U.S. companies could face hurdles covering abortion travel costs


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Case closed,this should not be debated

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Why are Trump people so interested in controlling the woman's body? But then they allow the powerful guns that kill children in schools.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Even if inter/national companies want to help their employees, they may not be legally able to, going forward.

Any Federal support that Biden provides may be erased by a future Republican president, and if these states want to double down on free movement, they will be able to. Tech advances mean that it is easier than ever for the state to monitor people, particularly across borders - national or state. I'm not being melodramatic when I say that America really has become two nations with this ruling, and migration to a Democrat state may be the best option for women and families with daughters.

Now that the supreme court is Republican, power has shifted fundamentally in the US for at least the next decade. I wish Democrats would realise how much trouble they are in and prepare for it. Some research needs to be done on what it would mean for Americans with both houses of government, the presidency and the supreme court all controlled by the Republicans. Democrats need to be planning for this now, as do ordinary citizens.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

GR,we control the prosecution power in the US, Supreme Court justice are not immune from criminal prosecution

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Are employees going to have to tell their manager they are going to have to travel from Texas to California to have an abortion?” Kropp said.

The answer is no 

Then answer is YES. It will need to be approved so that reimbursements can be made.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Might be cheaper for companies to provide easy and free access to differing types of contraception and the morning after pill. Put some focus on preventative measures.

I don't necessarily agree with the law change but it is what it is.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

After the U.S. Supreme Court revoked the federal right to an abortion that's been in place for half a century, companies like Amazon, Disney, Apple and JP Morgan pledged to cover travel costs for employees who live in states where the procedure is now illegal so they can terminate pregnancies.

I'm guessing that there won't be a high percentage of employees from those companies recklessly becoming pregnant.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

This is great news. If less working women have children they have more time to devote to the company. We should just abort all young kids, no matter the age, so there will be no burden on the bottom line.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

These companies would rather pay for their employees to have their babies killed, than to cover the cost of parental leave -- not to mention the cost of including their employees' kids on their health insurance plans.

It's bad enough when companies do things to save money but try to convince us that it's really for some other purpose.

But when it involves killing babies, it isn't just bad. It's hideous. It's evil.

And yes, folks, unborn babies are human beings. They couldn't possibly be detected with Down syndrome or spina bifida otherwise. Those conditions are entirely unique to human beings.

Not to mention, when women get pregnant, they don't grow a second set of DNA, a second set of chromosomes, a second heart, a second brain, a second blood supply, a second pair of arms and legs, or roughly half the time, a penis.

That means abortion is an act of homicide. That's not an opinion. It's a fact.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Want a free trip to California? Just get pregnant.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I have only vaguely heard of one company now offering the same $4000 for employees who have a child. I would hope to see more of that.

My company already offers the standard congratulations payment upon childbirth.

I dont know how abortion rates a $4000 reward. but to get it, many people in the company will be knowing about it at the management level.

its naive to claim to employees otherwise.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

For shareholders, it makes sense to maximise returns by expediting employee abortions.

However reimbursement proof is required, so a photo of the terminated foetus in a bucket or similar is needed.

This could drive "abortion tourism" given the US had 630k abortions in 2019.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This is great news. If less working women have children they have more time to devote to the company. We should just abort all young kids, no matter the age, so there will be no burden on the bottom line.

Yes! The absolute naivety of feminists, imagining they could somehow liberate themselves through abortion! The truth is, women now have a worse and more stressful life than ever before - becoming slaves to the workplace and the economy while competing against men and struggling to bring up kids.

The 1973 Roe precedent was set by a bunch of men, and has really only benefitted businesses and irresponsible men. Women have been traumatised for life by their abortions, whatever they try to claim.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

So this is how you close the gender wage gap while providing plausible deniability that any abortion took place, and be reimbursed for the abortion that may or may not have been taken place.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month, states that have restricted abortion have made it clear this also applies to abortion through medication — a method now used in more than half of all abortions in the country.

But that has raised questions about enforcement of such laws, and whether states actually have the power to ban drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Given the religious fervour surrounding this issue, I think Republican states will pursue women like 17th century witch hunters. As for HK and Afghanistan, get out whilst you can.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“It’s not necessarily altruistic,” she said. “It also makes some sense for companies to not have a bunch of employees that are highly distressed because they have unwanted pregnancies and have to carry the child to term.”

Or, you know, avoiding maternity leave which is incredibly expensive. Compared to the massive nominal and opportunity costs associated with maternity leave, paying for an abortion is an outright bargain for these companies. Talk about ignoring the elephant in the room.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The largest firms that are self insured will have less of a problem providing this benefit as they will not be subject to state insurance laws that might prohibit such a benefit in certain states. It is smaller firms that must contract with state regulated health insurance firms that will find this hard if not impossible to do in those states that ban abortion.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Yes! The absolute naivety of feminists, imagining they could somehow liberate themselves through abortion! The truth is, women now have a worse and more stressful life than ever before - becoming slaves to the workplace and the economy while competing against men and struggling to bring up kids

Kind of a patronizing way of thinking, wouldn't you say? Are you maybe afraid a woman will out produce you in the working world? I have a hunch my electrical engineer wife would have some choice words for you, if you were even worth her time, which you very well might not be. I'd like to see you say that to this Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Shirley Franko, I worked with for a time. She's sharp.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Soon the republicans will place pregnant women under house arrest when the USA passed their constitution and 14th amendment. WASP white men did it. Women were not equal to men back then. Do republican men want to take away all women's rights? I do not trust them; the three SCOTUS justices all lied before the Senate. Their deception was to the public and moderate Senators.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is just the beginning for this Supreme Court, one that has been dubbed the "YOLO Court" for You Only Live Once. I predict at the next Presidential election one or more states will send Republican electors even when the majority of their citizens voted for a Democratic candidate, and when the legal challenge arrives at the Supreme Court they will say the state legislature can do that. Some states are going to pass laws outlawing birth control and homosexuality and those too will be upheld by the current Supreme Court. That is where the US is headed under the current Supreme Court. The dream of the far right is to muster enough state legislatures to call a Constitutional Convention and completely re-write it to reflect their religious and racial bigotries. Such a move could precipitate a civil war but I honestly think that is what many Republicans are spoiling for.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I also expect at least one state to make Christianity the state religion and tie public services to membership in a Christian Church. Since the US Constitution only says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" a state will argue that the Constitution places no restriction on states in this regard. I expect this court would uphold such a law. Their recent gutting of the 6th Amendment should tell everyone that rights as written in the US Constitution mean nothing to this court.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Desert Tortoise, what about equality under the law? Is the entire US government just a wing for far-right Christians? I wonder if the neo-far right will chain pregnant mothers or place tracking devices on them?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is equal protection under the law, oops

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites