Incontinence desire and health care coverage

[cathdiap]

Do you think your incontinence desire should be considered to be such a serious mental condition that your need for diapers should be covered by health care insurance? Or do you think it is "only" a sexual desire?

In my case I don't think I would truly suffer from diaper abstinence, though life would become a lot harder without it. But for me it is just a sexual desire, the cost of my diapers therefore should not be covered.

Any thoughts on this?

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

That this comes up gives us insight into the hesitancy of insurance companies to cover mental illness cases

My AbPsych instructor told us a story from when he was in Korea during the war. There was this guy who always was making like he was riding a motor bike and was busting for a section 8 discharge. Well, he got it. When it came through he went up to the gate handed they guy the papers. gut up of the "bike" and handed the same guy the imaginarky keys and said "Here, this is for the next poor bastard that wnats to get out of here" and walked off as calm as you please. There were MANY Corporal Klingers

A shrink who tried to treat a fetish, even though it was listed in the AbPsych book, but not clearly ID'ed as a disorder, would come under close scruteny by the APA (whichever one was the governing body of his profession), insurance companies and the authorities. So let me say "Not if they knew what was good gor them"

[ppdude]

What does it matter the kind of underwear I choose to wear? Jockey or boxer shorts? Or something more substantial like a diaper? Like Hilary said, "What difference does it make?" Fetish or not, It doesn't appear to be harmful to the user or others around it. Unless you're talking about the potential "smell."

It is my totally uniformed opinion, most shrinks are mental disorders and a danger to society.

[rusty pins]

It depends on how bad mentally you are in regards to your feelings of just having to wear diapers to cope.  There are people who were in the service with such severe problems and PSTD that they have to be on medications and treatment to be able to cope with life.  Even then you never know what can set them off.  If someone was like that and that bad to where they couldn't mentally cope with the world unless they had the security of diapers, then I would say that would have to be a special determination based on medical and psychiatric examinations.  If someone was a DL or AB who just wanted to wear diapers or decided they just didn't feel right unless they wore diapers, that would be a grey area that would also take some psychiatric testing.  I don't think the majority of the people here with incontinent desires or who made the choice personally to wear diapers 24/7/365 have severe enough mental conditions to have their insurance cover the cost of their diapers.  I'm sure there are those out there, but probably not here.  My thought is it's not right to have insurance pay for diapers when it's your personal choice to wear them or make yourself incontinent on purpose in order to have to wear them.  It's your choice to do so barring any sever mental issue.  Besides, if you had a desire to wear diapers or make yourself incontinent for your own personal feelings, would you be happy with the cheap brands of worthless diapers the insurance would pay for?

[DiaperedAllTheTime]

22 hours ago, rusty pins said:

It depends on how bad mentally you are in regards to your feelings of just having to wear diapers to cope.  There are people who were in the service with such severe problems and PSTD that they have to be on medications and treatment to be able to cope with life.  Even then you never know what can set them off.  If someone was like that and that bad to where they couldn't mentally cope with the world unless they had the security of diapers, then I would say that would have to be a special determination based on medical and psychiatric examinations.  If someone was a DL or AB who just wanted to wear diapers or decided they just didn't feel right unless they wore diapers, that would be a grey area that would also take some psychiatric testing.  I don't think the majority of the people here with incontinent desires or who made the choice personally to wear diapers 24/7/365 have severe enough mental conditions to have their insurance cover the cost of their diapers.  I'm sure there are those out there, but probably not here.  My thought is it's not right to have insurance pay for diapers when it's your personal choice to wear them or make yourself incontinent on purpose in order to have to wear them.  It's your choice to do so barring any sever mental issue.  Besides, if you had a desire to wear diapers or make yourself incontinent for your own personal feelings, would you be happy with the cheap brands of worthless diapers the insurance would pay for?

I personally could never wear insurance brand diapers.  Cost of premium diapers is expensive but usually save the embarrassment of  untimely leaks.  Most importantly they are far more comfortable to wear in my opionion.

There is no doubt that some people just mentally are not happy unless they are diapered.  As someone who honestly mentally needs to wear diapers I have no desire to try and get free diapers out of it.  Since my doctor diagnosed me as having incontinence I could probably actually push to have my insurance pay for diapers.  That will never happen.

[Bettypooh]

When a "mental condition" reaches the point where it's a true illness or disorder, insurance should cover it. But it often doesn't, even when it progresses much farther than that. Insurance is a scam where you are often left having to choose between one evil or another as both aren't covered. And there are many like me who can't afford insurance but make too much to be eligible for assistance; that is the biggest reason I'm for socialized healthcare which covers everything- nobody and nothing goes uncovered for anyone who needs it. I'm happy to buy my own diapers but having some financial help with it would be nice, which is how i think things should be done so that the wearer can decide which product works best for them. Those with no financial ability would be able to acquire something adequate even if not the best.

tldr: If a person has a real and true need for something to remain healthy and active in society, then they should have that. It should be seen as a human right.

Bettypooh

[rusty pins]

I have to agree with Bettypooh.  You try and try to get medicaid if you are in the required poverty level with income and get turned down time and time again until finally you escalate things to the governor's office.  DHS calls you, scared because the Governor's office stepped in and read them the riot act and apologizes to you, saying they don't know what happened but of course your covered, they have all your necessary paperwork that you sent in a year ago!  Your goal is to get work, earn money so you can get off medicaid.  That happens but you don't qualify for health insurance through your employer.  You make too much to qualify for medicaid, barely.  Health Insurance, even the highest deductible lowest coverage plan is over $700 a month!  You pay the $700 a month and what you have left over afterwards would put you back in the poverty range, not enough at all to live on!  Why would someone want to work enough to get out of poverty if that caused them to lose medicaid and have to pay even more on their own to get any kind of health insurance?  It would be a losing situation because even though they actually make more money above the poverty level, their net balance is a lot lower in the end after paying out of pocket for health insurance.  How can anyone get by?  It's a stupid system for those in that income range.