|
| Traduire à français Tradurre all'italiano Traduzca al español Traduza a português Übersetzen Sie zu Deutsch Oversett til Norsk |
Mandated Contraceptive Coverage:
A Public Policy Nightmare
| By Wisconsin State Representative Sheryl K. Albers Every biennium, legislators introduce new mandates on our health insurance carriers, demanding that insurers pay for personal conveniences outside the boundaries of medically-necessary treatment. The contraceptive coverage mandate stands as one of the most dramatic of these proposals. It forces people of faith to fund chemically-induced abortions, puts matters of personal convenience and choice on the same level of as medically-necessary treatment, requires coverage of drugs which can endanger the safety of women, and increases insurance costs for employers and individuals. During the 1999 legislative session, a few proponents of forced-coverage introduced Assembly Bill 362, a bill that mandated coverage of five types of contraceptives. In materials submitted during debate in support of the mandate, proponents admitted that they "prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg." In other words, they cause chemically-induced abortions. Mandated coverage of surgically-induced abortions could well be next. Medically speaking, when a mother's egg and a father's sperm join, a new human being is created. Utilizing a chemical drug to block the tiny baby's ability to attach itself to the mother's uterine wall kills the child. It can come in forms such as "the Pill," "Norplant," "the Morning-after Pill" and "Depo-Provera" - each can end the life of a newly-formed human being. People of many varied faith groups support the right of a child not to be killed via an induced abortion. To this end, I joined many other legislators to adamantly oppose forced coverage of these abortion-causing drugs. While abortion continues to serve as a controversial topic in American culture and politics, statistics demonstrate that an overwhelming number of people do not support abortion on demand. In 1999, for instance, a survey of Wisconsin residents showed that 66% opposed abortion on demand for any reason other than rape, incest or the life of the mother. While 19% believed that abortion should be legal within the first three months of a pregnancy, an equivalent 19% said that abortion should never be allowed under any circumstance. Thus, government-mandated coverage of abortion-causing drugs does not comport with the attitudes of at least two-thirds of the people in Wisconsin. Forcing everyone to pay for contraceptives violates individually-held religious beliefs of many Americans. It also directly affects insurance companies sponsored by religious organizations. As an example, Catholic insurance companies would have to violate the closely-held tenets of their religious beliefs under such a mandate, or, in the likely alternative, stop offering medical coverage completely. We could also expect future legislation requiring hospitals and pharmacies to provide contraceptives as part of their medical care. Those linked to a church may choose to close their doors in order to avoid providing a state-mandated benefit. Elimination of medical coverage, and eventually medical care, by faith-based or religiously-oriented organizations could lead to a public health crisis, in addition to the taxpayer-funded litigation that would follow. Aside from the moral and religious objections to forced coverage of abortion-causing drugs, there's also the practical argument against such a policy. Birth control for personal convenience is not medically necessary. We do not mandate coverage for massages, health spas, exercise programs, aspirin for minor headaches, or acupuncture - even though each makes our lives more comfortable and provides health benefits. As a society, we recognize these items as personal conveniences that each individual chooses to take advantage of or forego. When individuals choose personal conveniences, they also bear the financial responsibility of having made a conscious choice to buy these optional goods. Unlike personal convenience items, birth
control is not safe for every woman. After suffering injuries, 300 Wisconsin women
received a court settlement from the manufacturer of "Norplant." Medical
studies also show that women who utilize prescriptive contraceptives are at an
increased risk for acquiring chlamydial infection. In addition, a Los Angeles-based
study associated use of "the pill" among young women with an increased risk of
breast cancer. In the end, mandatory birth control coverage equals bad public policy. |
| Back | Next |