T1B

My husband and I have been trying to get pregnant for about a year now. We went through a couple tests (yes, the ever fun whack-off-in-the-doctor's-office test for my husband, and a painful hysterosalpingogram test for me (basically they shoot dye up into the uterus to see if there is any blockage - hurt like hell and no offer of drugs, thanks doc). The results? Yeah, we are both reproductively challenged (and yes, I anticipate the typical "that's nature's way of tellling you not to have kids" response). The only option for us is in vitro fertilization.

Well, IVF is going to cost upwards of $10,000. I looked up what my insurance covers for IVF, and like any typical greedy fucktard insurance company, mine will pay a whopping 0 for IVF. Not that I'm surprised or anything, but once I found out that several states require mandatory coverage for infertility, it just pisses me off that my state (Oklahoma) of course doesn't have that requirement.

So for all this talk about how our state is so family oriented and all that bullshit - fuck off. If the state really was family oriented, then they would want to encourage starting a family, no matter how it happens. Not to mention Oklahoma is one of the worst when it comes to child health care and immunizations and shit. Maybe if this state would stop building a fucking church on every street corner, we'd have funds help people who really need it.

rack 'scal lmao

mvscal wrote:So you two are fucked up losers who can't afford your own brats and yet expect someone else to pick up the tab for your spawn? Does that about cover it?

Ouch. Cruel...

Yet so very accurate.


I guess maybe Oklahoma got the memo that we now outsource our overpopulation duties to Mexico.

mvscal wrote:So you two are fucked up losers who can't afford your own brats and yet expect someone else to pick up the tab for your spawn? Does that about cover it?

Go fist yourself, you scummy whore.

No, you missed the point. If the state is going to be selective in how it helps "families", then it's not a "family oriented" state if only certain aspets of "family" are accepted. Not paying for it is fine, but then don't call yourself "family oriented", especially if you can't help get kids immunized (which has nothing to do with infertility, so GFY).

KatMode wrote: Maybe if this state would stop building a fucking church on every street corner, we'd have funds help people who really need it.

the state is building churches?

KatMode wrote: The results? Yeah, we are both reproductively intellectually challenged

FTFY.

KatMode wrote:(and yes, I anticipate the typical "that's nature's way of tellling you not to have kids" response).

Yes it is, and its also nature's way of saying you're too fucking stupid to have children. Nature just did it in a more "friendly" manner than some of us on the board here may.

KatMode wrote:The only option for us is in vitro fertilization.

Look, you fucking selfish (unfit to be parents) yuppie scum!

There's this strange thing out there for adults that actually want children... and its called Adoption!!!

Thank god/nature... for making you too stupid for this to ever to cross your selfish little fuckin' pea brains.

KatMode wrote:Well, IVF is going to cost upwards of $10,000. I looked up what my insurance covers for IVF, and like any typical greedy fucktard insurance company, mine will pay a whopping 0 for IVF.

I suggest you invest in a mirror.

Felix wrote:

KatMode wrote: Maybe if this state would stop building a fucking church on every street corner, we'd have funds help people who really need it.

the state is building churches?

That's a RACK Felix! Let the pile-on continue!

Why be so vicious? Here is a woman expressing frustration and disappointment over problems conceiving and you all are telling her she deserves it because she's 'too stupid' to have kids?

My humble opinion is kind of along the same lines, though, as far as policy: all this fertilization technology and all the sympathetic, respectful human interest stories on couples trying to conceive makes the quest to reproduce seem so respectable, almost noble. But in these days of rampant overpopulation it just doesn't seem that critical to me that somebody be able to conceive, or that they should just take it for granted that they're going to 'start a family'. That seems like an outmoded model. M2 could have said it in a much less vituperative way: why not adopt?

My health insurance didn't pay a penny for my pool addition, and now they're refusing to help with my daughter's college tuition.

How can they call themselves family oriented?

:x

tuff gong wrote:Why be so vicious?

Because some people come to this place to be just that. See the disclaimer.


The bottom line is what mvscal said. People are not entitled to children, children are gifts from God/nature. Regarding, conception, the odds are truly against it happening at all.

The fact we have technology to allow those who can't bear children the POSSIBILITY they MIGHT. Is nice. BUT, it is not an entitlement. Nor is it a conflict against "familiy values" that a state doesn't fund infertility treatment.


Good luck Kat. If you're looking for sympathy, it's in between SHIT and SYPHILLIS in the dictionary.

I empathize with your frustration, though. Frankly, coming up on 40, if it doesn't happen for my wife and me, it doesn't. We can adopt OR just spend more time serving the community in other ways. It sucks but like I tell my wife, hey, it's not fair that some of these kids are coming home without legs and arms either.

tuff gong wrote:Why be so vicious? Here is a woman expressing frustration and disappointment over problems conceiving and you all are telling her she deserves it because she's 'too stupid' to have kids?

Yeah. And she's having regular sex, which is more than can be said for 95% of the board.

Define "regular".

KatMode wrote:(yes, the ever fun whack-off-in-the-doctor's-office test for my husband

They won't let you give him a BJ in the office and then spit?

mvscal wrote:

tuff gong wrote:Why be so vicious?

Lost?

Alright, alright. I should have put it another way. No, appearances to the contrary I actually do realize where I am: it's just that this lady already sort of blew herself up in the first post. The argument against what she said just about makes itself. I was actually reacting more to M2's presentation: good points made and then obscured by random personal insults.

tuff gong wrote:Why be so vicious?

seriously...take it to the sopping vage forum.......

I'm gonna suggest to the admins they make you the moderator.....

KatMode wrote:

mvscal wrote:So you two are fucked up losers who can't afford your own brats and yet expect someone else to pick up the tab for your spawn? Does that about cover it?

Go fist yourself, you scummy whore.

No, you missed the point. If the state is going to be selective in how it helps "families", then it's not a "family oriented" state if only certain aspets of "family" are accepted. Not paying for it is fine, but then don't call yourself "family oriented", especially if you can't help get kids immunized (which has nothing to do with infertility, so GFY).

No you missed the point bitch....but props to you for giving the board some smack fodder to break the monotony of the tard and trolls posting.

Feel free to not fuck with nature and get knockled up by turkey baster and then have some 3 headed retarded genetic freak that the state will will to take care of the rest of it's miserable life. Consider adopting a bona fide American child that needs a home..

KatMode wrote:
(yes, the ever fun whack-off-in-the-doctor's-office test for my husband


They won't let you give him a BJ in the office and then spit?

What?????.. and fuck up the DNA after she blew her n--ger stud ??

tuff gong wrote:

mvscal wrote:

tuff gong wrote:Why be so vicious?

Lost?

Alright, alright. I should have put it another way. No, appearances to the contrary I actually do realize where I am: it's just that this lady already sort of blew herself up in the first post. The argument against what she said just about makes itself. I was actually reacting more to M2's presentation: good points made and then obscured by random personal insults.

Good points and then random insults ???? Welcome to the pile on.

Sincerely,

Every post on this board since it was spawned.

KatMode wrote:Yeah, we are both reproductively challenged (and yes, I anticipate the typical "that's nature's way of tellling you not to have kids" response). The only option for us is in vitro fertilization.

I wouldn’t give up so quickly on the mailman.

KatMode wrote:oriented

I think they prefer the term "asianed".

You may want to try to take your husbands cock out of your mouth, you can't get prego by swallowing.

My Health Insurance made me pay 20% of the cost of my first 2 kids both born by C-Section with one with some complications that ran the bill upwards of 10 thousand. This fucking state jobbed me big time and they call it a "Family Orientated" place.
They OWED me a free ride once we made a decision to start a family because it only gives us the opportunity to create a life on even par with all the expectations of Welfare Scabs and Illegal Alien Shitbags

Not to sound callous, but the fact is that none of us has an inalienable right to pound out offspring with our genetic imprint. The states that force HMO's to cover elective medical procedures (which IVF indisputably IS) are a huge part of the problem of health care costs spiralling out of control. The emotional issues involved doesn't change any of that. There's no damned reason why I or any other taxpayer or employer should have to pay higher health care costs because someone wants to have kid.

Health care should be for preventive care and dealing with true medical needs (illnesses, surgery). Period.

I've been wearing corrective lenses since I was 11. I'd love to get that laser surgery and do away with glasses, but I'd be way out of line to expect my HMO and/or fellow Americans to help chunk in for that.

KatMode wrote:My husband and I have been trying to get pregnant for about a year now.

Did you check the fluids?

Oh, wait...

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Not to sound callous, but the fact is that none of us has an inalienable right to pound out offspring with our genetic imprint. The states that force HMO's to cover elective medical procedures (which IVF indisputably IS) are a huge part of the problem of health care costs spiralling out of control. The emotional issues involved doesn't change any of that. There's no damned reason why I or any other taxpayer or employer should have to pay higher health care costs because someone wants to have kid.

Health care should be for preventive care and dealing with true medical needs (illnesses, surgery). Period.

I've been wearing corrective lenses since I was 11. I'd love to get that laser surgery and do away with glasses, but I'd be way out of line to expect my HMO and/or fellow Americans to help chunk in for that.

RACK

My wife got her eyes fixed last year and most of it was covered by insurance, but that's because she was going blind from cataracts.

Mikey wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Not to sound callous, but the fact is that none of us has an inalienable right to pound out offspring with our genetic imprint. The states that force HMO's to cover elective medical procedures (which IVF indisputably IS) are a huge part of the problem of health care costs spiralling out of control. The emotional issues involved doesn't change any of that. There's no damned reason why I or any other taxpayer or employer should have to pay higher health care costs because someone wants to have kid.

Health care should be for preventive care and dealing with true medical needs (illnesses, surgery). Period.

I've been wearing corrective lenses since I was 11. I'd love to get that laser surgery and do away with glasses, but I'd be way out of line to expect my HMO and/or fellow Americans to help chunk in for that.

RACK

My wife got her eyes fixed last year and most of it was covered by insurance, but that's because she was going blind from cataracts.

Maybe if your wife quit beating off so much he would not have the vision problem.

Derron wrote:Maybe if your wife quit beating off so much he would not have the vision problem.

You must be planning a move to Kansas City.

Hell, I've only been wearing glasses for a little over 5 years and I hate the fucking things.

I'm already saving up for the Laser Doc.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:I've been wearing corrective lenses since I was 11. I'd love to get that laser surgery and do away with glasses, but I'd be way out of line to expect my HMO and/or fellow Americans to help chunk in for that.

There is a way that you can get some of the cost defrayed. If your district offers flexible health care spending accounts, just set up an account next year for the cost of the procedure. Since the limit is 5,000 dollars and most lasik procedures are in the 2500 dollar range you can realize a real savings of around 500-600 dollars on that procedure. Plus, the money is deducted on a per pay period basis over the year. So it amounts to a tax free, interest free loan.

I'm planning on doing it next year. Unwar me not thinking of it sooner.

https://www.fsafeds.com/fsafeds/faq.asp#g1a

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Derron wrote:Maybe if your wife quit beating off so much he would not have the vision problem.

You must be planning a move to Kansas City.

He's just got a one track mind. Or maybe that's a one cell mind.

Either way, KC is probably appropriate.

Well, I've only been wearing glasses for a little over 5 years and I hate the fucking things.

I'm already saving up for the Laser Doc.

Best check to be sure you live in a vision oriented state first.

Oklahomans expect a free ride?

Color us shocked!

Sincerely,
King County Taxpayers

Y2K wrote:My Health Insurance made me pay 20% of the cost of my first 2 kids both born by C-Section with one with some complications that ran the bill upwards of 10 thousand. This fucking state jobbed me big time and they call it a "Family Orientated" place.
They OWED me a free ride once we made a decision to start a family because it only gives us the opportunity to create a life on even par with all the expectations of Welfare Scabs and Illegal Alien Shitbags

....I no understand, I hab 7 keeds already...I yust go to County USC and hab dem all. It no cost me anyting. wat da bigg deal? Day all citizen now!



sin, Half the freaking population of Mexifornia!

ChargerMike wrote:

Y2K wrote:My Health Insurance made me pay 20% of the cost of my first 2 kids both born by C-Section with one with some complications that ran the bill upwards of 10 thousand. This fucking state jobbed me big time and they call it a "Family Orientated" place.
They OWED me a free ride once we made a decision to start a family because it only gives us the opportunity to create a life on even par with all the expectations of Welfare Scabs and Illegal Alien Shitbags

....I no understand, I hab 7 keeds already...I yust go to County USC and hab dem all. It no cost me anyting. wat da bigg deal? Day all citizen now!

sin, Half the freaking population of Mexifornia!

Not understanding the difference between delivery and conception much?

BSmack wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:I've been wearing corrective lenses since I was 11. I'd love to get that laser surgery and do away with glasses, but I'd be way out of line to expect my HMO and/or fellow Americans to help chunk in for that.

There is a way that you can get some of the cost defrayed. If your district offers flexible health care spending accounts, just set up an account next year for the cost of the procedure. Since the limit is 5,000 dollars and most lasik procedures are in the 2500 dollar range you can realize a real savings of around 500-600 dollars on that procedure. Plus, the money is deducted on a per pay period basis over the year. So it amounts to a tax free, interest free loan.

I'm planning on doing it next year. Unwar me not thinking of it sooner.

https://www.fsafeds.com/fsafeds/faq.asp#g1a

If that's how you roll...

I had the procedure done a few years ago, and I didn't want just any quack working on my vision... so I went with the best of the best.

Yeah, it cost $5,000 for both eyes, but that seemed like a bargin to me to have the best there is working on my eyes.

Dr. Hwang is one of the four Doctor's to do the research on the lasik procedure to have it approved in the United States for the public.

Dr. Hwang is a bad, bad, man! And not only because he finished college at UCSF at the age of 15, but he also became a Doctor by the young age of 21. Yeah, I'd say this badass is fairly bright.

Bottom Line: You're not touching my eyes, unless you're simply the best! Fuck looking for the best deal when it comes to my vision.

Because... that's how 420 roll's.

The reason eye laser surgery isn't covered by insurance is that over time your eyes will degenerate once again as part of the aging process. The reason is because as you age your lenses lose some of their eleasticity and can no longer bulge with the ciliary muscles in the eye to contract.

The laser-assisted in ssitu kearatomileusis (LASIK) procedure only reshapes the corneal tissue below the surface of the cornea. It doesn't deal with the problem with the underlying lens. So you guys will be wasting your money in the long term.

For KatMode, do you drink Dr. Pepper soft drinks after sex?

I would imagine poor KatMode was long gone by response #3. Maybe she has taken her plight to some OB/GYN-oriented board with a fertility forum where she can get sympathy and advice.

Dr. Pepper?

Atomic Punk wrote:For KatMode, do you drink Dr. Pepper soft drinks after sex?

RACK HIM!

HE GETS IT!

Lazy-Eyed Mike In Fresneck is our huge, HUUUGE call of the day!

420 wrote: There's this strange thing out there for adults that actually want children... and its called Adoption!!!

Goddammit, kat. look wtf you did!!! now I gotta go and do something that don't happen every day. and I ain't too happy about it.

rack mtool

Sorry, just can't bring myself to do that in regular font.

As for who should pay, as long as there are babies out there in need of a stable home, you have your fukking gubmint assistance in becoming a parent.

BTW, my wife and I went the IVF route for our son. Best 8 grand I ever spent. That's right, me. Every last fukking penny of it was mine. As it should be.

You wanna do IVF? Fine. Do it, but, don't ask anyone else to pay for it. Or adopt. And if you are willing to take something other than a new born white kid, there are plenty to pick from. If you do want a new born whitey, bitch at Rosie O' fatass. She has scarfed up pretty much all of them.

Mikey wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Not to sound callous, but the fact is that none of us has an inalienable right to pound out offspring with our genetic imprint. The states that force HMO's to cover elective medical procedures (which IVF indisputably IS) are a huge part of the problem of health care costs spiralling out of control. The emotional issues involved doesn't change any of that. There's no damned reason why I or any other taxpayer or employer should have to pay higher health care costs because someone wants to have kid.

Health care should be for preventive care and dealing with true medical needs (illnesses, surgery). Period.

I've been wearing corrective lenses since I was 11. I'd love to get that laser surgery and do away with glasses, but I'd be way out of line to expect my HMO and/or fellow Americans to help chunk in for that.

RACK

My wife got her eyes fixed last year and most of it was covered by insurance, but that's because she was going blind from prolonged viewing of my fat pasty arse.

ftfy, nc.