Aa
Aa
A
A
A
Close
1530342 tn?1405016490

Judge refuses to block Kan. abortion insurance law

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-refuses-block-kan-abortion-insurance-law-190741647.html

WICHITA, Kan. (AP) — A federal judge refused Thursday to block a new Kansas law restricting insurance coverage for abortions, saying opponents failed to prove their claim that legislators' real intent was to create obstacles for women seeking abortions.

The law prohibits insurance companies from offering abortion coverage as part of general health plans, except when a woman's life is at risk. Patients who want abortion coverage must buy supplemental policies, known as riders, covering only abortion.

The ruling means that women seeking an abortion in Kansas will need to buy a rider or pay for the procedure out-of-pocket if their insurance policies are new or were renewed after the law took effect July 1.

The American Civil Liberties Union sued the state in August, arguing that the law's true intent was to impose an unconstitutional burden on abortion seekers, and asked that the law be put on hold during the court fight.

U.S. District Judge Wesley Brown rejected the request, saying the ACLU didn't provide evidence that the law "actually has the effect of creating a substantial obstacle to obtaining abortions." The ACLU also claimed the law was discriminatory because men can buy a general health plan for all their reproductive needs, but Brown said the group failed to show a likelihood of prevailing on that claim, too.

But the judge told the ACLU it could try again, noting his decision wasn't a final ruling on the merits of the group's claims. He also ordered an expedited schedule so the case would move more quickly through the courts.

The law was among several major anti-abortion initiatives approved by Kansas legislators and signed into law this year by Republican Gov. Sam Brownback, who called on lawmakers to create "a culture of life" after he took office in January. Supporters of the insurance restrictions contended that people who oppose abortion shouldn't be forced to pay for such coverage in a general health plan.

"The law appears to rationally further a state interest in allowing the State's citizens to avoid paying insurance premiums for services to which they have a moral objection," Brown wrote in his 19-page order. "Whether the practical effect of the law is to actually create a substantial obstacle is another question, but plaintiff has not attempted in this motion to put on evidence to establish such an effect, and the court expresses no opinion here on that question."

The Kansas attorney general's office said it was pleased with Brown's decision. The ACLU noted it was only a preliminary ruling and vowed to keep fighting.

"The state has no business depriving a woman of insurance for vital services that are already covered by most health plans," said Doug Bonney, legal director for the ACLU of Kansas and Western Missouri. "If a woman and her doctor reach the decision that ending a pregnancy is the right choice for her and her family, she should have the peace of mind of knowing that her insurance will cover all of her medical needs."

The ruling was a setback for abortion rights advocates, who have successfully blocked enforcement of other new Kansas laws dealing with abortion. Federal judges have temporarily blocked two laws — one dealing with strict abortion clinic regulations and another that strips federal family planning dollars from a Planned Parenthood chapter — pending trial on their constitutionality.

Brown said the insurance law appears to draw heavily from federal law. He noted that the federal health care overhaul also authorized states to prohibit abortion coverage in policies sold on state-level exchanges, where individuals and small businesses would be able to choose from different health care plans and compare coverage options. The new Kansas law has such a provision.

As for the ACLU's claim that the law violates its members' rights to equal protection, since men could buy general policies for their reproductive needs, the judge sided with the state. Brown, who at age 104 is the nation's oldest sitting federal judge, agreed that such a contention must be reviewed but said the ACLU didn't provide enough evidence to convince him.

In a separate case challenging another abortion law, a federal judge refused on Thursday to allow a national anti-abortion doctors' group to join a lawsuit over Kansas' new abortion clinic regulations. The judge said intervention by the by American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists would unnecessarily delay the case, and shot down all of the group's arguments.
10 Responses
Sort by: Helpful Oldest Newest
163305 tn?1333668571
If you want to look at it from an economic perspective, you may feel that women should pay for their abortions but who pays if poor women land up on the welfare rolls for 18 years to support this unwanted child? Who pays for this child's health care? Who pays for their education, housing, etc?
It is certainly cheaper in the long run to let the insurance companies, which are reaping in the profits, to pay for abortions.
Helpful - 0
127124 tn?1326735435
I think it should be up to the insurance companies whether or not abortions are covered under said policies.  It should not be up to the government to say "you can not cover abortions"  What will be next????  No cancer treatments, no transplants.  The list is endless.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
I'm glad this is going through. An abortion is an elective procedure and should not be covered by insurance unless her health is in danger. And sadly, el, many breast augmentations are being covered by insurance when women will appeal the insurance company stating it was for their emotional health that they "needed" this procedure done. ughh...
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Insurance companies tell you what they will and will not cover and they tell you how much you will pay for it in order for them to go that far. So, someone is always controlling it, leaving me with raised eyebrows. Elective procedures as well as cosmetic procedures have never been offered under Insurance as far as I can remember. I cannot believe they are questioning birth control tho.
Helpful - 0
377493 tn?1356502149
Now I'm just all mixed up again..lol.  So even if the private insurance company has policies that include, well, anything...the gov't should block that?  Isn't that sort of the point of not having gov't interference in private enterprise, and aren't insurance companies private?  I mean, I know they have shareholders, so are technically public companies, but isn't this exactly what so many Americans didn't want?  Putting the issue of abortion specifically aside, don't insurance companies have the right to approve or decline at their will?
Helpful - 0
1310633 tn?1430224091
My vasectomy wasn't covered by insurance, so I'm not sure I agree with an abortion being covered by insurance.

"Elective Procedures" in general, don't qualify, so I don't think making a special rule for abortions is right. I honestly don't care WHAT the circumstances are...

Next thing you know, breast-augmentation will be covered, and penis-enlargements.
Helpful - 0
1530342 tn?1405016490
NEVER be sorry for your opinions. If we didn't have opinions and views then the world would be BORRIIINNNGGG....I never once thought your comments were snotty! I know you're not a snotty person...lol there's mad love from me to you and vice versa:)

As for your comment, I get what you're saying about the government trying to impose this law on private companies. I am pro choice. I am not  in favor of abortions but I think to each his own, BUT I think if you are to get an abortion for whatever reason you should be responsible for it yourself. If a woman is pregnant and GOD FORBID the baby wasn't growing or something medical happened to the baby, that's really not considered an abortion IMO. If a young girl/woman is rapped that again is a different story entirely. If a woman got pregnant on the pill and for whatever reason she feels she doesn't want the baby, then she needs to cough up the money on her own. There are PLENTY of ways to prevent pregnancy. Everyone knows the pill alone is not 100% effective. Now if someone REALLY doesn't want to get pregnant, they won't.... I don't think it should be covered under healthcare from your employer...If its is covered there should DEFINITELY be some stipulations especially for rape victims. That would be the only way I could see a reason for an abortion. JUST MY OPINION....
Helpful - 0
377493 tn?1356502149
You know how sometimes you reread what you wrote and realize it didn't come across right?  Well, that's how I feel right now.  How snotty do my comments above sound, and I didn't mean it like that at all.  I hope you know that.  I wouldn't intentionally be rude to you.
Helpful - 0
377493 tn?1356502149
So, removing personal opinions on abortion (although I understand what a heated subject it is), here is what confuses me with this law.  I thought the whole point of not having a health care system like ours here was because you don't want gov't interference in health care.  You want to be able to choose your insurance coverage, etc.  I get that.  But isn't gov't interference exactly what this is?  I mean, the law is ruling on what a private insurance company can offer?  So I'm confused.

Our health care here does cover abortion in case anyone was wondering.  That's whether it is for medical reasons, or just because it's what you want.  For a variety of reasons, I do agree with that.  That's just me personally though.  Not an advocate for abortion, but want it to remain safe and legal, and I believe that restricting paid for insurance removes that.  

And MrsPincince, even the best birth control sometimes fails.  Not to be nit picky, but unwanted pregnancies are not always a result of people being negligent.  Saying that in a completely respectful tone and hope it's coming across that way!!
Helpful - 0
1530342 tn?1405016490
I apologize in advance if I offend anyone.......This is just MY opinion...

Ok I'm pro choice and all BUT I'm sorry, I agree with this law. Why should it be covered on health insurance? That's BULL&%$# IMO...If a woman wants an abortion, then she should have to pay for it out of her pocket. Maybe it'll teach her to be more careful next time...Hopefully they come back and "prove their claim"...
Helpful - 0
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.

You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group

Didn't find the answer you were looking for?
Ask a question
Popular Resources
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.