A Wall Street Journal article from today reports that a draft regulation being circulated at the Department of Health and Human Services includes language that treats most birth-control pills and intrauterine devices as abortion because they can work by preventing fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus. The regulation considers that destroying "the life of a human being." um WTF.
Thankfully, many medical groups disagree...Also thankfully, abortion is legal, so birth control methods that currently exist would also remain legal.
However, supporters of the draft regulation hope that it might mean insurance companies will drop coverage of birth control prescriptions. The regulations stated purpose, according to the WSJ, is to improve enforcement of existing laws that protect some medical professionals' rights to refuse to participate or assist in abortion (with abortion including birth control). Here's a quote:
"Among the laws considered coercive: Requirements that emergency rooms offer rape victims the morning-after pill, insurance plans cover contraception as part of prescription-drug benefits, and pharmacists fill prescriptions for birth control. The draft regulation would weaken these laws by expanding the right of conscientious objection...if the regulation is enacted, insurers, hospitals, HMOs and other institutions could claim that a law requiring them to dispense contraception or subsidize an IUD discriminated against their religious convictions. State and local governments would have to certify in writing that they don't practice such discrimination. Those who didn't comply could lose federal funding or be sued for damages."
This is not good. As various people in the community blog have demonstrated, it can already be difficult for women to access birth control products and this draft regulation would make it so much harder.
Thankfully a lot of people are up in arms, including Senator Obama. Let's hope the draft regulations make it no where and we can have one less obstacle in our way towards controlling our reproductive rights!
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Birth Control = Abortion...?!.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/8314
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
I didn't know Obama had released a statement about this proposed regulation yet, can you link it, please?
tofu -
I actually haven't see a statement from him either. The WSJ article says, "Dozens of Congressional Democrats -- including presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama -- have signed letters of protest blistering the proposal. His Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, declined to comment."
So that's my source.
I love how they say:
As you stated, it's already hard enough for us to get our contraceptives, now they're trying to make it even harder.
It shouldn't matter if only a "few women" are harmed by this. Injustice to a few is injustice to us all, to lift a sentiment from Jefferson.
*headdesk*
"Among the laws considered coercive: Requirements that emergency rooms offer rape victims the morning-after pill, insurance plans cover contraception as part of prescription-drug benefits, and pharmacists fill prescriptions for birth control."
OK so let me see if I'm following this.
Offering someone a pill, which they can then turn down...requiring prescription drug plans to actually cover prescription drugs...and requiring pharmacists to fill a prescription, which, I thought, was part of their JOBS....
....all of this is COERCIVE? You mean actually requiring people to DO THEIR JOBS is COERCIVE?!?
WHY can't people realize that birth control is just another drug, used by women to control their own hormonal cycles. WHY?!?
Are they suggesting all this regulatory mumbo-jumbo for an pill that helps men's dicks stay hard--a drug that can potentially cause heart attacks, is completely ELECTIVE and really has no medical merit aside from "sexual function." THAT'S perfectly OK, but I have to negotiate a mine field JUST TO GET MY PILLS?
...deep breaths...
OK No more internet for me. It's making me too angry.
At what level are we allowed to conscientiously object?
If I were to have religious or spiritual beliefs that said that ANY medication is bad, would I still be allowed to be a doctor or a pharmacist? Could I refuse to fill any prescriptions because I thought it was bad an unnatural to take pills?
Could I refuse to dispense viagra to older men because I conscientiously object to the unnatural interference of drugs in the natural process of their body's aging?
Would that be allowed? Not.A.Chance.In.Hell.
So why the exceptions and double standards on this issue? That was rhetorical, and I think we all already know the answer...