Too, patients who use hormone therapy to treat a condition may be able to avoid surgery, delay surgery, or have fewer surgeries—again, saving the insurance company money.

MemyselfandI complained above about being “forced” to purchase hormone therapy/contraceptive coverage in a group plan… since having it as part of the plan actually *lowers* the cost to you (because it drastically lowers the cost to the insurance company, and they actually *do* pass it on as a savings to the customers), I don’t see why you’re unhappy about saving money.

I take it you’re also saying that an employer has the right to deny a man medical coverage for a Viagra prescription unless and until he submits proof from a doctor that he truly needs it for severe erectile disfunction… and that he’s not just one of those men who wants to get a “hard on” more often… which of course would be a frivolous and immoral use of the medication. Also, you’re saying that the employee has absolutely no right to privacy regarding his prescription, and that it’s perfectly fine for his need for Viagra to become “office joke” fodder when the employers lets it slip to his co-workers.

Hormone Therapy Treatment (a.k.a. Oral Contraceptives) are a valid part of female healthcare needs, treating everything from severe medical conditions in young women, to menopause and osteoporsis in older women. They also allow a woman to control her own fertility, which doesn’t just benefit the woman’s health, but also her family’s health and economic standing. With the advent of birth control, MEN were able to wait longer before becoming parents (and able to pursue better education/job placement/financial security) just as women were; plus, as it’s been said before here, with birth control women are able to defer a consecutive pregnancy until her body has had time to heal and to replenish vitamins, minerals, and other nutrients from the prior pregnancy. This improves the health of both the mother AND the consecutive baby.

To be blunt, people like you are against health coverage of female hormone therapy for ONE reason: you can’t get over the fact that we’re talking about the health of a woman’s *sexual* organs, and you insist on bringing all kinds of value judgments related to sexual *behavior* into it. And that isn’t just a wrong thing or an unjust thing to do—it’s also downright ignorant to attempt to put limitations on what IS an issue of basic healthcare, just because YOU are uncomfortable or have value judgments about the activity those bodily organs are *sometimes* used for.

I think it is despicable that political institutions attempt to impose their dogma by proxy.