[DoodleDawg]

So if we’re talking about policies for single people, is Ellmers saying that there should be a men’s insurance plan and a woman’s ensurance plan? Men’s plan wouldn’t cover breast cancer or pregnancy, women’s plan wouldn’t cover prostate cancer or vasectomies? Something like that? Would the government then have to force insurance companies to develop a cafeteria-style system of policies?

[5thGenTexan]

Today, we don't have gender-specific plans, but do have gender-specific pricing. So, men and women pay different amounts based on which subset of the total of offered services they are likely to use. But both are covered, which means that if a man gets breast cancer (rare, but not non-existent), he is covered. But the pricing structure takes into account how rare it is for a man to get it. On the flip side, the pricing takes into account that women will not ever get prostate or testicular cancer.

And if we are getting rid of all these gender differences in insurance, why not auto insurance? Men pay WAY more until age 25.

[Rusty0604]

The plan was that women shouldn’t be charged more than men, even though they usually require more care.
But I don’t think it is fair for an individual man to be forced to pay for maternity care for himself when there is no risk that he will get pregnant, do you? If he got a women pregnant, she wouldn’t be covered under his individual plan anyway.
Why does everyone have to pay for drug abuse treatment even though an individual never does drugs?