Birth Control/Contraceptives

Because of you, many women will not lose access to no-cost birth control under the health care law.

For months now, we've been updating you on a new "interim" rule that would provide women across the country access to birth control with no co-pays. This morning, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced it was issuing a final rule providing contraceptives without co-pays and refused to expand the religious employer exemption.

Over the summer in its temporary rules, HHS deemed birth control a necessary preventive health service for women, thus requiring coverage without co-pays by the Affordable Care Act. It also would allow a narrow set of religious employers to deny this critical coverage to their employees. But that didn't satisfy opponents of contraception. They wanted the coverage to be dropped, or at least to expand the exception to nearly 1.5 million employees and the women in their families. HHS stood firm, taking a giant step forward in protecting women's health.

Join us in thanking Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius for standing firm and issuing a final rule providing women access to birth control with no co-pays.  Read more »

Last May, we told you about a recently signed law that would improve women’s access to family planning services in Maryland, and now the Family Planning Works Act has gone into effect!

The Family Planning Works Act expands the Medicaid family planning service program and is expected to give 33,000 low- and moderate-income women free access to a range of services, including birth control, STI testing, and cancer screenings. Read more »

We were disappointed by Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ decision to overrule the evidence-based decision reached by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to remove the age restriction on emergency contraception. So it didn’t really come as a surprise when President Obama voiced his support for Sebelius’ decision (watch it here).

But that doesn’t mean it didn’t hurt. Even worse was how Obama defended Sebelius’ decision – speaking as a father about his daughters. Emily Douglas from The Nation and Rebecca Traister from Salon nailed it when they wrote about Obama’s paternalism.

If President Obama and Secretary Sebelius are concerned about 11 and 12 year old girls accessing emergency contraception without fully understanding how to use it, perhaps they should consider investing in comprehensive sex education programs. Not making emergency contraception readily available, unfortunately, doesn’t mean that young girls won’t need it, it just means that when they do, they will face significant hurdles in obtaining it. And unfortunately that means, these girls may face an even bigger challenge – unintended pregnancy. Read more »

The reaction to recent decision by Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius that overruled the evidence-based decision reached by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on removing the age restriction on Plan B One Step, a form of emergency contraception, has largely centered around young women and how their access to emergency contraception will continue to be hindered.

We’ve already written about how we think the science should have been allowed to speak for itself.

But we also want to underscore that young women are just one group of women who are affected by this decision. In reality, all women continue to be affected by the age restriction, as emergency contraception will continue to be kept “behind the counter” at pharmacies, so pharmacists can verify the age of those purchasing it, instead of on the shelves alongside other over the counter medicines (and likely far from the bubblegum). Read more »

Today, despite all evidence showing that Plan B One-Step should be available over-the-counter to all women no matter their age, the Secretary of HHS, Kathleen Sebelius, told the FDA that it could not make Plan B One-Step available without a prescription for women under 17. This isn’t just speculation about what happened behind closed doors – this is straight from the horse’s mouth in the form of a letter from Secretary Sebelius to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, M.D. Determinations of drug safety should be left to scientists, not political appointees. President Obama has said this himself – and ironically the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is currently working to implement a policy to ensure the integrity of scientific work across the government. And so, it appears that these principles don’t apply when the women’s health is at issue.

Secretary Sebelius’ letter says she decided to intervene because there isn’t not enough research showing that girls of the youngest reproductive age, those as young as 11, could understand when the medication is needed and how to use it. But according to an article in The Washington Post earlier this week, Plan B One-Step’s manufacturer provided the FDA two studies as part of its petition to remove the age restriction. One study showed that between 72 and 96% of girls ages 12 to 17 understood the packaging. The second study showed that girls ages 11 to 16 could use the product properly and safely. The research is there. It was reviewed by FDA scientists. The FDA Commissioner herself stated that the scientists found the research conclusive that Plan B One-Step should be available without prescription for women under 17. The final score should be Science-1, Politics-0. Instead it’s the other way around. Read more »

Welcome to December! As usual, we’ve got another end-of-the-week roundup for you. This week: stories on teen pregnancy rates in the U.S. and sex education, pondering whether or not Apple’s Siri is pro-choice or anti-choice, ways to find a mentor, some new videos in the NWLC library, and this week’s HERvotes blog carnival. 

Over the weekend, The Abortioneers published a blog post pointing out that Siri, the “personal assistant” feature in the new Apple iPhone 4s, doesn’t seem to be able to find information about abortion and abortion clinics. Siri even seems to have difficulty helping people find information about birth control and contraceptive services. What’s even more troubling to pro-choice advocates is that in some cases, Siri actually directs the iPhone user to anti-choice crisis pregnancy centers.

Many have noted that Siri was programmed with a sense of humor. That she’s meant to be a bit sassy. But now some are also asking, is Siri anti-choice? Read more »

August brought with it a victory for women’s health. It was announced that all new health insurance plans would be required to coverage preventive services such as contraceptive coverage. However, in not so great news, the mandate included language that would allow religious employers to deny such coverage on the basis of religious or moral beliefs; also known as a “refusal clause.” Today, many religious institutions are pushing to expand the language, creating the opportunity to deny more woman necessary preventive services.

Needless to say I’m having a difficult time grasping what this so-called, “conscience clause” actually means. Call me silly, but it actually seems immoral to deprive a woman of contraception if those pills are necessary for her to maintain her health. It seems quite immoral to make a woman choose between receiving adequate health care coverage and her job. Do we honestly think it’s fair to deny contraceptive coverage to a teacher at a Catholic school or university even though she may not be Catholic herself? Read more »

In 2008 when then Senator Barack Obama was still campaigning for the presidency and there were notions that the Bush administration would offer a parting shot to women’s groups and the reproductive health community, Obama’s take on the proposed regulation to expand religious restrictions was clear –

“We need to restore integrity to our public health programs, not create backdoor efforts to weaken them. I am committed to ensuring that the health and reproductive rights of women are protected.”

But now, here we are three years later, and under President Obama, we are still having a very similar fight. Read more »

As you may have heard, the Catholic Bishops are urging the Obama administration to expand the religious refusal clause concerning contraceptives. This could allow religiously affiliated institutions that are not churches – such as hospitals, universities, Catholic Charities, and others – to refuse to cover birth control without co-pays for their students and employees. That’s even though birth control constitutes “preventive care” under the Affordable Care Act, which is mandatorily covered at no cost by insurance plans. And as we’ve been telling you, denying contraceptive coverage is harmful to women.

In response, today the HERvotes coalition is banding together for another blog carnival to fight the Catholic bishops’ push to expand the religious exemption for employer birth control coverage. After the jump, we have links to some of the posts in today’s blog carnival to get you started reading. While you’re at it, please make sure to take a moment to tell President Obama that all women need affordable birth control. For more information about contraceptive coverage and for more resources and blogs from the NWLC, please visit our contraceptive coverage overview page.

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 »