tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3056525448969662286.post742334624929332693..comments2011-06-30T15:07:38.279-04:00Comments on Scott On the Orwigs: Blog Innovation: Responses to ACTUAL Questions!Scott Orwighttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10772381581380970203noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3056525448969662286.post-12094210494899921932008-04-25T14:50:00.000-04:002008-04-25T14:50:00.000-04:00Scott, Ok. No, I don't have any personal problems ...Scott, <BR/><BR/>Ok. No, I don't have any personal problems with surrogacy, and couldnt be happier that the twins are here. Questions arent coming from anyone else, just me. I have always wanted to ask those questions but wanted the twins to be out and well before I did, didnt think it was appropriate to ask before now. Maybe it was not appropriate to ask at all, but come on brother, when you put your blog out there - people are going to ask questions! <BR/><BR/>Hey, when are you going to call me to set up a time to see my new niece and nephew?<BR/><BR/>Love, AmyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3056525448969662286.post-42454513488366971482008-04-25T11:46:00.000-04:002008-04-25T11:46:00.000-04:00Amy - I'm not mad at you for asking the question, ...Amy - I'm not mad at you for asking the question, although the timing is a bit jarring. I understand you're coming to this from a debate you've been having "off line". This is just the way it worked out. And I don't think either one of us can take these kids out of the mix.<BR/><BR/>I think you're right that the question boils down to "is it OK to use your insurance coverage to make money?" Let me clarify again that once the kids are born they are covered by our insurance just like if Sarah had carried them. And let me also clarify that even with our surrogate's generous insurance coverage, we took a significant hit in paying for treatment for the preterm labor, the whole IVF process, ultrasounds, and on and on.<BR/><BR/>So when a woman becomes pregnant, should she be asked if this is a surrogacy and cut loose if it is? I do expect that will happen, it will be that much more expensive for people like us, and more people will be priced out. And I don't believe the savings to insurance companies (public or private) will make even a dent in the care of anyone else.<BR/><BR/>What if it's not a money making arrangement? If a woman is carrying a child to help out a friend or relative, should that be covered? I'm guessing that someday it won't. In fact, what about a traditional pregnancy that was started via IVF or other very elective means? Pregnancy itself is quite elective, in fact. Should cancer patients go without treatment because the woman next door forgot to take her pill? Should the aging baby boomers go without arthritis meds because of an irresponsible 20-something? At what point is a pregnancy legitimate enough to justify the cost?<BR/><BR/>My own experience with getting treatment paid for by my insurance company has been eye opening. I highly doubt that surrogacy is much of a drain on my insurance company, but my treatment is clearly being rationed. Treatment is a scarce resource. I have trouble getting appointments when I need them and my doctor and I have had to compromise on my care because of insurance rules. Again, it's extremely unlikely that all this is happening because of greedy surrogates. If you're trying to get more chemo, procedures, and pain meds for cancer patients, surrogacy is a red herring. Relatively speaking, we're not talking about very much money.<BR/><BR/>So I expect that surrogacy will someday not be covered at all and only the very rich will have the option. I also suspect that the "controversy" about it has more to do with reservations about surrogacy itself that it has to do with money.Scott Orwighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10772381581380970203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3056525448969662286.post-14256141433461444022008-04-25T10:23:00.000-04:002008-04-25T10:23:00.000-04:00Scott, Wow, you answered every one of her question...Scott, <BR/><BR/>Wow, you answered every one of her questions, thank you! I wonder if she will send more...<BR/><BR/>Before I ask this question, I am SO thankful for Grace, Shep and Kennedy and grateful to the surrogates who carried them - so this has nothing to do with them (of course) so keep that in mind when you read the following question as you know where I work and my position on issues of insurance.<BR/><BR/>Try not to make this a political discussion. The newsweek article talked about Tricare surrogates being favorable candidates because of comprehensive insurance coverage and surrogates with this insurance getting essentially a $5,000 (signing bonus, unless I misunderstood) because the insurance is so good. Taking all of your beautiful children out of the mix, what do you think about that? <BR/>I work with cancer patients with Medicaid, Tricare and private insurance, they struggle to get chemo agents covered, procedures, pain meds and the like...I talk with men from the Detroit VA who can't get appts with their drs, wait on procedures to the extent that they come to us to get their tx and end up paying much higher costs. I have a problem with the government paying for (so essentially joe public & me) the cost of what is entirely elective. I have the SAME problem if it were private insurance. If someone is using their BCBS to pay for getting a kidney removed and then selling their kidney for money. If I have BCBS, my insurance premiums escalate if these kinds of things are allowed to happen. The hospital has to cover their costs fo the entire pregnancy once that pregnancy happens. Additionally, I am imagining that if their are multiples there is a higher risk of the babies needing alot of care after their born - who pays for that? <BR/><BR/>I am not talking about surrogacy in general here- only the payment arrangement side of it. Everything here boils down to money, is it ok to use your insurance coverage to make money? And please don't be mad at me for asking this question.<BR/><BR/>Love you, <BR/>AmyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com