contraceptive coverage

Contraception: Expand Access, Not Exemptions

Author image

by Jessica Arons, Center for American Progress and Center for American Progress Action Fund

November 23, 2011 - 7:29pm (Print)

A broad religious exemption for contraceptive coverage would go too far, depriving millions of women of an important health benefit. Instead of expanding exemptions, we should be expanding access to affordable care.

Follow Jessica Arons on Twitter, @jrarons

. . . . . . . . . .

Will Obama's Thanksgiving Gift to Female Voters Be a Tax on Women's Healthcare?

Author image

by Jodi Jacobson, Editor in Chief, RH Reality Check

November 23, 2011 - 9:34am (Print)

Women's groups working to save coverage of women's health care under health reform are concerned that President Obama will cave as early as this weekend to demands by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (all 271 men) to eliminate coverage of birth control without a co-pay. The reason? The President thinks he "owes" the Bishops for help with passage of health reform.

Follow Jodi Jacobson on Twitter, @jljacobson

. . . . . . . . . .

Obama and the Bishops: Is the White House Caving on Birth Control Coverage?

Author image

by Jodi Jacobson, Editor in Chief, RH Reality Check

November 16, 2011 - 2:32pm (Print)

The Bishops are lobbying hard for the Obama Administration to effectively excuse any and all "religious" entities from covering contraceptives without a co-pay. Last week Archbishop Dolan paid a private visit to President Obama and word on the street is that the White House may cave. This would be a grave mistake.

Follow Jodi Jacobson on Twitter, @jljacobson

. . . . . . . . . .

What Dr. Hathaway Told Mr. Pitts: Contraception is Necessary Preventive Care

Author image

by Dr. Mark Hathaway, Washington Hospital Center (WHC), OB/GYN

November 3, 2011 - 1:19pm (Print)

There are those who assert that unintended pregnancy is not a health condition and therefore prevention of unintended pregnancy is not preventive health care. From my personal practice I can say that I cannot disagree more.

. . . . . . . . . .

Do New Health Law Mandates Threaten Conscience Rights and Access to Care?

Author image

by Jon O'Brien, Catholics for Choice

November 2, 2011 - 12:14pm (Print)

I firmly believe the requirements under the Affordable Care Act, and the slate of regulations being created to implement it, infringe on no one’s conscience, demand no one change her or his religious beliefs, discriminate against no man or woman, put no additional economic burden on the poor, interfere with no one’s medical decisions, compromise no one’s health -- that is, if you consider the law without refusal clauses.

. . . . . . . . . .

Religious Exemptions and Contraceptive Coverage: How Far Can Denial Go and Still Be Constitutional?

Author image

by Annamarya Scaccia

September 30, 2011 - 9:20am (Print)

The Department of Health and Human Services has included contraceptive coverage as essential preventive care under the Affordable Care Act, while exempting organizations with an explicit religious mission from having to comply. For some, this exemption does not go far enough. But how far can religious right organizations go in denying their employees access to essential preventive care?

Follow Annamarya Scaccia on Twitter, @sitswithpasta

. . . . . . . . . .

Join the National Women's Law center for a blog carnival on Birth Control on July 21!

Author image

reader diary by sdrahan, National Women's Law Center

July 7, 2011 - 3:58pm (Print)

On July 21, 2011, we’ll be hosting the “Birth Control: We’ve Got You Covered” blog carnival, featuring bloggers from across the net.  Women need access to birth control to prevent unintended pregnancies, plan the timing and size of their families and protect their health. Women know the preventive health benefits of birth control, but we also know the cost to stay on it throughout our childbearing years. Birth control can be expensive, and the high cost of birth control can affect whether women use it consistently.

. . . . . . . . . .
Syndicate content