Better Students Ask More Questions.
Approximately 10% of couples in the United States are unable to concieve after one year...
Topic: Health Insurance
Approximately 10% of couples in the United States are unable to concieve after one year of unprotected intercourse. There are a number of medical options now available to treat infertility. Do you think insurance companies should cover the cost of these procedures? Explain why.
1 Answer | add yours
My own view is that insurance companies should not be required to cover the very high costs of this type of treatment. That is to say, they should not be required to cover them without being able to charge higher premiums to those who want to be able to avail themselves of these treatments. However, it would certainly be possible to argue the contrary.
My view is that having children is not necessary to a person’s life. Of course, many people do think that it is. However, people who cannot have children in the natural way can do things like adopting. Therefore, the point is that this is not something that is medically necessary. It is more like plastic surgery than it is like regular medical treatment. Therefore, it does not seem that insurance companies should be required to cover it.
My basic view is that insurance companies should be required only to cover things that are medically necessary for health. They should not be required to cover elective procedures. Therefore, I would argue that it is not appropriate to require that they cover fertility treatments.
Posted by pohnpei397 on June 11, 2013 at 3:47 PM (Answer #1)
Related QuestionsSee all »
Join to answer this question
Join a community of thousands of dedicated teachers and students.