Overheard at Work

[Frugalroogal]

How is she paying for the IVF? Credit cards?

I can only assume that there would be some type of debt to pay for the IVF. She said that it has cost her around $50 000 in IVF to get to the point of 1 child and 1 viable pregnancy. She does have a reasonably high paying job but not enough to cover that kind of expenditure as well as daycare fees.

In the throes of morning sickness yesterday she said she had to go and buy something nice for the baby so she didn’t totally regret her decision so off she went to the shops to buy baby clothes, although she has plenty of clothes from the first time around. In the afternoon she mentioned that she may have to break up with her new boyfriend (who lives with her and her daughter) and get him to move out of the house to reduce the household income to be eligible for more government benefits. Not sure if this was the morning sickness talking or if she was serious.

A note to say this example is not from the USA (it’s from Australia) so we don’t get a food program at school (that I know of) but we do have a generous social security system.

The boyfriend isn't gone yet? She chose a donor over him (maybe there were complications I'm not aware of?) but more importantly she decided to get pregnant against his wishes. That seems incredibly selfish if you're planning a future together.

She chose a donor over him as he didn’t want any more children. They haven’t broken up but if it was me I wouldn’t have hung around after she decided to have more children. I don’t think they talked about the IVF in great detail before she got pregnant as he was apparently quite surprised that it worked and asked if he would be put on the birth certificate as the father. To his apparent great relief the answer was no.

[runbikerun]

Why don't they start requiring the parents to get group therapy to resolve whatever problems they have so they can feed their children. What kind of parents can't provide meals and if they can't, they should be encouraged to be sterilized or use birth control.

Today in "I have a viciously mean-spirited opinion that's completely divorced from reality and history and I'm fucking well proud of it"...

What the absolute hell? You seriously think that encouraging the sterilisation of poor people is a sound public policy, rather than the first step on the road to a totalitarian dystopia? You don't think there's any problem with the state effectively pushing for the sterilisation of disadvantaged minorities?

At the very least the suggestion is not mean spirited, even if you think the results of such a policy would be negative.

I think people make connections between the word sterilization and the terrible ways forced sterilization was used in the past. Somewhat like the connections often made with communism and socialism. Not to mention it was sterilization OR birth control. Would you feel better if they said free vasectomys, tubal occlusions, or more temporary forms of birth control?

Let's not engage in this muddying of waters. I made it perfectly clear that what I found unconscionable in the post was the argument that poor people be "encouraged to be sterilized". I stand by my assessment: thinking poor people should be encouraged to be sterilised is viciously mean-spirited and based around the idea that the creation of human life should, to some extent, be reserved for the wealthy. Of course people make connections between the word and the terrible ways sterilisation was used in the past - because as a species, we have a perfect batting record on state-endorsed sterilisation leading to awful and hateful outcomes. Ignoring that ignominious history and the wreckage of human lives it created is morally indefensible. At an absolute base minimum, anyone arguing for state-endorsed sterilisation should be starting off by acknowledging that horrific history and explaining exactly how their idea will avoid the pitfalls that every other case has led to - but we didn't even get that, just a casual suggestion that we sterilise poor people, as though that's a reasonable starting point for a policy discussion.

[OtherJen]

Jup. In my country the teen pregnancy rate is about 2 per 1000 girls and the teen abortion rate is 4 per 1000 (both abortions and contraception are completely free for minors) . According to wikipedia there are American states where the teen birth rate is over 60 per 1000, and in certain communities it is much, much higher. That's just insane.

Teenagers are going to experiment with sex, that's just the reality of life. Can anyone remember a time when abstinence worked? I am totally pro-choice, but I do believe we should try to get our abortion rate as low as we can, and the best way to prevent abortion is by offering reliable and affordable contraception.

Regarding the incidence of 60/1000: as an American, I believe it. I have a large extended family, and getting pregnant and becoming a single mom by age 21 seems to have become a rite of passage among many of my younger female cousins. They're all from conservative religious backgrounds, so they're exposed to plenty of the "no sex ed/birth control is evil/abortion is murder" trifecta. Clearly, that plan works super well. [/sarcasm]

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

Wow, wow, wow.
I know mustachians generally like to think that wealth is entirely based on choices, but that's not actually the case. There are many reasons why a family can be in financial trouble. Like significant and expensive health issues. To suggest that someone struggling AT THAT TIME (because lets remember that you're only seeing a single point in someones' life) should be steralised is kind of sickening. Do you want to live in a society where no one gets to fuck up? Where no one gets to learn and grow, but instead gets punished? I don't.

[OtherJen]

Wow, wow, wow.
I know mustachians generally like to think that wealth is entirely based on choices, but that's not actually the case. There are many reasons why a family can be in financial trouble. Like significant and expensive health issues. To suggest that someone struggling AT THAT TIME (because lets remember that you're only seeing a single point in someones' life) should be steralised is kind of sickening. Do you want to live in a society where no one gets to fuck up? Where no one gets to learn and grow, but instead gets punished? I don't.

This. Especially considering the bullshit coming out of the US government right now.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

Wow, wow, wow.
I know mustachians generally like to think that wealth is entirely based on choices, but that's not actually the case. There are many reasons why a family can be in financial trouble. Like significant and expensive health issues. To suggest that someone struggling AT THAT TIME (because lets remember that you're only seeing a single point in someones' life) should be steralised is kind of sickening. Do you want to live in a society where no one gets to fuck up? Where no one gets to learn and grow, but instead gets punished? I don't.

This. Especially considering the bullshit coming out of the US government right now.

I was going to mention that. The moment someone says sickening, we all know what's being talked about, right? Maybe they do want to live in that kind of society??? Pretty glad I live on the other side of the planet, frankly.

[Sibley]

Free and easily accessible birth control is a fantastic idea. That is how other developed countries have teen pregnancy and abortion rates that are so much lower than ours. Go lobby your representative to fund Planned Parenthood. :) Many studies have shown over and over that having control over your fertility is a necessary part of economic development that lifts countries out of poverty. I’m not sure why the US is so slow to get that message.

It's really quite simple. There is a segment of the population that would greatly prefer that women be at home, raising children and taking care of the house. Giving women control over childbearing blows that out of the water. And that doesn't fit in their mindset of women being inferior to men.

[Hula Hoop]

Free and easily accessible birth control is a fantastic idea. That is how other developed countries have teen pregnancy and abortion rates that are so much lower than ours. Go lobby your representative to fund Planned Parenthood. :) Many studies have shown over and over that having control over your fertility is a necessary part of economic development that lifts countries out of poverty. I’m not sure why the US is so slow to get that message.

It's really quite simple. There is a segment of the population that would greatly prefer that women be at home, raising children and taking care of the house. Giving women control over childbearing blows that out of the water. And that doesn't fit in their mindset of women being inferior to men.

Sad but true.  Also a lot of people are in denial that young unmarried people have sex and they consider such sexual activity to be sinful.  My kids are young, but when the time comes I plan to make sure that they have access to birth control and are educated about how to use it.

[MarciaB]

How is she paying for the IVF? Credit cards?

I can only assume that there would be some type of debt to pay for the IVF. She said that it has cost her around $50 000 in IVF to get to the point of 1 child and 1 viable pregnancy. She does have a reasonably high paying job but not enough to cover that kind of expenditure as well as daycare fees.

In the throes of morning sickness yesterday she said she had to go and buy something nice for the baby so she didn’t totally regret her decision so off she went to the shops to buy baby clothes, although she has plenty of clothes from the first time around. In the afternoon she mentioned that she may have to break up with her new boyfriend (who lives with her and her daughter) and get him to move out of the house to reduce the household income to be eligible for more government benefits. Not sure if this was the morning sickness talking or if she was serious.

A note to say this example is not from the USA (it’s from Australia) so we don’t get a food program at school (that I know of) but we do have a generous social security system.

The boyfriend isn't gone yet? She chose a donor over him (maybe there were complications I'm not aware of?) but more importantly she decided to get pregnant against his wishes. That seems incredibly selfish if you're planning a future together.

She chose a donor over him as he didn’t want any more children. They haven’t broken up but if it was me I wouldn’t have hung around after she decided to have more children. I don’t think they talked about the IVF in great detail before she got pregnant as he was apparently quite surprised that it worked and asked if he would be put on the birth certificate as the father. To his apparent great relief the answer was no.

A quick derail - what does get put on the birth certificate if the father was an anonymous sperm donor (with a guarantee of privacy)?

[Imma]

How is she paying for the IVF? Credit cards?

I can only assume that there would be some type of debt to pay for the IVF. She said that it has cost her around $50 000 in IVF to get to the point of 1 child and 1 viable pregnancy. She does have a reasonably high paying job but not enough to cover that kind of expenditure as well as daycare fees.

In the throes of morning sickness yesterday she said she had to go and buy something nice for the baby so she didn’t totally regret her decision so off she went to the shops to buy baby clothes, although she has plenty of clothes from the first time around. In the afternoon she mentioned that she may have to break up with her new boyfriend (who lives with her and her daughter) and get him to move out of the house to reduce the household income to be eligible for more government benefits. Not sure if this was the morning sickness talking or if she was serious.

A note to say this example is not from the USA (it’s from Australia) so we don’t get a food program at school (that I know of) but we do have a generous social security system.

The boyfriend isn't gone yet? She chose a donor over him (maybe there were complications I'm not aware of?) but more importantly she decided to get pregnant against his wishes. That seems incredibly selfish if you're planning a future together.

She chose a donor over him as he didn’t want any more children. They haven’t broken up but if it was me I wouldn’t have hung around after she decided to have more children. I don’t think they talked about the IVF in great detail before she got pregnant as he was apparently quite surprised that it worked and asked if he would be put on the birth certificate as the father. To his apparent great relief the answer was no.

A quick derail - what does get put on the birth certificate if the father was an anonymous sperm donor (with a guarantee of privacy)?

I guess it's just left blank / says father: unknown?

[availablelight]

Coworker’s baby is turning one. They are spending $300 on an 8-inch cake. And holding the party at a restaurant. I doubt the baby will remember any of it.

Such spending seems primitive to me, a sacrifice made in fear with the hopes of pleasing the gods. Sacrifice enough, then you'll have perfection and be blessed in all areas of your life. It's like a belief in magic.

Not to mention they'll also be an annoyance to everyone else at the restaurant when they get treated to a probably screaming baby who has no business or desire to be there.

[Linda_Norway]

Coworker: All cash transactions are criminal.

Same coworker: I don't buy anything on Finn (the Norwegian version of Graig's list). Everything is stolen goods there.
Me: I buy and sell there all the time and I am honest.

Same coworker: I told my children they should sell their (old) bicycles on Finn. They can keep the money from the sales. But my children are not interested.
Me (thinking): Spoiled brats, those children.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

Coworker’s baby is turning one. They are spending $300 on an 8-inch cake. And holding the party at a restaurant. I doubt the baby will remember any of it.

Such spending seems primitive to me, a sacrifice made in fear with the hopes of pleasing the gods. Sacrifice enough, then you'll have perfection and be blessed in all areas of your life. It's like a belief in magic.

Not to mention they'll also be an annoyance to everyone else at the restaurant when they get treated to a probably screaming baby who has no business or desire to be there.

One of the many reasons I hate restauranting and avoid eating in public. In the home, screaming and tantrums are seldom a problem even with the tiniest kids, because there are so many ways of making the child be comfortable. A parent can always nip out to another room to do a diaper change, a distraction of some kind, whip out a boob, call a pet over for an emergency pup-snuggle, or even put the child down for a nap in an environment that isn't a sensory overload.

Of course, there are establishments that specialize in children's parties. Maybe, if there are enough kid guests, they might have the party there. It sounds horrific but it can actually be kind of fun.

[Swish]

CW: Life sucks
Me: oh why is that?
CW: I totaled my car and the insurance company is paying me out less than I owe.
Me: How long will it take to fix that?
CW: Well I can pay out the loan from savings but then I need a new car. There is a lease I can get on an SUV. Its only $44k and the payment is $430 per month with a $22k buyout in 5 years.
Me: that sounds pretty expensive. Why don't you just ride your bike for the summer to work and then save some money to buy a used car. It would take off a lot of pressure.
CW: LOL oh your funny. Ride my bike. Like I am poor.
Me: I ride my bike most days in the summer or walk it is quite nice.
CW: ..... we couldn't survive without two cars, I'd be all sweaty, wah-wah lots of other excuses.

[Dragonswan]

Why don't they start requiring the parents to get group therapy to resolve whatever problems they have so they can feed their children. What kind of parents can't provide meals and if they can't, they should be encouraged to be sterilized or use birth control.

Today in "I have a viciously mean-spirited opinion that's completely divorced from reality and history and I'm fucking well proud of it"...

What the absolute hell? You seriously think that encouraging the sterilisation of poor people is a sound public policy, rather than the first step on the road to a totalitarian dystopia? You don't think there's any problem with the state effectively pushing for the sterilisation of disadvantaged minorities?

Oh for heaven's sake.   No one wants poor people to get sterilized.  We need them to fight the wars that protect the power and wealth of the wealthy.  And when they aren't needed to fight, there are menial jobs that need to be done. /s

[LennStar]

Oh for heaven's sake.   No one wants poor people to get sterilized.  We need them to fight the wars that protect the power and wealth of the wealthy.  And when they aren't needed to fight, there are menial jobs that need to be done. /s

Only as long as you can prevent the poor from getting rid of padly paid menial jobs.

I mean, just look at the socialist nordic states! Public toilets that clean themselves, no toll booth people - who when no those are the potential cannon fodder?

[87tweetybirds]

Slightly off topic, but since so many were railing against the idea of offering sterilization or birth control(I read it as not forcing sterilization, but offering it as an option for those who do not want (more) children), Anecdotally; After a distant family member got pregnant with her 8th pregnancy (5 abortions, 2 living children +pregnancy) at 22, and her significant other showed his true colors as a piece of sh** blaming her for the pregnancy (like he had no part in it):/, becoming violent and threatening her life and that of her 2 kids, her father and stepmother took them in and her stepmother pulled her aside and had a gentle discussion, "do you want more children? You haven't really wanted any of these pregnancies, your contraceptives aren't working for you, so why don't you consider getting your tubes tied." And offered to pay for it if she chose to do so. She chose to and I hope that with no more unplanned pregnancies hopefully she can get out of the rut she's been in. No one forced her to, it was her choice, but the option was provided whereas without her stepmother offering to foot the bill she'd still be using contraceptives on the government's dime(planned parenthood or public health provided), which for her obviously haven't worked well.

[Dragonswan]

Oh for heaven's sake.   No one wants poor people to get sterilized.  We need them to fight the wars that protect the power and wealth of the wealthy.  And when they aren't needed to fight, there are menial jobs that need to be done. /s

Only as long as you can prevent the poor from getting rid of padly paid menial jobs.

I mean, just look at the socialist nordic states! Public toilets that clean themselves, no toll booth people - who when no those are the potential cannon fodder?

Precisely, in cultures where there is a workable humane system for birth control and related edication, you have to start automating to make ends meet.  But here in the US, we've got at least a couple more generations before we actually have to face the decision of automating or doing it *gasp* ourselves.

[Teachstache]

Wow, wow, wow.
I know mustachians generally like to think that wealth is entirely based on choices, but that's not actually the case. There are many reasons why a family can be in financial trouble. Like significant and expensive health issues. To suggest that someone struggling AT THAT TIME (because lets remember that you're only seeing a single point in someones' life) should be steralised is kind of sickening. Do you want to live in a society where no one gets to fuck up? Where no one gets to learn and grow, but instead gets punished? I don't.

Agreed 100%.

[enFuego]

I've enjoyed all 400+ pages of these.  Finally have a worthy one...

Me: (Shows pics of a recent low-budget, low maintenance backyard landscaping project I did myself)  We talked about putting in an above ground pool it but didn't think we'd get enough use out of it and don't want to maintain it so we did this instead.
CW: I'd like to put in a pool in our back yard, it'd be great with the kids.  But we have the kitchen project going on (translation: replacing granite countertops with Quartz countertops + wine fridge + $4000 stove...) so the budget is tight right now.
Me: You could always put in an above ground pool.  They're not that expensive.  It'll last you till your kids outgrow it then you take it down.
CW: Well my backyard isn't flat like yours so I'd need to hire an excavator to level out the yard.  So you're talking $10k right there.  So I may as well just do an inground.
Me: Oh I see (not really - $10k for excavation is a high estimate and an inground with concrete, fence and landscaping is more like $50k+).
CW: Plus, you know, I'm surrounded by judgy people. (shrugs) [That is an exact quote]
Me: (nods and ends conversation)

[solon]

Have you ever noticed that the most judgmental people are the ones who complain about others being judgmental?

Is it judgemental of me to say this? :)

[dragoncar]

Have you ever noticed that the most judgmental people are the ones who complain about others being judgmental?

Is it judgemental of me to say this? :)

Yes, people who complain are THE WORST

[Threshkin]

Why don't they start requiring the parents to get group therapy to resolve whatever problems they have so they can feed their children. What kind of parents can't provide meals and if they can't, they should be encouraged to be sterilized or use birth control.

Today in "I have a viciously mean-spirited opinion that's completely divorced from reality and history and I'm fucking well proud of it"...

What the absolute hell? You seriously think that encouraging the sterilisation of poor people is a sound public policy, rather than the first step on the road to a totalitarian dystopia? You don't think there's any problem with the state effectively pushing for the sterilisation of disadvantaged minorities?

At the very least the suggestion is not mean spirited, even if you think the results of such a policy would be negative.

I think people make connections between the word sterilization and the terrible ways forced sterilization was used in the past. Somewhat like the connections often made with communism and socialism. Not to mention it was sterilization OR birth control. Would you feel better if they said free vasectomys, tubal occlusions, or more temporary forms of birth control?

Let's not engage in this muddying of waters. I made it perfectly clear that what I found unconscionable in the post was the argument that poor people be "encouraged to be sterilized". I stand by my assessment: thinking poor people should be encouraged to be sterilised is viciously mean-spirited and based around the idea that the creation of human life should, to some extent, be reserved for the wealthy. Of course people make connections between the word and the terrible ways sterilisation was used in the past - because as a species, we have a perfect batting record on state-endorsed sterilisation leading to awful and hateful outcomes. Ignoring that ignominious history and the wreckage of human lives it created is morally indefensible. At an absolute base minimum, anyone arguing for state-endorsed sterilisation should be starting off by acknowledging that horrific history and explaining exactly how their idea will avoid the pitfalls that every other case has led to - but we didn't even get that, just a casual suggestion that we sterilise poor people, as though that's a reasonable starting point for a policy discussion.

The idea of encouraged sterilization/abortion for the poor has been tried before with horrifying results.  Look up the history of Eugenics.  The concept was very popular with celebrities at the time.  Unfortunately it became the foundation for both the Nazi genetic purification program and Planned Parenthood.  At least one of the two is (mostly) done.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

Why don't they start requiring the parents to get group therapy to resolve whatever problems they have so they can feed their children. What kind of parents can't provide meals and if they can't, they should be encouraged to be sterilized or use birth control.

Today in "I have a viciously mean-spirited opinion that's completely divorced from reality and history and I'm fucking well proud of it"...

What the absolute hell? You seriously think that encouraging the sterilisation of poor people is a sound public policy, rather than the first step on the road to a totalitarian dystopia? You don't think there's any problem with the state effectively pushing for the sterilisation of disadvantaged minorities?

At the very least the suggestion is not mean spirited, even if you think the results of such a policy would be negative.

I think people make connections between the word sterilization and the terrible ways forced sterilization was used in the past. Somewhat like the connections often made with communism and socialism. Not to mention it was sterilization OR birth control. Would you feel better if they said free vasectomys, tubal occlusions, or more temporary forms of birth control?

Let's not engage in this muddying of waters. I made it perfectly clear that what I found unconscionable in the post was the argument that poor people be "encouraged to be sterilized". I stand by my assessment: thinking poor people should be encouraged to be sterilised is viciously mean-spirited and based around the idea that the creation of human life should, to some extent, be reserved for the wealthy. Of course people make connections between the word and the terrible ways sterilisation was used in the past - because as a species, we have a perfect batting record on state-endorsed sterilisation leading to awful and hateful outcomes. Ignoring that ignominious history and the wreckage of human lives it created is morally indefensible. At an absolute base minimum, anyone arguing for state-endorsed sterilisation should be starting off by acknowledging that horrific history and explaining exactly how their idea will avoid the pitfalls that every other case has led to - but we didn't even get that, just a casual suggestion that we sterilise poor people, as though that's a reasonable starting point for a policy discussion.

The idea of encouraged sterilization/abortion for the poor has been tried before with horrifying results.  Look up the history of Eugenics.  The concept was very popular with celebrities at the time.  Unfortunately it became the foundation for both the Nazi genetic purification program and Planned Parenthood.  At least one of the two is (mostly) done.

Hopefully Planned Parenthood will never be "done", until there's either a functional national health care system or some other way for women in Yankistan to obtain medical care.

Although Planned Parenthood was indeed started by a small-minded eugenicist, it turned into something that's saved countless lives by allowing access to reproductive medical care for both men and women that would not otherwise have been available. Being able to prevent unwanted pregnancies, including by ending them, is a key factor in health and economic participation. That's especially true in developing countries like Yankistan where there's no social safety net except for the upper-middle class and the entitlement classes. With little or no medical or maternal leave available for a pregnancy that goes bad, and often no way to pay for the medical expenses related to birthing an unwanted fetus or for the lifelong health complications that can sometimes go with it, the only way to stay employed and earning an income is to stay healthy. The worst thing you can do in a country like Yankistan is to get sick or develop a medical problem. Pregnancy is a major, but preventable, medical problem. Accordingly, both men and women do their best to remain in a non-pregnant condition until such time as they're ready and able to become parents.

[CindyBS]

Wow, wow, wow.
I know mustachians generally like to think that wealth is entirely based on choices, but that's not actually the case. There are many reasons why a family can be in financial trouble. Like significant and expensive health issues. To suggest that someone struggling AT THAT TIME (because lets remember that you're only seeing a single point in someones' life) should be steralised is kind of sickening. Do you want to live in a society where no one gets to fuck up? Where no one gets to learn and grow, but instead gets punished? I don't.

YES!  100%.   

I spent more than 50 days living in the Pediatric ICU with my son last year.  He spent more than 170 days (including the 50 ICU days) inpatient in the hospital in the 18 months that ended Dec. 2017. 

My son got cancer at age 13.  It is like a bomb going off in your life.   We had the financial means for me to quit my job at the exact moment our expenses went sky high, and have been able to weather the storm without any welfare or financial support but that is because of a lot of factors, including the fact we are in our 40's with decades of savings.  25 year old parents of a 2 year old with cancer would probably struggle much more, even if they worked in the same industry and had the same family support.

Is generational poverty and issue? yep.  Could people be making better choices? yep.  Are their societal factors at play in all this? yep.

However, I encourage anyone who believes this "what happens to you is all choices" bullcrap to spend 1 day in a pediatric ICU.  Hear the screams of kids.  Know that some of them could be dead tomorrow and too many will die there.   My friend's teenage son just died of cancer this month.     

What do you think having a sick kid does financially to a family?  Especially when one parent has to stop working - often for years - to take care of a kid.   

[Threshkin]

Why don't they start requiring the parents to get group therapy to resolve whatever problems they have so they can feed their children. What kind of parents can't provide meals and if they can't, they should be encouraged to be sterilized or use birth control.

Today in "I have a viciously mean-spirited opinion that's completely divorced from reality and history and I'm fucking well proud of it"...

What the absolute hell? You seriously think that encouraging the sterilisation of poor people is a sound public policy, rather than the first step on the road to a totalitarian dystopia? You don't think there's any problem with the state effectively pushing for the sterilisation of disadvantaged minorities?

At the very least the suggestion is not mean spirited, even if you think the results of such a policy would be negative.

I think people make connections between the word sterilization and the terrible ways forced sterilization was used in the past. Somewhat like the connections often made with communism and socialism. Not to mention it was sterilization OR birth control. Would you feel better if they said free vasectomys, tubal occlusions, or more temporary forms of birth control?

Let's not engage in this muddying of waters. I made it perfectly clear that what I found unconscionable in the post was the argument that poor people be "encouraged to be sterilized". I stand by my assessment: thinking poor people should be encouraged to be sterilised is viciously mean-spirited and based around the idea that the creation of human life should, to some extent, be reserved for the wealthy. Of course people make connections between the word and the terrible ways sterilisation was used in the past - because as a species, we have a perfect batting record on state-endorsed sterilisation leading to awful and hateful outcomes. Ignoring that ignominious history and the wreckage of human lives it created is morally indefensible. At an absolute base minimum, anyone arguing for state-endorsed sterilisation should be starting off by acknowledging that horrific history and explaining exactly how their idea will avoid the pitfalls that every other case has led to - but we didn't even get that, just a casual suggestion that we sterilise poor people, as though that's a reasonable starting point for a policy discussion.

The idea of encouraged sterilization/abortion for the poor has been tried before with horrifying results.  Look up the history of Eugenics.  The concept was very popular with celebrities at the time.  Unfortunately it became the foundation for both the Nazi genetic purification program and Planned Parenthood.  At least one of the two is (mostly) done.

Hopefully Planned Parenthood will never be "done", until there's either a functional national health care system or some other way for women in Yankistan to obtain medical care.

Although Planned Parenthood was indeed started by a small-minded eugenicist, it turned into something that's saved countless lives by allowing access to reproductive medical care for both men and women that would not otherwise have been available. Being able to prevent unwanted pregnancies, including by ending them, is a key factor in health and economic participation. That's especially true in developing countries like Yankistan where there's no social safety net except for the upper-middle class and the entitlement classes. With little or no medical or maternal leave available for a pregnancy that goes bad, and often no way to pay for the medical expenses related to birthing an unwanted fetus or for the lifelong health complications that can sometimes go with it, the only way to stay employed and earning an income is to stay healthy. The worst thing you can do in a country like Yankistan is to get sick or develop a medical problem. Pregnancy is a major, but preventable, medical problem. Accordingly, both men and women do their best to remain in a non-pregnant condition until such time as they're ready and able to become parents.

I expected that part of my response would be controversial.  Discussion and disagreement is good because it helps us all learn.

It is interesting to me that the founder of PP was actually opposed to abortion except as a last resort.  Her primary focus was on birth control education.  She focused on the poor because she felt they were the most negatively affected by unwanted pregnancy.  But she also felt that terminating life through abortion should be avoided if possible.  At the time, any form of birth control or education was illegal.  She was right in advocating for this to be changed.  Today birth control and sex education are generally easily accessible and inexpensive.  Unfortunately the fine organization she founded has morphed into the largest abortion provider in the US.  I disagree with the position that PP is the only source for women's health services in the US.

I am a strong supporter of sex education and birth control.  I am less enamored with, but do not completely oppose, abortion because it terminates life.  Abortion is an appropriate option in some cases but it should be used judiciously.  Abortion is a surgical procedure with the real possibility of significant complications.  It is much better to prevent conception in the first place.

[plainjane]

Hopefully Planned Parenthood will never be "done", until there's either a functional national health care system or some other way for women in Yankistan to obtain medical care.

I disagree with the position that PP is the only source for women's health services in the US.

I am a strong supporter of sex education and birth control.  I am less enamored with, but do not completely oppose, abortion because it terminates life.  Abortion is an appropriate option in some cases but it should be used judiciously.  Abortion is a surgical procedure with the real possibility of significant complications.  It is much better to prevent conception in the first place.

I do not believe that the original poster said that PP is the only source for women's health services in the US. There are obviously other sources. The question is whether those sources are nearby, accessible & affordable.

I think the vast majority of people who support abortion being legally accessible would also prefer options are available to people who want to use them which prevent conception in the first place. Abortion of course is not just for unwanted pregnancies, but also for desired pregnancies which have medical complications.

[monte0930]

One from this week: An older co-worker, 60s F, constantly complains about not being able to retire. The problem is she spends like crazy, here are just a few I've picked up on over the months. She has an $800 dollar blender that she has mentioned, among other high end kitchen gadgets. Of course hair and nail salon appointments are regularly scheduled (she has to keep up that unnatural hair color). Drives a new $40k+ SUV to work every day. Recently had $1000's of dollars of Italian furniture delivered to her house + plus a fancy chandelier (another $1000?). This is what finally pushed me over the edge, she already ones at least one dog, which she purchased from a breeder for $2k, and wait for it, is picking up ANOTHER $2k dog on Monday, which will be delivered by a "dog nanny" for the low price of $450! Of course she is taking the whole week off next week to welcome the new addition. Also, she has been at this job since 18 years old, minimum retirement age for full pension would have been abut 5 years ago. It's mind boggling.

[Swish]

I've enjoyed all 400+ pages of these.  Finally have a worthy one...

Me: (Shows pics of a recent low-budget, low maintenance backyard landscaping project I did myself)  We talked about putting in an above ground pool it but didn't think we'd get enough use out of it and don't want to maintain it so we did this instead.
CW: I'd like to put in a pool in our back yard, it'd be great with the kids.  But we have the kitchen project going on (translation: replacing granite countertops with Quartz countertops + wine fridge + $4000 stove...) so the budget is tight right now.
Me: You could always put in an above ground pool.  They're not that expensive.  It'll last you till your kids outgrow it then you take it down.
CW: Well my backyard isn't flat like yours so I'd need to hire an excavator to level out the yard.  So you're talking $10k right there.  So I may as well just do an inground.
Me: Oh I see (not really - $10k for excavation is a high estimate and an inground with concrete, fence and landscaping is more like $50k+).
CW: Plus, you know, I'm surrounded by judgy people. (shrugs) [That is an exact quote]
Me: (nods and ends conversation)

This made my day :)

Today CW advised me he is buying fishing kayak for $4k. I made the mistake of being slightly excited. Oh I have a canoe its lots of fun I didn't know you did that sort of stuff? CW proceeds to tell me how he has never fished or boated really before, none of his friends do but he really likes the idea of this so he is going to try it out. The only reason he doesn't do it is because he doesn't own all the stuff. At this point it sunk in how much he was spending and I mentioned it might be prudent to rent a kayak first before he drops $4k on one. The rebuttal was this is a really great deal as its normally over $5k and he does not want to miss out. - Sadly I used to be able to relate to this kind of thinking. Now I just think SHIT his boat that needs a paddle costs more than my car.

[tyrannostache]

I don't want to derail shame and comedy much further, but I have to weigh in here.

Hopefully Planned Parenthood will never be "done", until there's either a functional national health care system or some other way for women in Yankistan to obtain medical care.

I disagree with the position that PP is the only source for women's health services in the US.

I am a strong supporter of sex education and birth control.  I am less enamored with, but do not completely oppose, abortion because it terminates life.  Abortion is an appropriate option in some cases but it should be used judiciously.  Abortion is a surgical procedure with the real possibility of significant complications.  It is much better to prevent conception in the first place.

I do not believe that the original poster said that PP is the only source for women's health services in the US. There are obviously other sources. The question is whether those sources are nearby, accessible & affordable.

I think the vast majority of people who support abortion being legally accessible would also prefer options are available to people who want to use them which prevent conception in the first place. Abortion of course is not just for unwanted pregnancies, but also for desired pregnancies which have medical complications.

"Abortion should be used judiciously." Absolutely. And can we let individuals make that decision?

Let me tell you a story. My friend was pregnant with a desperately wanted second child. Several weeks in, she discovered that the fetus had stopped growing. Either she could wait for her body to do the work and risk serious infection, or take action. The doctor gave her the option of a d&c or prescription medication. She chose prescription, and went to pick it up that evening. So there she was, devastated, waiting in line at a busy Walgreens with her 5-year-old, trying to hold her shit together so as not to scare her daughter. And the pharmacist said he would not fill her prescription because of his personal conviction against abortion. She had wanted this child. She wanted to carry it to term. She's already grieving the loss of her pregnancy, and now this man's personal conviction is forcing her to jump through another set of hoops just to protect her health. There was no other pharmacist available to fill the prescription. They had to send it across town, and place the burden on my friend to figure out how she would get there. She did get the prescription the next morning from a different pharmacy, but not after suffering the indignity of being refused at her most vulnerable time.

Another story. My best friends in the world tried to get pregnant for 8 years. And finally, it happened. She was carrying a baby boy. She was thrilled. And then at 20 weeks, she discovered that he had unsurvivable birth defects (limb-body wall). She might be able carry him to term, but he definitely would not survive once delivered. There was no surgery to intervene, no way to save him. The couple was devastated. Since they live in a state with few restrictions, her own OB was able to perform the procedure, and she was able to grieve and recover quietly with minimal fuss. If she had lived in a state with restrictive abortion laws, she would have to go through a waiting period, an independent" ultrasound, would potentially have had to travel for hours to access a provider, would have had to walk through a wall of protesters with gory billboards spouting abuse at her.

Let's work to reduce the need for abortions by providing great birth control and sex education. Let's work to make sure all babies can be supported so that no one has to get an abortion for purely financial reasons. Let's be compassionate to those who need to access abortion services. And let's also remember that abortion is a medical procedure that saves women's lives.


Phew. OK. ANd now let's get back to ridiculing the non-frugal.

[I'm a red panda]

Let me tell you a story. My friend was pregnant with a desperately wanted second child. Several weeks in, she discovered that the fetus had stopped growing. Either she could wait for her body to do the work and risk serious infection, or take action. The doctor gave her the option of a d&c or prescription medication. She chose prescription, and went to pick it up that evening. So there she was, devastated, waiting in line at a busy Walgreens with her 5-year-old, trying to hold her shit together so as not to scare her daughter. And the pharmacist said he would not fill her prescription because of his personal conviction against abortion. She had wanted this child. She wanted to carry it to term. She's already grieving the loss of her pregnancy, and now this man's personal conviction is forcing her to jump through another set of hoops just to protect her health. There was no other pharmacist available to fill the prescription. They had to send it across town, and place the burden on my friend to figure out how she would get there. She did get the prescription the next morning from a different pharmacy, but not after suffering the indignity of being refused at her most vulnerable time.

You actually know this woman? (This story has been getting major news attention lately)  This is one of the most ridiculous cases I've heard. It wasn't even for an abortificant, as the fetus was already deceased. 

Another story. My best friends in the world tried to get pregnant for 8 years. And finally, it happened. She was carrying a baby boy. She was thrilled. And then at 20 weeks, she discovered that he had unsurvivable birth defects (limb-body wall). She might be able carry him to term, but he definitely would not survive once delivered. There was no surgery to intervene, no way to save him. The couple was devastated. Since they live in a state with few restrictions, her own OB was able to perform the procedure, and she was able to grieve and recover quietly with minimal fuss. If she had lived in a state with restrictive abortion laws, she would have to go through a waiting period, an independent" ultrasound, would potentially have had to travel for hours to access a provider, would have had to walk through a wall of protesters with gory billboards spouting abuse at her.

And if she found out a few weeks later (maybe her 20 week scan was normal, but then a growth scan at 25-weeks showed abnormalities incompatible with life) she would likely have to not only travel for hours; but likely travel to another state entirely; since nearly every state bans at 20- or 24-weeks.  She would have to coordinate time off work (at least a week to fly there, 3-days for the procedure, more if there is a waiting period, and fly home) at a moments notice, pay tens of thousands out of pocket for the procedure (maybe to get some reimbursement from insurance, but it is surely out of network), start her labor in an unfamiliar hotel room, be separated from her spouse for the safety of the clinic doctor to deliver behind bullet proof doors, and likely return to work with no recovery time because it wasn't a procedure done at a hospital, giving the name of the facility to HR to ask for time off to recover from a birth (at, about 25 weeks- D&C is generally no longer considered safe and induction is used, after stopping the baby's heart) is essentially disclosing the procedure.  Having it done in the safety, an anonymity of the hospital the prenatal care in is a million times better for the woman.

Or maybe she had her ultrasound at 19w 5d (instead of the traditional 20-week ultrasound) and the state has a 20-week ban. The woman now has only minutes to make the most important, and most difficult decision of her life- with hopes the doctors can rush her into surgery to do the procedure before the non-emergency OR closes down for the day.  And yes, I know a woman who was given less than 7 minutes to determine if she should end her pregnancy.

Unwanted babies are absolutely NOT the only reason women have abortions. And women doing what they believe is best for their children (because many of these babies wouldn't necessarily be born still; some would suffer needlessly for hours or months; not even mentioning the difficulty of carrying a pregnancy of a doomed child) are forced to deal with difficult situations in even more difficult situations that are thrust upon them only by politicians.

I would respect any woman who chooses to carry a fetus with a fatal abnormality to term. But I also greatly respect the woman who makes the choice to end the pregnancy as well.

[Hirondelle]

Wait, refusing abortions for medical reasons and even a prescription to end the pregnancy of a child who's heart has stopped is even a thing in the US? Mind. Blown.

[OtherJen]

Wait, refusing abortions for medical reasons and even a prescription to end the pregnancy of a child who's heart has stopped is even a thing in the US? Mind. Blown.

Yep. And now that we've the Supreme Court justice who often acts as the "swing" vote has retired, the court will receive another far-right appointee and will likely overturn Roe v. Wade, which means that the decision to legalize abortions (including medical/chemical abortions) will go back to the individual states. If this happens, women in many states will have no access unless they have the means to travel long distances.

[tyrannostache]

Let me tell you a story. My friend was pregnant with a desperately wanted second child. Several weeks in, she discovered that the fetus had stopped growing. Either she could wait for her body to do the work and risk serious infection, or take action. The doctor gave her the option of a d&c or prescription medication. She chose prescription, and went to pick it up that evening. So there she was, devastated, waiting in line at a busy Walgreens with her 5-year-old, trying to hold her shit together so as not to scare her daughter. And the pharmacist said he would not fill her prescription because of his personal conviction against abortion. She had wanted this child. She wanted to carry it to term. She's already grieving the loss of her pregnancy, and now this man's personal conviction is forcing her to jump through another set of hoops just to protect her health. There was no other pharmacist available to fill the prescription. They had to send it across town, and place the burden on my friend to figure out how she would get there. She did get the prescription the next morning from a different pharmacy, but not after suffering the indignity of being refused at her most vulnerable time.

You actually know this woman? (This story has been getting major news attention lately)  This is one of the most ridiculous cases I've heard. It wasn't even for an abortificant, as the fetus was already deceased. 

I do not know the woman whose story has been in the news lately. I'm talking about a friend who had the exact same experience a couple of years ago. She's been sharing the story again as the more recent news story blew up. It's eerily similar.

[plainjane]

Coworker told a bunch of us this morning about her friend who loaned her BF of 3 months 10k. The guy partially paid it back, then went mia. Turned up again in BC, says he never knew her, that the texts and emails could all be falsified, and that his wife will vouch for him.

I'm glad I learned my lesson about unsecured loans with $40.

[birdman2003]

Me (to intern): I would recommend contributing X% to get full company match and after you pay off student loans and start full time with our company, then raise your % until you max out your 401(k).  That's what I do.
Intern: Sounds good, thanks birdman2003
Coworker (overhearing us): You're able to max out your 401(k) because you don't have kids.  Kids are expensive.
Me: It's true that we don't have kids.  But I can easily max out my 401(k) because we don't have car or truck payments, and we have a modest mortgage.

My coworker has two kids, but he is also making payments on a brand new F150, expensive hobbies like bowhunting, has an expensive house, etc...
He didn't respond to my last statement.

[marcela]

Let me tell you a story. My friend was pregnant with a desperately wanted second child. Several weeks in, she discovered that the fetus had stopped growing. Either she could wait for her body to do the work and risk serious infection, or take action. The doctor gave her the option of a d&c or prescription medication. She chose prescription, and went to pick it up that evening. So there she was, devastated, waiting in line at a busy Walgreens with her 5-year-old, trying to hold her shit together so as not to scare her daughter. And the pharmacist said he would not fill her prescription because of his personal conviction against abortion. She had wanted this child. She wanted to carry it to term. She's already grieving the loss of her pregnancy, and now this man's personal conviction is forcing her to jump through another set of hoops just to protect her health. There was no other pharmacist available to fill the prescription. They had to send it across town, and place the burden on my friend to figure out how she would get there. She did get the prescription the next morning from a different pharmacy, but not after suffering the indignity of being refused at her most vulnerable time.

You actually know this woman? (This story has been getting major news attention lately)  This is one of the most ridiculous cases I've heard. It wasn't even for an abortificant, as the fetus was already deceased. 

I do not know the woman whose story has been in the news lately. I'm talking about a friend who had the exact same experience a couple of years ago. She's been sharing the story again as the more recent news story blew up. It's eerily similar.

I had to go to a different pharmacy when I was in college because the pharmacist on duty did not want to fill my prescription for my pre-IUD insertion misoprotostol. It happens a lot more than people realize.   

[kanga1622]

Let me tell you a story. My friend was pregnant with a desperately wanted second child. Several weeks in, she discovered that the fetus had stopped growing. Either she could wait for her body to do the work and risk serious infection, or take action. The doctor gave her the option of a d&c or prescription medication. She chose prescription, and went to pick it up that evening. So there she was, devastated, waiting in line at a busy Walgreens with her 5-year-old, trying to hold her shit together so as not to scare her daughter. And the pharmacist said he would not fill her prescription because of his personal conviction against abortion. She had wanted this child. She wanted to carry it to term. She's already grieving the loss of her pregnancy, and now this man's personal conviction is forcing her to jump through another set of hoops just to protect her health. There was no other pharmacist available to fill the prescription. They had to send it across town, and place the burden on my friend to figure out how she would get there. She did get the prescription the next morning from a different pharmacy, but not after suffering the indignity of being refused at her most vulnerable time.

You actually know this woman? (This story has been getting major news attention lately)  This is one of the most ridiculous cases I've heard. It wasn't even for an abortificant, as the fetus was already deceased. 

I do not know the woman whose story has been in the news lately. I'm talking about a friend who had the exact same experience a couple of years ago. She's been sharing the story again as the more recent news story blew up. It's eerily similar.

I had to go to a different pharmacy when I was in college because the pharmacist on duty did not want to fill my prescription for my pre-IUD insertion misoprotostol. It happens a lot more than people realize.

Or the pharmacy staff gives the patient/customer grief even if they do fill it. I have a friend that went for a Plan B medication and was harassed (in front of her young child) about why she needed it. Do they really want someone to break down in front of them and share their rape or some other horror story? Or do they need to share that they aren't ready for more kids but the condom broke? It is not the staff's business and if it isn't illegal, just do the job.

I've also had people give me personally some very weird comments when buying a pregnancy test. Having a cashier ask you what you want the outcome to be or "wish you luck" when they don't know why someone would be buying the test is just horrible to the customer. You would think people would learn to keep their mouths shut with regard to medically related purchases unless asked for their opinions.

[Nicholas Carter]

One from this week: An older co-worker, 60s F, constantly complains about not being able to retire. The problem is she spends like crazy, here are just a few I've picked up on over the months. She has an $800 dollar blender that she has mentioned, among other high end kitchen gadgets. Of course hair and nail salon appointments are regularly scheduled (she has to keep up that unnatural hair color). Drives a new $40k+ SUV to work every day. Recently had $1000's of dollars of Italian furniture delivered to her house + plus a fancy chandelier (another $1000?). This is what finally pushed me over the edge, she already ones at least one dog, which she purchased from a breeder for $2k, and wait for it, is picking up ANOTHER $2k dog on Monday, which will be delivered by a "dog nanny" for the low price of $450!

You couldn't take another dog, but were still on board with the chandelier? That's where I would have gotten off the train.

[MrMoogle]

Or the pharmacy staff gives the patient/customer grief even if they do fill it. I have a friend that went for a Plan B medication and was harassed (in front of her young child) about why she needed it. Do they really want someone to break down in front of them and share their rape or some other horror story? Or do they need to share that they aren't ready for more kids but the condom broke? It is not the staff's business and if it isn't illegal, just do the job.

I've also had people give me personally some very weird comments when buying a pregnancy test. Having a cashier ask you what you want the outcome to be or "wish you luck" when they don't know why someone would be buying the test is just horrible to the customer. You would think people would learn to keep their mouths shut with regard to medically related purchases unless asked for their opinions.

Some of this may be a HIPAA violation.  They are basically disclosing your prescription information to anyone around you, who should not have access to it.  Prescriptions are PHI.

https://kb.iu.edu/d/ayzf

At my pharmacy, they ask you if you have any questions.  If you do, they pull you to the side that has a movable barrier so you are separated from everyone else.  The only thing they'll mention is the number of prescriptions you're there to pick up, or if they have it in stock, but they never mention it by name.

[Kitsunegari]

Let me tell you a story. My friend was pregnant with a desperately wanted second child. Several weeks in, she discovered that the fetus had stopped growing. Either she could wait for her body to do the work and risk serious infection, or take action. The doctor gave her the option of a d&c or prescription medication. She chose prescription, and went to pick it up that evening. So there she was, devastated, waiting in line at a busy Walgreens with her 5-year-old, trying to hold her shit together so as not to scare her daughter. And the pharmacist said he would not fill her prescription because of his personal conviction against abortion. She had wanted this child. She wanted to carry it to term. She's already grieving the loss of her pregnancy, and now this man's personal conviction is forcing her to jump through another set of hoops just to protect her health. There was no other pharmacist available to fill the prescription. They had to send it across town, and place the burden on my friend to figure out how she would get there. She did get the prescription the next morning from a different pharmacy, but not after suffering the indignity of being refused at her most vulnerable time.

You actually know this woman? (This story has been getting major news attention lately)  This is one of the most ridiculous cases I've heard. It wasn't even for an abortificant, as the fetus was already deceased. 

I do not know the woman whose story has been in the news lately. I'm talking about a friend who had the exact same experience a couple of years ago. She's been sharing the story again as the more recent news story blew up. It's eerily similar.

I had to go to a different pharmacy when I was in college because the pharmacist on duty did not want to fill my prescription for my pre-IUD insertion misoprotostol. It happens a lot more than people realize.

Or the pharmacy staff gives the patient/customer grief even if they do fill it. I have a friend that went for a Plan B medication and was harassed (in front of her young child) about why she needed it. Do they really want someone to break down in front of them and share their rape or some other horror story? Or do they need to share that they aren't ready for more kids but the condom broke? It is not the staff's business and if it isn't illegal, just do the job.

I've also had people give me personally some very weird comments when buying a pregnancy test. Having a cashier ask you what you want the outcome to be or "wish you luck" when they don't know why someone would be buying the test is just horrible to the customer. You would think people would learn to keep their mouths shut with regard to medically related purchases unless asked for their opinions.

I remember the malaise when I went to buy a pregnancy test and the pharmacist scoffed and told me "Yeah I'd bet that's what you wanted".
Like, was that necessary, bitch?

[Hirondelle]

Let me tell you a story. My friend was pregnant with a desperately wanted second child. Several weeks in, she discovered that the fetus had stopped growing. Either she could wait for her body to do the work and risk serious infection, or take action. The doctor gave her the option of a d&c or prescription medication. She chose prescription, and went to pick it up that evening. So there she was, devastated, waiting in line at a busy Walgreens with her 5-year-old, trying to hold her shit together so as not to scare her daughter. And the pharmacist said he would not fill her prescription because of his personal conviction against abortion. She had wanted this child. She wanted to carry it to term. She's already grieving the loss of her pregnancy, and now this man's personal conviction is forcing her to jump through another set of hoops just to protect her health. There was no other pharmacist available to fill the prescription. They had to send it across town, and place the burden on my friend to figure out how she would get there. She did get the prescription the next morning from a different pharmacy, but not after suffering the indignity of being refused at her most vulnerable time.

You actually know this woman? (This story has been getting major news attention lately)  This is one of the most ridiculous cases I've heard. It wasn't even for an abortificant, as the fetus was already deceased. 

I do not know the woman whose story has been in the news lately. I'm talking about a friend who had the exact same experience a couple of years ago. She's been sharing the story again as the more recent news story blew up. It's eerily similar.

I had to go to a different pharmacy when I was in college because the pharmacist on duty did not want to fill my prescription for my pre-IUD insertion misoprotostol. It happens a lot more than people realize.

Or the pharmacy staff gives the patient/customer grief even if they do fill it. I have a friend that went for a Plan B medication and was harassed (in front of her young child) about why she needed it. Do they really want someone to break down in front of them and share their rape or some other horror story? Or do they need to share that they aren't ready for more kids but the condom broke? It is not the staff's business and if it isn't illegal, just do the job.

I've also had people give me personally some very weird comments when buying a pregnancy test. Having a cashier ask you what you want the outcome to be or "wish you luck" when they don't know why someone would be buying the test is just horrible to the customer. You would think people would learn to keep their mouths shut with regard to medically related purchases unless asked for their opinions.

Why on earth would people do this? I think people really need to start being more civil about this. There's no need to be blamed and shamed on getting a pregnancy test or plan B medication. Plenty of valid reasons to get some that strangers don't need to know about.

[OtherJen]

Why on earth would people do this? I think people really need to start being more civil about this. There's no need to be blamed and shamed on getting a pregnancy test or plan B medication. Plenty of valid reasons to get some that strangers don't need to know about.

It's a badge of honor to do this in some ultra-conservative Christian communities (I say this with confidence as an ex-fringe member of an ultra-conservative Catholic community), and they're generally allowed to get away with it in the current political climate.

[alanB]

Let me tell you a story. My friend was pregnant with a desperately wanted second child. Several weeks in, she discovered that the fetus had stopped growing. Either she could wait for her body to do the work and risk serious infection, or take action. The doctor gave her the option of a d&c or prescription medication. She chose prescription, and went to pick it up that evening. So there she was, devastated, waiting in line at a busy Walgreens with her 5-year-old, trying to hold her shit together so as not to scare her daughter. And the pharmacist said he would not fill her prescription because of his personal conviction against abortion. She had wanted this child. She wanted to carry it to term. She's already grieving the loss of her pregnancy, and now this man's personal conviction is forcing her to jump through another set of hoops just to protect her health. There was no other pharmacist available to fill the prescription. They had to send it across town, and place the burden on my friend to figure out how she would get there. She did get the prescription the next morning from a different pharmacy, but not after suffering the indignity of being refused at her most vulnerable time.

You actually know this woman? (This story has been getting major news attention lately)  This is one of the most ridiculous cases I've heard. It wasn't even for an abortificant, as the fetus was already deceased. 

I do not know the woman whose story has been in the news lately. I'm talking about a friend who had the exact same experience a couple of years ago. She's been sharing the story again as the more recent news story blew up. It's eerily similar.

I had to go to a different pharmacy when I was in college because the pharmacist on duty did not want to fill my prescription for my pre-IUD insertion misoprotostol. It happens a lot more than people realize.

Or the pharmacy staff gives the patient/customer grief even if they do fill it. I have a friend that went for a Plan B medication and was harassed (in front of her young child) about why she needed it. Do they really want someone to break down in front of them and share their rape or some other horror story? Or do they need to share that they aren't ready for more kids but the condom broke? It is not the staff's business and if it isn't illegal, just do the job.

I've also had people give me personally some very weird comments when buying a pregnancy test. Having a cashier ask you what you want the outcome to be or "wish you luck" when they don't know why someone would be buying the test is just horrible to the customer. You would think people would learn to keep their mouths shut with regard to medically related purchases unless asked for their opinions.

Why on earth would people do this? I think people really need to start being more civil about this. There's no need to be blamed and shamed on getting a pregnancy test or plan B medication. Plenty of valid reasons to get some that strangers don't need to know about.

I bought pregnancy tests a couple of times.  All I got was the standard silent judgement.  For context, I am a man.  Maybe they were too confused to figure out what the proper reaction was? 

One time I only bought herbes de provence and a lemon from Whole Foods and the cashier acted like I broke the sacred covenant of things you are allowed to buy.  "Wow, how could you only buy this????"  I still do not understand why he was so pissed...

[bluebelle]

so back to things overheard at work.........

What is the 'normal' retirement age in the US?  I work for the Canadian subsidiary of a US company.  Based on my salary, I imagine that most of my US colleagues are easily making in the $150K-250K range (including bonus and company stock).  None of them think retiring before 67 is possible, the occasional one 'dreams' of retiring at 62.  What am I missing?  I'm not talking about the FIRE crowd; I'm talking about just retiring at 55-60, is that unheard of in the US outside the ER crowd?

Retiring at 40 would raise eyebrows in Ontario, but retiring at 60?  Nope - congrats. 

I get that health care is expensive, but how expensive really?  Canada's 'free' health care is paid via hefty taxes, and does not cover prescriptions, dental, glasses, para-medical, although the bulk of prescriptions are covered once we're 65.

[alanB]

so back to things overheard at work.........

What is the 'normal' retirement age in the US?  I work for the Canadian subsidiary of a US company.  Based on my salary, I imagine that most of my US colleagues are easily making in the $150K-250K range (including bonus and company stock).  None of them think retiring before 67 is possible, the occasional one 'dreams' of retiring at 62.  What am I missing?  I'm not talking about the FIRE crowd; I'm talking about just retiring at 55-60, is that unheard of in the US outside the ER crowd?

Retiring at 40 would raise eyebrows in Ontario, but retiring at 60?  Nope - congrats. 

I get that health care is expensive, but how expensive really?  Canada's 'free' health care is paid via hefty taxes, and does not cover prescriptions, dental, glasses, para-medical, although the bulk of prescriptions are covered once we're 65.

At that income range some people in US do retire semi-early.  Even late 50s would not raise too many eyebrows, especially if they are moving to part time consulting.  Vast majority are doing 67+ though.

[Hirondelle]

Why on earth would people do this? I think people really need to start being more civil about this. There's no need to be blamed and shamed on getting a pregnancy test or plan B medication. Plenty of valid reasons to get some that strangers don't need to know about.

It's a badge of honor to do this in some ultra-conservative Christian communities (I say this with confidence as an ex-fringe member of an ultra-conservative Catholic community), and they're generally allowed to get away with it in the current political climate.

I've bought a morning after before while being in a conservative muslim country and they didn't blink an eye :p

[dcheesi]

so back to things overheard at work.........

What is the 'normal' retirement age in the US?  I work for the Canadian subsidiary of a US company.  Based on my salary, I imagine that most of my US colleagues are easily making in the $150K-250K range (including bonus and company stock).  None of them think retiring before 67 is possible, the occasional one 'dreams' of retiring at 62.  What am I missing?  I'm not talking about the FIRE crowd; I'm talking about just retiring at 55-60, is that unheard of in the US outside the ER crowd?

Retiring at 40 would raise eyebrows in Ontario, but retiring at 60?  Nope - congrats. 

I get that health care is expensive, but how expensive really?  Canada's 'free' health care is paid via hefty taxes, and does not cover prescriptions, dental, glasses, para-medical, although the bulk of prescriptions are covered once we're 65.

I think it's simple lifestyle inflation. Many people save just enough for standard retirement (if that), and then any remaining surplus is considered free to be spent on vacations and other luxuries. As their salaries increase over time, more and more of those indulgences become de rigueur in their own minds, or those of their family/friends, and they can't see any way out of the trap they've fallen into.

The healthcare part just gives the trap more teeth, since it increases (often drastically) the amount needed to retire before Medicare kicks in.

Also, remember that it wasn't that long ago (and may yet be again) that a middle-aged adult with average middle-aged health issues had practically zero chance of obtaining reasonable health insurance on the individual market, due to pre-existing conditions etc. I think a lot us long-time office drones are still in that pre-ACA mindset, where going it alone was just unthinkable.

[Dabnasty]

One time I only bought herbes de provence and a lemon from Whole Foods and the cashier acted like I broke the sacred covenant of things you are allowed to buy.  "Wow, how could you only buy this????"  I still do not understand why he was so pissed...

Weird. You still probably spent around $10, right?

[TheGrimSqueaker]

Do they really want someone to break down in front of them and share their rape or some other horror story?

Yes. Sadistic people love that sort of thing because they interpret it as evidence of their own superiority.

Why on earth would people do this?

Some do it because they simply enjoy the experience. That's an example of an act that has intrinsic value to them. Others do it because it is an instrumentally valuable act: it produces something else they enjoy, which is increased prestige and attention within a fairly radical subculture that values aggressive behavior. This puts it in the same category as spouse beating or "honor" killings.

People who view the act of publicly humiliating or harming someone else as valuable, either intrinsically or instrumentally, will put themselves in a position to do so as often as possible. It's a taste they have. They *want* the conflict and the drama. For this reason, they don't do what most normal people do, which is to seek out forms of employment or entrepreneurship that align as well as possible with whatever personal talents and constraints they've got. Their desire for drama creates a gigantic conflict of interest for them, and it's something employers need to watch out for. It's not the religion that creates the problem, it's the desire for drama.

Lots of people have constraints that affect their suitability for different professions or lines of work. To a person whose religious beliefs (or lack thereof) do not present any constraints, or who is willing to make compromises by providing goods or services they would not personally use or by serving customers they do not necessarily approve of, it can seem strange. But there really is such a thing as a person whose will is so completely in alignment with his or her sincerely held religious beliefs that they are genuinely distressed if they cannot practice those beliefs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Their religious beliefs guide and inform every aspect of their behavior including how they do their work. Such an individual is simply not capable of compromise. For that individual, religion really is a constraint on employment.

Just because a person has deep religious faith does not mean he or she is constrained by it from an employment perspective.

Similarly, having religiously imposed constraints on one's behavior is not the same thing as being a sadistic jerk. It's possible to be a sadistic jerk regardless of religious perspective.

Those pharmacists would be in the red section of the attached diagram:

* edited for typos