So why is it rude if a doctor hints around that a couple really shouldn’t be having a child because they are too young/old/poor/busy… but it is just fine for us as mothers to do to each other?

Of course, no one’s insurance plan ever changed mid-year, and no one ever got laid off from their job mid-pregnancy. No one’s spouse ever died mid-pregnancy.

LOL I knew everyone would jump on me. No crap bad things can happen. I still say it’s wrong to evict your baby for monetary reasons. If there are people that will induce/section just to have a certain birthdate (11/11/11 make anyone else sick?) I know there are a lot more that will induce/section just for a little extra money.

Well sometimes people have a 5-10 thousand dollar insurance deductable at the begining of each year. I hardly think that’s “cutting it close”, and certainly not a reason to not have a child.

I think you are reading a lot more into my statement than is there lol but I stand by my it. I am the product of construction trash and ranchers. They could afford every child they had. They sure were not wealthy, just made good choices. If you would induce for $10,000 that’s your perogative, but I would not, because I belive the best thing for the baby is to be allowed to come when it wants. I am not going to bring a child into the world and not give it the absolute best chance possible. It’s ok if you hate me

By the way.. I read somewhere (or saw on the news, can’t remember) that a doctor was paying for the births of women who agreed to induce or section on 11/11/11. Is that ok? It made my stomach turn People who are having it rough would be tempted to do things they wouldn’t do otherwise. Seems sleezy to me.

We have a $3,000 deductible on our insurance. If we have satisfied it in one year, it starts all over again Jan. 1st. So a baby born on Dec. 31 could be $3,000 cheaper than one born on Jan. 1st.

Have you considered using a property management company? That is what we do with our investment property. They do all the legwork for us, they find and screen tenants, collect deposits and rent, do repairs, etc for a percentage of the rent collected.

What base? (I have a lot of friends in the military, one might be close and need something)

This is a really really hard one. I live in a poor part of the country, and around here, we have a mixed bag of folks–some state aloud that the *only* reason they have kids is to get assistance. Others have children they can afford, except that as some have said, it’s a shaky economy and who knows what can happen (factories closing, etc.). Still others have children they cannot care for monetarily (and admit it), but do so due to religious reasons and refuse assistance. That only prospective parents can make the call is the bottom line (though I personally wish more people put more thought into having children for whom they know/admit they cannot give proper care at the outset–like our neighbors–they were quite upfront about the fact their decisions were monetarily disastrous, but had everything to do with their religious beliefs). That’s ultimately their call, though I do have the right to disagree (inwardly).

In the case of induction to save money on taxes–well, once again, that is going to be a personal issue/decision, depending on the needs of the family, the willingness to take the increased risk of c-section, pain of induction, the cascade of interventions, etc. All I can say is that *only* for myself, I would not do it–the tax ‘bonus’ might not offset the price of induction/interventions/possible c-section. And it would be a pretty awful birth (IMHO only) to have the necessary interventions that go hand in hand with induction. But that’s just me. Others might think it’s a great idea. Looking forward to hearing OP’s outlook on what happened.

I should add that insurance premiums in Australia are not anywhere near 5k as far as I know. I think teh highest I personally have heard of is 1200

Not exactly, we pay monthly premiums (or the employer if you are lucky enough to have a great job) We pay about $200 a month for private insurance through my husbands government employer for the whole family (which is somewhat reasonable right now). With the ‘insurance plan/policy’ the city has paid for it includes a deductible(some ‘plans’ have no deductible, they cost a lot more), some are per visit, like $25 for every dr visit that you pay out of pocket at sign in, and some are a billed before we pay, and total yearly $5000 (for us) out of pocket that we are required to pay before the insurance company picks up the tab. With insurance the bill is lowered significantly before we are required to pay, but we still have to come up with that deductible money, once our bills total that $5000, then our insurance covers every dime until the next year when the plan rolls over. Which is why for us with private insurance I have paid out $5k already since July1 (major ER visit and surgery) so my deductible has been met, so for me every medical bill from now until June 30th 2012, every penny will be paid for with out me ever seeing a bill. and if I were pregnant and due again about the same time of the 28th of June, I would be very proactive about trying to get labor started early so that any delivery bill would be finished before July 1, after that I would be responsible for the first $5000 again.

No, no, no. The deductable is *in addition to* your premiums, all of which varies greatly company to company and plan to plan (as a general rule, the higher the deductable the lower the monthly premiums). Now my insurance has no deductable (for anything, including pregnancy) – I only pay the co-pay ($25) for the first prenatal, after that prenatal care and all associated labs are fully covered, and I co-pay $150 for the delivery. Depending on the insurance someone has they may have to pay their full deductable (could be 5 grand, or more) before anything is covered related to prenatal care/delivery). Now, our insurance premiums are taken directly out of my husband’s pay (like taxes) and that is what is paid just for the “privelage” of having insurance in the first place. It’s kinda like car insurance that way – you pay your premiums just to have the insurance, if you need to use your insurance for an accident you have to cover your deductable (if you have one) before they will pay anything. If you don’t have a deductable (like the insurance I have) you will pay more in premiums. Then you have co-pays/co-insurance to cover as well (in my plan the annual max for co-pays/co-insurance is $5000, so you will never pay more than that out of pocket in a year). We are okay paying the higher premiums: I am not done having children (working on #3, will probably be my last) and with two, soon to be three, young kids in the house it is worth it not to have to worry about deductables (my youngest’s recent trip to the ER will only cost $125, rahter than us having to pay some ungodly deductable before they will cover a dime of the bill). Again, plans vary, but that is how it works, in a nutshell.

Now, for me, hospital birth is much cheaper than MW-attended HB would be – I’d carry insurance anyway, so I’d be paying the premiums anyway. Instead of $175 out of pocket for the whole pregnancy it would be whatever the MW charges (that depends on where you live, but usually in the 4-figure range). So hospital birth is much cheaper for me.

“Why is induction different than that?”

Because you get some women who will go to message boards griping about wanting their “body back” and inevitably someone(s) will point out to them that if they report decreased fetal movement then tests of fetal well-being will be run. If these tests are anything but perfect (and even if they ARE perfect, in some cases) induction will be “recommended” by the doctor. If the woman in question is truly savvy she will know that even mild dehydration causes amniotic fluid levels to drop making otherwise normal levels to look “low” so she will make sure to restrict fluids before the tests. And so, you get a doctor, who is already worried about lawsuits, seeing a woman reporting decrease fetal movement, “low” amniotic fluid per u/s, and she’s “term”, especially if her cervix is favorable (but even if it isn’t they can try ripening agents) she will be induced – the doc doesn’t want to “sit on” a potentially compromised baby. It’s rotten and unethical of the woman (just like drug seekers will come up with ways to fool providers into prescribing for them). But it happens. Check out some of the mother-to-be message boards. It’s disgusting, but I’ve seen it happen

Now, I’m not saying it’s common, and it doesn’t excuse doctors from attempting to persuade those who *don’t* go to such extreme lengths to wait for labor to begin on its own. But women aren’t faultless in this mess. Some do go to ridiculous extremes to get induced….