Jill C. Morrison, Senior Counsel

Jill C. Morrison is Senior Counsel in Health and Reproductive Rights at the National Women’s Law Center. Since joining the Center in 1998 as a Georgetown Women’s Law and Public Policy Fellow, her focus has been on religious restrictions on reproductive health services. Ms. Morrison is a graduate of Rutgers University and Yale Law School, where she was an editor of the Yale Journal of Law and Feminism and president of the Black Law Students' Association. She served as a judicial clerk to the Honorable Sterling Johnson Jr., Eastern District, New York. Ms. Morrison also practiced in Philadelphia as a Bar Foundation Fellow with the Women’s Law Project, and as an associate with Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll. Ms. Morrison currently serves on the board of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, and teaches Reproductive Justice at the University of the District of Columbia Law School.

Expert in: Pharmacy Refusals, Religious Restrictions, Barriers to Reproductive Care, Pregnancy Rights, Health Care & Reproductive Rights
  • Printer-friendly version
  • Send by email

My Take

Women of Childbearing Age: Take Your Talents Elsewhere

Posted by Jill C. Morrison, Senior Counsel | Posted on: February 02, 2012 at 02:30 pm

We are thrilled that the Department of Health and Human Services HHS has upheld its decision to exempt only a narrow class of religious employers from the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive coverage requirement. This means most insurance plans are required to provide coverage for all FDA approved contraceptives with no co-pays, deductibles or cost-sharing. But not everyone is breaking out the sparkling cider. You might have noticed that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church is pretty displeased. It is important to note that these objections come from the hierarchy, and not Catholic women (or men) themselves, as 98% of them have used contraceptives that are deemed forbidden by the Vatican.

In all the hoopla however, you may have missed this priceless quote from the Rev. William Grogan, bioethics chairman of the Chicago Archdiocese, in a trade magazine called Modern Healthcare. Rev. Grogan believes that women should know that their Catholic-affiliated employers (such as hospitals and universities) have an objection to birth control, and should expect these religious institutions to impose their beliefs on their workers. Rev. Grogan said, "If women want those types of medications, they shouldn't seek employment with organizations which are publicly known to be opposed to their use."

In issuing the contraceptive coverage rule, HHS gave clear guidance on exactly when workers can be expected to follow their employers' religious dictates.

Read more...
Tags: Barriers to Reproductive Care, Religious Restrictions, Family Planning, Health Care & Reproductive Rights | Add new comment

One more time…

Posted by Jill C. Morrison, Senior Counsel | Posted on: January 31, 2012 at 05:33 pm

Abortion. [uh-bawr-shuhn]

Contraception. [kon-truh-sep-shuhn]

These are not the same. Yet I’ve repeatedly seen claims that the HHS decision on contraceptive coverage requires religious employers to cover “abortifacients.”

Clearly, those opposed to the preventive services rule know they are on shaky ground when it comes to rallying their troops against contraception. After all, their troops are using the stuff en mass (but hopefully not in Mass). Ninety-eight percent of Catholics have used a form of contraception opposed by the Vatican. The “abortifacients” claim is based on the fact that the preventive services rule requires coverage for emergency contraception. Some still seem to think that EC causes an abortion. It does not. I repeat. It does not. If you don’t believe me, then turn to another source, like the Catholic Health Association.

Read more...
Tags: Abortion, Birth Control/Contraceptives, Department of Health and Human Services, Emergency Contraception/Plan B, Barriers to Reproductive Care, Religious Restrictions, Family Planning, Health Care Reform, Pregnancy Rights, Health Care & Reproductive Rights | 1 comment

Tribal Court Drops Prosecution of a Pregnant Woman Charged with “Failing to Obtain Prenatal Care”

Posted by Jill C. Morrison, Senior Counsel | Posted on: December 20, 2011 at 06:27 pm

I am guess all of us in the Reproductive Justice community could use a bit of good news these days. Leave it to my friends over at the National Advocates for Pregnant Women to deliver. They just reported that they have been working on a case in Washington State. A young Native American woman, Misty Jones, pregnant and addicted to prescription pain killers, had agreed to enter substance abuse treatment. Here at the Center, we support comprehensive, family-based drug treatment as the best policy solution to address the problem of drug addiction among pregnant women.

Read more...
Tags: Pregnancy, Reproductive Justice, Reproductive Rights, Health Care & Reproductive Rights | Add new comment

I’m not married: Does my health insurance cover infertility services?

Posted by Jill C. Morrison, Senior Counsel | Posted on: November 29, 2011 at 10:45 am

This blog post was cross-posted from The Center for Infertility Justice, the official blog of RESOLVE.

Lisa Green’s* insurance benefits book listed “artificial insemination” under covered services.  It did not say “but only for married people.”  Yet when her doctor recommended artificial insemination, the insurer denied her claim because she was not married. 

In its communications to Lisa, the insurer claimed that because the benefits book said “cost of donor sperm” was not covered, a woman using donor sperm (e.g., sperm from anyone other than her spouse) was not entitled to artificial insemination coverage. 

Lisa looked again at her benefits book.  There was “artificial insemination” under covered services.  There was “cost of donor sperm” under services that were not covered.  But Lisa did not have any cost for donor sperm, since she was using her life partner’s sperm.  And it did not seem like a narrow exclusion for the “cost of donor sperm” should affect her coverage for the artificial insemination procedure itself.

Read more...
Tags: Affordable Care Act (ACA), Health Insurance, Reproductive Health, Reproductive Rights, Barriers to Reproductive Care, Health Care & Reproductive Rights | Add new comment

Enough with attacks on contraception already!

Posted by Jill C. Morrison, Senior Counsel | Posted on: November 09, 2011 at 12:59 pm

Last week, there was a hearing in Congress entitled “Do New Health Law Mandates Threaten Conscience Rights and Access to Care?” How about an alternative that really addresses what this is all about: “Are religious employers entitled to impose their “values” on their employees?” This hearing focused on the Affordable Care Act and the requirement that all health plans cover contraceptives. The Department of Health and Human Services issued a rule in August that exempted a narrow class of employees from having to comply with the law. Only employers who hire and serve people of the same religion, and have the purpose of instilling religious values qualify for the exemption.

Read more...
Tags: Birth Control/Contraceptives, Department of Health and Human Services, Personhood, Reproductive Rights, Women's Health Amendment, Barriers to Reproductive Care, Religious Restrictions, Health Care Reform, Health Care & Reproductive Rights | Add new comment