Insurance Companies Are Giving Ridiculous Reasons For Not Covering New Birth Control Methods

[Jilly_in_VA]

Whitney, an Indiana-based pediatrician who asked that her last name be withheld, had been using a year-long birth control ring called Annovera for nearly a year when she recently changed jobs, and her new insurance provider declined to cover the ring. Prior to the ring, Whitney had been using an IUD, knowing that a long-term birth control method would work best for her. But without coverage for her Annovera ring, she’s had to change to an alternative that hasn’t been working well for her. Aside from challenging her insurance company, however, Whitney says she “doesn’t have any other option right now but to use this non-preferred method.”

Stories like Whitney’s are common, according to Dr. Raegan McDonald-Mosley, CEO of the reproductive rights campaign Power to Decide, despite how under the Affordable Care Act, insurers are legally required to cover the full range of contraceptive methods, without any out-of-pocket costs. It’s through this mandate of the ACA that about 65 million Americans are able to access birth control without a co-pay.

Amid escalated attacks on reproductive rights, including a Supreme Court case that could reverse Roe v. Wade and a pandemic that’s created significant logistical barriers to get contraception and abortion, McDonald-Mosley emphasizes that patients trying to get reproductive care “aren’t doing this as a political act.” Birth control is a ubiquitous part of the lives of people of all ages, faiths, and communities. But as the FDA approves more and more forms of contraceptives, from new patches with lower hormones, to non-hormonal contraceptive gels, many private insurers are doing everything they can to shirk the ACA’s birth control mandate and avoid covering less traditional methods.

One patient McDonald-Mosley recently worked with concluded that a non-hormonal septic contraceptive gel would work best for her—only for her insurance company to require her to pay $300 out-of-pocket for just 12 applications of the gel, which she couldn’t afford. Health care providers like McDonald-Mosley are trying to help their patients choose the right contraceptive method for their unique needs, only for insurance companies to “undermine that decision-making, undermine the patient-provider relationship, and weaken patients’ overall trust in the medical system,” she says.

https://jezebel.com/insurance-companies-are-giving-ridiculous-reasons-for-n-1848520648
______________________________________________________________________________
It's time insurance companies were banned from practicing medicine without a license.