Should insurance companies be able to exclude someone from long term birth control because they had an IUD removed early?

Question

I had my IUD removed today because of minor complications and I feel that another method would be more suitable for me. My doctor informed me that when someone has an IUD removed early, insurance companies can and do exclude people from any long term birth control method for two years. That's fine for me because my body doesn't do well with long term birth control anyway due to a condition I have. But do you feel this is okay in general?

Accepted Answer

My IUD caused fluid pockets in my uterus so randomly it would pop and look like I peed myself.
If I was excluded I would cry. 
It isn’t our fault when things go wrong, birth control isn’t 100% guaranteed to work for us so they can fuck off.

Answer

No. Birth control decisions should be between the patient and their doctor. That’s it. It’s not like women are wasting insurance dollars getting things put in and taken out for the sheer fun of it.

Answer

That’s ridiculous, absolutely not. Also that’s stupid, so they’d rather fit prenatal care, labor and delivery and a new human being? Idiots...

Answer

Insurance companies should be able to cover what they want.

Answer

I can see both sides tbh. IUDs are expensive products and expensive to put in and take out, so when someone gets one the insurance company knows the cost will spread out over 5 years. As a patient you expect to have it that long as well so when it's taken out early, it isnt cost effective. 
As a patient it seems unfair because of course you dont want to deal with awful side effects. I hated my mirena and had it taken out way early too. 
Fortunately my insurance company took into account a certain percentage of people who have horrible side effects and require removal so they did pay for another form for me, but I can understand why they wouldn't.

Answer

Insurance companies are not in the business of helping people. They are only after the money. So from that perspective it makes sense to them to deny the procedure. It’s possible that the way your doctor coded the removal procedure could make a difference on if the insurance company will pay for a second one or not.

Answer

No....  you don’t know how your body will react to something until you try it. Those people shouldn’t be excluded from choosing from other long term options.

Answer

I think until insurance companies have licensed doctors evaluating medical claims and taking each patient's medical history into account they shouldn't get a say in whether or not they cover anything deemed medically necessary by a doctor.

Answer

No it shouldn’t, and definitely not if the IUD was causing a health concern.

Answer

It’s a hell of a lot cheaper for an insurance company to cover LARC (long acting reversible contraception) than for them to cover a pregnancy and delivery.

Should insurance companies be able to exclude someone from long term birth control because they had an IUD removed early?

The Top Baby Tracker App: Embrace New Beginnings with Tender Care

The Top Fertility Tracker App: Your Path to Achieving Pregnancy

The Top Pregnancy App: Nurturing Your Journey to Motherhood

The Top Period Tracker for Empowering Your Menstrual Health Journey