As women practicing in urology and physical therapy, respectively, we see some definite inequalities between men and women’s healthcare coverage. These are inequalities that the average taxpayer and healthcare insurance policy-holders probably don’t know about, and we feel it’s time to bring them to light.

For instance, did you know that:

• Medicare will pay for penile implants for our male senior citizens with sexual dysfunction (with an uncomplicated implant easily costing $30,000), but some insurance plans will not cover a woman’s oral contraceptive pills?
• Medicare and insurance companies often cover three oral drugs to assist men with erectile dysfunction, but there are NO drugs on the market to assist women with sexual dysfunction?

Here’s the real kicker: did you know that now there is a maintenance daily dose of one of those drugs for male sexual dysfunction so that men can be “ever ready”? Men as young as those in their late 20s have been seen in our clinics requesting prescriptions for these drugs. Is this really a medical necessity?

The same kinds of inequalities are present throughout today’s healthcare coverage plans. For instance, the average Medicare reimbursement paid to a physician to implant a sling to alleviate male urinary incontinence is $981.90. At the same time, the average reimbursement for a sling to alleviate female urinary incontinence is only $764.13.

While we can’t make the case that there is deliberate gender discrimination, per se, in the healthcare system, it does seem logical that when physicians are paid more to treat men than women, men will probably receive more medical attention.

The current situation makes us scratch our heads and go, “Hmmm …” Maybe the glass ceiling applies not just to women in the corporate world, but to the level of treatment women receive in the healthcare world as well.

What do you think?