There's a good reason why most insurance policies exclude abortion, and it has nothing to do with morality, religion or choice. The fact is, insurance is a risk management tool , and health insurance is, or at least should be, predicated on the principle of "medical necessity."
 
Briefly, medical necessity is defined as "treatment which is required to treat or care for symptoms of an illness or injury or to diagnose an illness or condition that is harmful to life or health." So while abortion is indeed a legal procedure (as are breast augmentations and hair transplants), it is rarely considered to be "medically necessary." Absent this key attribute, then, it's generally excluded from coverage.
 
Which leaves, what, exactly?
 
Well, the answer is that the procedure is deemed "elective;" were we to include coverage anyway, both premiums and demand would spike, increasing the cost of both medical care and medical insurance. Neither of these outcomes would be optimal.
 
Which is why it's important to specifically exclude this coverage from any kind of health care "reform" effort: since it would increase costs, it would make it even more difficult for folks to afford insurance, and if it's subsidized by the tax-payer, demand for (and thus the cost of) the procedure would also rise significantly.
 
A truly lose-lose situation.
 
Henry Stern, LUTCF, CBC is an independent insurance agent in Dayton, OH. A licensed Continuing Education instructor for Ohio, Kentucky and Indiana, he has over 25 years of experience in “the biz.” He blogs every day (or so it seems) at InsureBlog.