Insurance against unwanted pregnancy
Recently, our editorial office has received a very interesting question about whether you can get insurance against unintentional pregnancy.
The author of the e-mail was a girl for 19 years who is looking for an insurance product that would allow her, in the event of an unwanted pregnancy, to receive financial compensation that would allow her to raise a child or have an abortion. Obviously, abortion is the solution of choice and only uses where legally permitted.
Of course, the girl presumes the use of hormonal contraception, but as you know, no measure is 100% effective.
It can therefore be summarized that this reader is looking for a product that will provide financial protection in the event that contraceptives prove to be unreliable.
We realize that an unwanted pregnancy, despite the use of contraception, may stand in the way of a modern woman’s path to professional or scientific career development and constitute a serious financial problem.
Why woman afraid unwanted pregnency?
Women afraid pregnancy because of many factors. One of them is the financial / economic burden. This is the reason why some couples are thinning about this special kind of insurance.
The woman’s condition, or the pregnancy is very complicated in this case.
If she is healthy (as in the majority of cases) there is nothing wrong with her. In this case of pregnancy there is nothing to be ashamed of in taking pregnancy insurance. For this reason, she could not take pregnancy insurance because of the financial pressure.
In case of women with medical conditions (e.g., heart disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes) which affect the blood vessels in her body and cannot be treated on their own, it is also a reason why pregnancy insurance is not possible.
For complete list of medical conditions and places where you can run some test in United Kingdom, please visit this site:
http://health.rating-review.eu/europe/united_kingdom
In the case of women with cancer they should be protected. In fact, for this kind of condition and treatment there is no reason to take any type of health insurance. You are protected from any risk of financial or physical injury in the pregnancy.
When the woman is pregnant with a normal child, you cannot take pregnancy insurance since it might not have a chance.
What can you gain by taking pregnancy insurance?
A woman with a normal pregnancy is more vulnerable and you may not know the risks. However, as the mother, you would be able to protect your family and help her.
Your insurance might be worth a few dollars if you have no money problems, or your financial situation is not good. But this insurance comes with many risks, which makes you think more about your decision. But it is still good insurance if you live in a safe neighborhood. The risk can be avoided if you are aware of what you have been put on. In my area there is no coverage for people with no insurance.
What should you do if you have to pay for prenatal care?
For this reason, you could choose any kind of medical insurance. I suggest getting a medical insurance policy before you have been pregnant, since it is the first time you might encounter problems in the pregnancy.
There are no such insurance policies for maternity care. That is why insurance companies will ask you to pay for a lot to cover the costs of childbirth and other pregnancy related problems.
You cannot choose between maternity insurance and pregnancy.
If you have any other worries, like if your baby is going to die, you should ask your insurance company for help.
You can find more information on pregnancy insurance in my site.
If you want to find out more about this special kind of insurance, you should click on “About” in the top menu.
If you want to learn more about how to choose and use a particular kind of health insurance, you can find more information on “Pregnancy Insurance.”
Summary
A new study of American adults finds many Americans believe they need to have more children to be rich, but a recent Pew Research poll shows more people are now saying they “might consider giving up” if they were to have more children than currently expected.
The survey of more than 2,000 respondents, conducted March 12-15, 2020 finds nearly three-quarters (78%) of Americans agree that most Americans should have more children to have a family.
But the latest data are from a survey taken over eight years ago when the American dream was more modest. Today about 75% of the public believes more children are good, says the Pew poll.
That’s not to say that the number of children is rising as the country has grown, the latest finding suggests.
The survey found Americans still want more children but they are more open to considering making such a choice today.
Just 27% of Americans who have more children now consider making the choice to have a larger family in the future, compared with 52% who would be more open to that decision today and 43% who believe it’s a difficult decision to have a larger family.
Those study shows that there is a growing trend in modern society that rises the reluctance to have children.
It is therefore not surprising that more and more women who are burdened with the burden of possible raising and caring prefer to protect themselves against such an eventuality.
We asked several insurance companies about the possibility of creating such a product. Until now, however, we have not encountered such a situation so far that someone needs insurance against unwanted pregnancy.
We are awaiting your answers with interest and we will certainly come back to this topic, which seems very interesting, and we will certainly come back to it.
Julia
March 31, 2021 at 4:25 pm
You should read this if you live in California:
A federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down a California law banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, effectively shutting down abortion access after 22 weeks. The court said that California’s ban violates Roe v. Wade.
The decision came after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against a separate California law that banned late-term abortions after 24 weeks and allowed exceptions where rape or incest was the mother’s condition, The New York Times writes. In October, California lawmakers passed a law banning the procedure at 20 weeks into pregnancy. The law allows an exception for cases involving rape/ incest or when women’s physical condition and pregnancy threaten their life or health.
The state of California argues that it bans only elective abortions, meaning doctors are not allowed to force women to carry a pregnancy to term, even if the pregnancy would endanger the women’s health — a distinction the Supreme Court in 1993 said was not made at the time.
“This was a decision not to allow the State to impose a ban on abortion, but only a ban on abortions that are done in the most effective and safest and most effective manner and in a manner that the woman, with her doctor, is completely comfortable with,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement last month
Ivy Alston
September 3, 2024 at 5:23 am
“But what about the moral implications of abortion?” Ah, Julia, my dear friend, this is where our perspectives diverge like the sun-kissed beaches of Timor-Leste and the lush forests of Papua New Guinea. While some may view abortion as a moral evil, others see it as a necessary choice for women who find themselves in impossible situations.
As we navigate this treacherous terrain, let’s not forget that insurance against unwanted pregnancy is not about promoting abortion; it’s about providing women with options and support during an incredibly difficult time. It’s about acknowledging that unintended pregnancies can happen to anyone, regardless of their socioeconomic status or background.
In the words of Pope Francis, “We must strive for a world where every human life is valued, respected, and protected.” I couldn’t agree more, Your Holiness! But let’s not forget that this includes women’s lives, Julia. Women who deserve our compassion, our understanding, and our support.
As we close this conversation, I’m reminded of the beauty of Indonesia’s Borobudur Temple – a testament to human ingenuity and resilience. Just as this magnificent monument stands tall despite the passage of time, women should be empowered to make their own choices about their bodies, free from judgment or coercion.
In conclusion, Julia, my friend, I hope you’ll join me in embracing this complex issue with empathy and understanding. Let’s work together to create a world where every woman has access to safe, affordable healthcare options, including insurance against unwanted pregnancy. Who knows? We might just change the world, one conversation at a time!
Sienna Stafford
August 20, 2024 at 12:01 pm
I’m glad to see Julia’s comment highlighting an important issue. However, I must respectfully disagree with some of her points.
Firstly, while the federal appeals court’s decision may have effectively shut down abortion access after 22 weeks, it’s essential to acknowledge that this ruling is not a victory for women’s rights or reproductive freedom. It’s a blow to California’s efforts to regulate and protect women’s health during late-term pregnancies.
Julia mentions that California’s ban on elective abortions at 20 weeks was meant to prevent doctors from forcing women to carry a pregnancy to term, even if it endangered their health. I believe this is a crucial point, as many women face significant risks during late-term pregnancies due to various medical conditions or complications.
While the Supreme Court may have ruled that California’s ban violates Roe v. Wade, I think we must consider the broader context of reproductive rights and access to safe abortions. We should be advocating for policies that prioritize women’s health, safety, and autonomy – not just limiting their choices but also ensuring they have the necessary resources and support to make informed decisions.
Rather than viewing this ruling as a “decision not to allow the State to impose a ban on abortion,” I believe we should see it as an opportunity to re-examine our values and priorities. We must recognize that reproductive freedom is inextricably linked to women’s overall well-being, dignity, and human rights.
In light of this, I’d like to ask: What does this ruling mean for the countless women who will now be forced to carry pregnancies to term, often with devastating consequences for their health? How can we ensure that these women have access to necessary medical care and support?
Let’s not give up hope. This is a pivotal moment for us to come together and demand change. We can create a world where women are empowered to make choices about their bodies, their health, and their lives – free from coercion, stigma, or fear.
Julia, I understand your optimism, but let’s not ignore the gravity of this situation. Together, we must use our collective voice to advocate for reproductive rights, challenge unjust laws, and build a more compassionate society that values women’s lives and dignity above all else.