Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Irked by abortion bill, Va. senator adds rectal exams for men [View all]Sgent
(5,856 posts)14. Since these aren't always medically neccessary
I imagine it will come back to bite her if it actually passes -- since Medicare nor any insurance company will cover it in many cases, and a $400-$500 (or more) bill will not make for happy people.
Unexplained impotence is worrying, and there are a lot of tests that possibly should be run including those in the bill, plus testosterone levels, blood sugar, cholesterol and possibly others. Ferreting out the reason for unexplained impotence can be expensive -- and necessary for the health of the patient.
However, explained impotence may not need any testing. For instance a known poorly controlled diabetic has no need to undergo additional testing -- and insurance / Medicare won't pay for it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
101 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I live in Glen Allen, and your 70/30 assessment on the repub side is about accurate, for this
spicegal
Jan 2012
#61
I think it is a great idea. I am still laughing and I was trying to read this to my husband.
southernyankeebelle
Jan 2012
#22
Speak for yourself - a fair number of women (especially in Europe) find it trivial, and rightly so.
saras
Jan 2012
#91
It's about time some one counteracted the rethuglican foolishness. Yes! Yes! Yes! nt
mfcorey1
Jan 2012
#51
once again, the party of "get gov. out of my business" delves right into women's private parts
wordpix
Jan 2012
#72
It should be Pro Abortion-rights, if they need to use that phrase. Pro-rights, not pro-abortion.
uppityperson
Jan 2012
#81