Posted on February 17, 2012 |
After living as a college student in DC for three years, I’d never been to the Capitol. I’ve toured the White House, visited the monuments, seen the Smithsonian museums, but never got a chance to go to Capitol Hill. Now I can say that I have finally crossed it off my list.
This week I had the opportunity to visit one of America’s greatest institutions. However, this great institution could soon be voting on a not-so-great amendment; an amendment that puts my health and the health of others at risk.
I attended a briefing on Capitol Hill presented by NWLC’s own Judy Waxman about the Blunt Amendment that may soon be voted on in the Senate. This amendment would give employers and insurers the option to refuse to cover a health care service that is against their religious or moral beliefs.
Last week, President Obama announced an accommodation to the contraceptive coverage provision of the Affordable Care Act that protects women’s access to this critical preventive health service while accommodating the opposition to the service by religiously-affiliated institutions. The Blunt Amendment is a new tactic to undo this advance for women’s health. However, this amendment goes far beyond overturning contraceptive coverage and would compromise the employees’ or beneficiaries’ health care services.
The Blunt Amendment could deny me some of my basic freedoms, like the freedom to not be discriminated against on the basis of sex. This protection is not new, it’s included in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
In other words, I would not receive birth control or contraceptive coverage because it was against my employer’s beliefs, but what about my beliefs? Or - more importantly - what about my health?
As a 21 year old college student, birth control is an important decision for me and my peer group in order to keep our bodies healthy. It is not just used for contraception, but also for other important medical uses. Insurance covered birth control is essential in order to make the choices we feel are best for us. It allows us the freedom to control our bodies and therefore the freedom to live our lives.
Call your senator today and tell them what you think in order to protect your health care and the services that you deserve. For more information on contraceptive coverage, visit our hub page.
Articles by Topic
Join the New Reproductive Health Campaign
Go to ThisIsPersonal.org to get the facts and tools you need to help protect women's reproductive health.
Blogroll
How You Can Help
Sign Up for Email Updates
Follow Us on the Web
Comments
Blunt Amendment
I am a Roman Catholic female who has used birth control pills over the years. This amendment affects women; but it is not a "woman's issue." This is about government's potential abuse of power and denying an individual/business owner's religious beliefs/doctrines/freedoms. If I want coverage for birth control I will apply to those employers who provide coverage for birth control. I choose for whom I will work for or not work for. The government needs to back off this one.
unexpected consequences of blunt ammendment
has it not occurred to legislators that allowing an employer to pick the health care their employees can have insurance pay for opens the door to situatios such as: (1) employer is 7th day adventist - so health insurance will not cover needed transfusions. (2) emploer is christian scientist - no insurance to cover medical proceedures. (3) employer has moral objections to medical research on animals - insurance will only cover medical care that has no animal research behind it.. this of course would mean little health care other than historically traditional medicine . (4) etc.
Bluntly
You make good points. Seems that insurance coverage should be neutral on the political/religious support for medical benefits covered. Individuals make their own choices as they do on most issues that have to do with personal beliefs. To say a business is forced to pay for coverages they don't believe in is a bit myopic. At issue is the ability for an individual to choose coverage components within a plan. Just because an institution does not agree with every component of a health benefit, does that mean they can veto the provision and create their own version of medical benefits. Many don't believe in smoking or alcohol consumption. Treatments and medications designed to deal with issues that can arise out of use of cigarettes or alcohol could be subject to the same kind of censorship. Slippery slope.
Post new comment