Your email address is safe with us. View our Privacy policy.
Author Bio:
Feminist advocate Susan Estrich works in many fields: as a lawyer, professor, political operative, author, and news commentator. She was educated ...
Read more about Susan Estrich.
Feminist advocate Susan Estrich works in many fields: as a lawyer, professor, political operative, author, and news commentator. She was educated ...
Read more about Susan Estrich.
What's a Woman To Do About Mammography?
Susan Estrich
So, as it turns out, did I not need to have my breasts squeezed in the
mammogram machines every year between the ages of 40 and 50? Could I
have missed the two scares in there, especially the one when both of
my kids were babies?
Maybe. Or rather, in my case, thank God, yes. Then again...
When I saw my doctor yesterday, the one I have trusted with my life and the lives of my children for all these years, the one who sent me for all those tests, I asked him if he would still be sending his women patients who are in their 40s for mammograms. The short answer is yes.
The longer answer is that you practice medicine on an individualized basis. While certain things may be true as a matter of "public health" -- like the costs of early mammograms outweighing their benefits -- that doesn't mean they're true for you. My doctor has been spacing out scans for women in their 40s with no risk factors for some time, sending them every 18 months instead of every year. But he's seen too many cases of women who had no risk factors and still developed aggressive cancers in their 40s to delay for a decade.
That's what I thought. And what I'd do. The truth is, I'd rather be safe than sorry. I'd rather worry needlessly than die needlessly. Who wouldn't?
The White House was quick to point out that this week's recommendation does not mean doctors should stop sending women for mammograms, or that insurance companies will be allowed to stop paying for them.
Of course it means that. Maybe not this month or this year, but isn't that what cost control is all about? Sure, get rid of waste and abuse and needless paperwork, but is there anyone who doesn't see a future in which tests that can't be justified on "public health" grounds don't get covered by insurance?
I always ask doctors, particularly on women's health issues, what their wives do. Ask any doctor if his wife is going to wait until 50 to start mammography, and I will lay down bets on the answer. Does that mean the federal government should pay for every woman to do the same? Maybe not. Does it mean that I expect my private insurer to do so? I do.
Like many women who have had some scares along the way, not to mention some relatives with breast cancer, I've been "lucky" enough to have years of multiple mammograms and advanced screenings. You think insurance notices when you have a second mammogram? The answer is yes.
Do they figure that anyone who is having two mammograms in a year must have a very good reason to do so, since most of us find it hard enough to have one? No. More than once, I have stood at front counters of testing centers discussing why it is that my insurance company has not approved the test I am scheduled to have. And, mind you, I'm good at this.
So I'm glad to see that everyone is focusing on what's best for women, but ultimately the answer is that, as always, these are issues for a woman and her doctor. And hopefully, once they decide, the insurance companies won't just say no.
========
To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
Copyright 2009 Creators Syndicate Inc.
This news arrived on: 11/20/2009
Printer Friendly Version | Send this page to a friend | Post Comment
Rate This Story:
Great - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 - Bad
Posted Comments:
11-22-2009 11:39
JCE wrote:
At least the bill in the senate doesn't allow a lot of the current death panel stuff. The way to really tell if anything in the bill is any good is to look at how the republicans or insurance companies feel about it. The more the like it, the worse it is. The more they oppose it, the better it is.
Catharyne I thought that there were some perfect idiots on here. Some of the ones who attack me on a regular basis have led me to that conclusion. But I agree, grammar and punctuation are not nearly as important as substance. And if, like some of us, our ideas are so good, then it is good to give the attackers something to complain about. Makes them feel better if they don't have to think to hard to find fault.
Catharyne I thought that there were some perfect idiots on here. Some of the ones who attack me on a regular basis have led me to that conclusion. But I agree, grammar and punctuation are not nearly as important as substance. And if, like some of us, our ideas are so good, then it is good to give the attackers something to complain about. Makes them feel better if they don't have to think to hard to find fault.
11-22-2009 01:13
Catharyne Stauffer wrote:
Lol , old cowboy, None of us are perfect :)
11-21-2009 20:30
old cowboy wrote:
Women's health issues.
Please excuse grammar and spelling in this one--it was terrible. Sorry
11-21-2009 20:28
old cowboy wrote:
Women's health issues.
Under the current system many insurance companies to not cover mammograms and other proceedures required by women in their general coverage. If a woman wants full coverage she will pay much more than a man. I guess they consider being a woman is a pre-existing condition.
I think there is a lot in the health care bills that is to be criticized--first, they are so big that most cannot even get through it and it is written legalize and political jargon that most have no idea about what is really being said.
If there is anything to bring health care equity for women we should all be for it as we all had mothers and many have wives and daughters that have been mistreated by insurance companies, employers who often set some of the insurance limits imposed and all the rest of the current system.
I think there is a lot in the health care bills that is to be criticized--first, they are so big that most cannot even get through it and it is written legalize and political jargon that most have no idea about what is really being said.
If there is anything to bring health care equity for women we should all be for it as we all had mothers and many have wives and daughters that have been mistreated by insurance companies, employers who often set some of the insurance limits imposed and all the rest of the current system.
11-21-2009 20:17
Redneck wrote:
ObamaNOcare
Again I like what JCE wrote! I have a daughter and three grandaughters, if I have to fly them out of the country to get healthcare I will. The government regulations don't come before my childrens health! More civil Disobedience!!
Comment archive | Comment FAQ's
 |
 |
View Susan Estrich ezine stories by date or visit the complete archive |
The ArcaMax Politics channel is one of 70 content categories offered by ArcaMax Publishing on this ... |
VideoSquares.com
