ninja]

Reminds me of a statement I read somewhere that said something like, “if you think the government shouldn’t have a say in what goes on in your bedroom, then why do you think the government should have to pay for it?”

 

[epan]

Reminds me of a statement I read somewhere that said something like, “if you think the government shouldn’t have a say in what goes on in your bedroom, then why do you think the government should have to pay for it?”

So, then you would be opposed to insurance paying for gynecological services for women, if they pertain to childbirth or fertility? Or, are you advocating a double standard? Men may not receive assistance in paying for medical services related to fertility, but women may have that assistance? Is that what you are advocating?

 

[JimG]

In the interest of keeping healthcare costs down, I think that patients should pay more of their routine costs and insurance pay only for high expense items. That would mean men paying for their own E.D. drugs and women paying for their own birth control pills.

Of course, lower deductible policies should be available but they would have higher premiums.

And I know of a medical practice which accepts no insurance whatever, not even Medicare. But for a reasonable monthly fee they’ll take care of all routine medical care, and save a bundle on insurance coding and paperwork.

 

[Burdensome1]

Insurance (definition) : A form of risk management primarily used to hedge against the risk of a contingent, uncertain loss.

So, no, I do think that insurance should pay for ED medication.

If your spleen explodes, yes, I believe your insurance provider should pay for that.

 

[maltmom]

I pay a little over $12,000 a year for my individual health insurance policy. I was looking at the list of things it doesn’t cover. I suffered from depression it wouldn’t cover counseling. It would cover my hospital bills if I tried to commit suicide. It won’t cover weight loss meds or surgery, but it would cover me if I had a heart attack or stroke. It doesn’t cover Chantix to quit smoking, but it would cover any illness caused by it. The list goes on and on. So no, sorry men while I may never need any of the services they do not cover there are conditions that they won’t cover that would have life saving benefits. No one has died from the inability to have sex. Of course it can lead to depression which…they won’t pay for mental health. I think they should cover things that are potentially life saving b/f paying for ED.

 

[Pug]

It is legitimate to cover it, but there is only so much money to go round. If by offering it there will not be enough money to cover someone’s heart pills, then don’t cover it.

Insurance companies have all sorts of clever ways to limit costs, like yearly deductibles, limiting the number of visits per year, keeping certain categories of expenses limited, etc. Perhaps that would be sufficient to deal with the situation and offer some minimal coverage.

 

[epan]

I pay a little over $12,000 a year for my individual health insurance policy. I was looking at the list of things it doesn’t cover. I suffered from depression it wouldn’t cover counseling. It would cover my hospital bills if I tried to commit suicide. It won’t cover weight loss meds or surgery, but it would cover me if I had a heart attack or stroke. It doesn’t cover Chantix to quit smoking, but it would cover any illness caused by it. The list goes on and on. So no, sorry men while I may never need any of the services they do not cover there are conditions that they won’t cover that would have life saving benefits. No one has died from the inability to have sex. Of course it can lead to depression which…they won’t pay for mental health. I think they should cover things that are potentially life saving b/f paying for ED.

You might shop around to see if you can find a better policy for your money…

 

[epan]

It is legitimate to cover it, but there is only so much money to go round. If by offering it there will not be enough money to cover someone’s heart pills, then don’t cover it.

Insurance companies have all sorts of clever ways to limit costs, like yearly deductibles, limiting the number of visits per year, keeping certain categories of expenses limited, etc. Perhaps that would be sufficient to deal with the situation and offer some minimal coverage.

Every insurance system has its limitations. They all manage costs, one way or another. The US companies really seem to have bamboozled the consumer though, into thinking that they don’t need basic medical coverage, as long as the heart attack is paid for. Just my opinion, after living in Germany for a while. Everyone is covered here, and they get complete medical care.

 

[epan]

I pay a little over $12,000 a year for my individual health insurance policy. I was looking at the list of things it doesn’t cover. I suffered from depression it wouldn’t cover counseling. It would cover my hospital bills if I tried to commit suicide. It won’t cover weight loss meds or surgery, but it would cover me if I had a heart attack or stroke. It doesn’t cover Chantix to quit smoking, but it would cover any illness caused by it. The list goes on and on. So no, sorry men while I may never need any of the services they do not cover there are conditions that they won’t cover that would have life saving benefits. No one has died from the inability to have sex. Of course it can lead to depression which…they won’t pay for mental health. I think they should cover things that are potentially life saving b/f paying for ED.

People don’t die from extreme and/or chronic pain, either. But pain management is part of medical care.

I can think of a lot of medical conditions, which if left untreated, affect quality of life adversely. And, I don’t think that your having poor insurance coverage should define what coverage others should have.

The argument, when looked at from another angle, might be whether a young vet who wants to have a family, but can’t afford to spend $300+ per month on these meds, or who needs other corrective surgery in order to be able to impregnate his wife, should have to pay for that, or not. It is not just about having sex.

 

[fpt]

I’m just curious what people think.

There are a number of treatments for erectile disease (sometimes called erectile dysfunction, or impotence). Many medical insurers will not pay for these treatments or drugs. Some who will assist with the expense of oral ED meds will limit the quantity to 7 pills per month, or 10 pills per month.

Do you think that insurance should assist with the expense of treating this medical condition, or not?

At least, ** for husband and wife who are linked by the natural marriage:** **It is the natural justice, the natural Goodness, the christian charity. **THE MARITAL SEXUALITY IS IMPORTANT, IT IS THE OBJECT OF NATURAL CONTRACT OF MARRIAGE: THE RIGHT OF THE BODY FOR MAKING ONE FLESH IN THE HUMAN FASHION, WITH SEXUAL COOPERATION.

**YES, OF COURSE, IN THIS SITUATION. **

 

[Pug]

Every insurance system has its limitations. They all manage costs, one way or another. The US companies really seem to have bamboozled the consumer though, into thinking that they don’t need basic medical coverage, as long as the heart attack is paid for. Just my opinion, after living in Germany for a while. Everyone is covered here, and they get complete medical care.

Having everything covered would be nice. My quality of life might be substantially different if that were so. I just live with a lot of things. But then, they may not have any kind of great cure for them, either.

Perhaps people here figure they can often pay for basic coverage themselves. I can pay for a little of it. But I know people who can’t pay for any of it, so they would always choose to forgo care. I know I choose to forgo physical therapy.