• 1 Post
  • 39 Comments
Joined 5 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 2nd, 2024

help-circle





  • We used to have laws that decentralized control of media. An entity could only own a certain number of newspapers, tv stations, or radio stations. There were incentives for smaller news companies to insure that there was competition in each market. Congress kept chipping away at those laws letting larger companies buy up more and more of the market, allowing mergers that restricted competition. Now radio is nearly a monopoly, TV and newspapers are oligarchies. The Internet fell into an oligarchy disturbingly quickly.

    The only way to get the media serving the people again is to break up the big companies and restore the guardrails that protected and supported small local companies.





  • The city requires people wanting to access IVF services to be infertile, which it defines as an inability to conceive through heterosexual sex or intrauterine insemination—a set of criteria which disqualifies only gay men.

    It’s the first sentence of the fifth paragraph, the article writes it out instead of abbreviating.

    Yeah the procedure would be performed on the surrogate either way. Something’s just not making sense to me. Since the couple the article is about have been to Drs and are living it and the complaint has already gone through a 2 year review process I assume that the article is just missing some important piece of info.


  • I’m confused about what’s presented in the article. The article says that to qualify for IVF the couple must be unable to conceive through IUI and that this requirement prevents gay men from accessing IVF. In the article’s conclusion it says that gay men can only have biological children through IVF. That doesn’t appear to be true.

    https://www.scrcivf.com/lgbtq-fertility-faq/

    That organization says that it is an option for gay men to use a surrogate and have a biological child through IUI. It wasn’t the only one I found when I searched, “can a gay male couple use IUI with a surrogate”.

    Gay couples should have insurance coverage for and access to infertility care but is it unreasonable for an insurance company to say that a simpler cheaper alternative that produces an equivalent result (IUI) must be ruled out before it will cover the more complex procedure (IVF)?

    Where is the disconnect? Will the insurance not cover IUI unless the procedure is preformed on the insured? Why jump to IVF and dismiss the simpler procedure? Why make IVF specifically the center of the argument instead of infertility treatment in general?



  • Lemmeenym@lemm.eetoAsklemmy@lemmy.mlwho is on Lemmy (the sociology of Lemmy)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Hexbear seems a little passive, they could be a little more aggressive in their interactions. Also they don’t include enough random spam and shit posting when they find a thread they want to interact with. What’s really sad though is that they only tend to engage with one or two representatives instead of sending every user on their server into the thread.