Comments on: R.I. Governor: First Marriage, Then Babies

Carcieri Vetoes Bill Requiring Insurers To Cover Infertility Treatments For The Unmarried

[brian31462]

I can see it now.... 1. Pass the law. 2. Insurance companies have to cover it. 3. Public aid recipients want to have more babies. 4. Get treatment. 5. Have more babies. 6. get more public aid.

[afmca]

Another card carrying liberal and I agree with SmagBoy1. It may not be popular ut, there are too many life style coverages now in our health care plans. This drives the price of the coverage up for all. If we, as a country, ever hope to have universal health care we have to ensure that preventive and active health care is given the highest priority.

Although I can feel for the women who wants and needs these fertility treatments, this type of procedure should be paid for by the patient not the health groups.

[blazercoach1]

Wow....look at the quote from the Democrat sponsor of the bill. Does she not realize that SHE wants to determine who can and cannot have children?? She wants to weild a power stronger than nature, evolution, natural selection, etc....

While I disagree with the Gov.'s reasoning in terms of marriage being the only reason, he's doing the right thing. Government is not responsible for people's pro-creative choices. We do not have a "right to bear children"....unless one assumes that the "right to bear arms" implies "legs, etc...as well" :)

[rohink-2009]

Good, he should have.

[smagboy1]

Even as a card-carrying liberal, I can't understand why any governing body or insurance company should get involved with fertility treatments. It doesn't seem to me to be a matter of health, but rather an elective procedure--like plastic surgery. Why should an insurance company be required to pay for fertility treatments for anyone, married or not? Hell, I'm not as tall as I'd like to be. Should my insurance pay for me to have treatments to increase my height?