Birth Control/Contraceptives

I’m very excited for a tweetchat that’s happening this afternoon at 3pm ET with Sandra Fluke, National Women's Law Center, and Law Students for Reproductive Justice! Follow the conversation at #CCEduChat.

This chat comes from the realization that a lot of students and employees of universities had questions about their contraceptive coverage under the health care law. There’s a section of the law that requires all new and non-grandfathered private insurance plans to cover a wide range of preventive services, including services such as mammograms, pap smears, smoking prevention and contraceptives without co-payments or other cost sharing requirements. The Administration even proposed an accommodation that would enable religiously-affiliated organizations beyond churches – such as universities and hospitals - to avoid directly providing contraceptive coverage if it was against their religion, but would ensure that all women are guaranteed coverage of this critical service without cost sharing. Read more »

Months later, I am still very concerned about the decision by the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) to overrule a judgment by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to expand over-the-counter availability of the morning-after contraception Plan B One Step. Anyone who is concerned about unintended pregnancy must support increased access to a range of contraceptive methods, including emergency contraception (EC).

The impact of unintended pregnancy among young women is staggering. Teen pregnancy, which is at unacceptably high levels in the United States and is higher than most other developed nations, has far-reaching consequences well into adulthood. Only about 50% of teen mothers receive a high school diploma by 22 years of old, versus about 90% of women who had not given birth during adolescence. And, dropping out of high school alters a young woman’s life for decades, and perhaps even generations. Why then would we not do everything we can—use every tool at our disposal—to increase access to emergency contraception? The stakes are too high, reducing unintended pregnancy is too important. Read more »

Shippensburg University recently made a controversial decision to sell emergency contraception or Plan B from vending machines in their student health center.  As a junior at American University, this decision does not seem controversial to me at all but instead a smart step in helping women make healthy decisions about their bodies.  Personally, I think that every college campus would benefit from selling Plan B.

Perhaps some of this controversy has risen because people do not understand the purpose of Plan B. Emergency contraception has been equated with the abortion pill, however; they are very different.  Forms of emergency contraception are safe and effective forms of birth control used after intercourse.  It does not work if the woman is already pregnant.  EC prevents pregnancy by delaying ovulation, and the fertilization of the egg. Therefore when a woman takes Plan B she is not aborting a fertilized egg, but instead preventing fertilization.  Read more »

Access to contraception without cost sharing is one of the many important gains for women in the Affordable Care Act. And it has become much more well-known in the last couple of months because of the kerfuffle on Capitol Hill and on talk radio. But here’s one of the in-the-weeds, wonky things about this provision of the law that has people in the reproductive rights community like me excited: the provision applies to emergency contraception. Read more »

Good news from Arizona! Legislators there listened to women that their health is not up for debate! Politicians were attempting to make it more difficult for Arizona women to access insurance coverage of birth control by stripping away current protections in the state contraceptive equity law. They wanted to allow any employer with a religious objection – even the CEO of a for-profit corporation – to refuse to provide contraceptive coverage to employees. They also wanted to make it easier for those employers to fire a woman if they found out she obtained birth control on her own. Most egregious to the press and public, the bill would have forced women who work for those employers and need contraception for medical reasons to prove it. Read more »

Although the Blunt Amendment failed, the attacks on women’s access to contraception are far from over. Yesterday in New Hampshire, GOP state representatives voted to take away the contraceptive coverage protections that women and families in New Hampshire have relied on for years.

Since 2000, New Hampshire has had a contraceptive equity law. This law ensures that all insurance plans cover FDA approved contraceptives to the same extent as other prescriptions. The law also ensures that consultations, examinations, and medical services related to contraception provided on an outpatient basis are covered to the same extent as other outpatient services. New Hampshire’s contraceptive equity law was passed with bipartisan support by a Republican legislature and a Democratic governor. It was enacted without a religious employer exemption—a measure that even religious leaders did not protest at the time. And, in the past twelve years, there has been no attempt to challenge or amend the law…until now.

Yesterday, the New Hampshire House said “yes” to a measure that will greatly undermine women’s access to preventative care by adding a religious employer exemption to the state’s contraceptive equity law. And to add insult to injury, the proposed exemption is extremely broad and undefined. It would allow any employer to remove a woman’s existing contraceptive coverage if the employer has a religious objection to contraception. Read more »

Most of us have heard what happened last Friday; Rush Limbaugh attacked Georgetown Law Student Sandra Fluke calling her names that aren’t fit to be printed. Many people responded; some were rightfully outraged while others brushed off his statement. Not surprisingly, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who just two weeks ago refused to let Ms. Fluke testify during the committee’s all-male expert contraceptive coverage hearing, did not come to Ms. Fluke’s defense. Instead in a letter to the committee Issa countered with, “I am struck by your clear failure to recognize your own contributions to the denigration of this discussion and attacks on people of religious faith.” Is it just me or did he just insinuate Rush’s comments were okay because both sides are engaging in the argument? This eye for an eye mentality has to stop for many reasons. One of the most important being it is immature, childish, and ultimately sets a bad example for our nation’s youth on how to deal with important and legitimate disagreements on policy issues.

Take Beantown Mom’s recent blog post about her sixteen year old daughter being bullied because of needing to take contraceptives for a serious medical condition. These teenagers used Rush Limbaugh’s words to hurt this young woman. No matter how much Rush apologizes, sincere or not, damage has already been done. Read more »

Last week we told you about the House Committee on Oversight hearing that spent three hours addressing why employers should not have to cover birth control – without a single woman on the first panel of witnesses. Representative Darrell Issa, Chairman of the Committee, barred Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke from the panel.

Chairman Issa questioned Fluke’s experience and he said that, as a student, she wasn’t qualified to testify. Thursday, Sandra responded to that assertion. “I’m an American woman who uses contraceptives,” she said. That’s what makes her qualified.

Well, this week she received the respect she deserved and ears to listen. Sandra made it on to a number of news shows, and on Thursday – a week after being rejected from the initial hearing – she finally got her chance to speak on Capitol Hill. Fluke then explained that since Georgetown University doesn’t cover contraceptives, a friend of hers eventually had to have one of her ovaries surgically removed. Oral contraceptives would have prevented the growth of a cyst the size of a tennis ball, but her friend could not afford the out-of-pocket costs. Read more »

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. Read more »

You’ve probably seen the photo by now of the witness panel at yesterday morning’s House hearing entitled “Lines Crossed: Separation of Church & State. Has the Obama Administration Trampled on Freedom of Religion?” What you may not be able to tell immediately by looking at this photo is that there is no witness to represent the House minority viewpoint. What is immediately obvious is that there were no female witnesses on that panel. But, I was there to witness it and I am here to testify.

From the title and from Chairman Issa’s opening statement, you would have thought that this was a hearing on freedom of religion. But from the start, it wasn’t. The Chairman rejected the minority’s witness, Sandra Fluke, a third-year law student at Georgetown University who was going to testify about experiences of students who don’t have contraceptive coverage. Rep. Issa said that he wanted only the most “qualified” clergy and lay people to discuss the issue of religious freedom. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton and Rep. Carolyn Maloney walked out on the hearing, furious that Chairman Issa wouldn’t allow them to have a witness.

Then, it was time for that all-male panel you’ve seen in the picture to give their opening statements. What did they say? Bishop Lori compared requiring preventive health services, including birth control, to requiring Kosher delis to serve ham sandwiches. Read more »