A Government Threat to Birth Control
Sen. Hillary Clinton and other advocates of women's rights say a planned regulation could cut access to contraception
A new set of health laws that could be proposed by the government sometime in the next few weeks has women's health activists steaming. If the laws are implemented, they claim, women will have a harder time getting access to contraception.
The legislation, a draft of which was leaked last week to the New York Times, stokes the debate over when human life begins by taking the position that birth control that prevents the implantation of a fertilized egg actually results in abortion. It would prohibit federally funded medical facilities—including teaching hospitals and Planned Parenthood clinics—from refusing to hire doctors who don't want to dispense birth control pills and other types of contraception that may cause the expulsion of a fertilized egg. (It's already illegal to discriminate against doctors who refuse to perform abortions.) The new laws would also override state laws that require hospitals to offer emergency contraception to rape victims and those that require employers to provide contraceptives along with other prescriptions.
Late last week, Sen. Hillary Clinton called the planned rules (which could be imposed without congressional approval) "damaging" and a "dire threat to women" and warned that contraceptive coverage would "disappear overnight" if enacted. Dozens of organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and Planned Parenthood, have also voiced their objection, especially to the government's definition of the onset of pregnancy. According to ACOG, "conception is the implantation of the fertilized ovum," based on the ability to clinically detect pregnancy through elevated hormone levels. Hormonal contraceptives—especially those that contain only progesterone like the minipill and the Mirena intrauterine device—don't always suppress ovulation, so sometimes a fertilized egg is expelled before it's implanted in the uterus. Refusing to comment specifically on the draft proposal, the Department of Health and Human Services yesterday issued a statement saying it is "exploring a number of options" to enforce the antidiscrimination laws put in place by Congress.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page >
Reader Comments
go away
I wish these ultra pro-lifers would just go away. Unfortunately they will never die out since they don't "believe" in birth control. They probably reproduce like rabbits or a virus and will continue to harass and intimidate sensible, logical people minding their own business. Get lost!! Shoo, crazies!
Hello!!!
Are the percentages of teenage and umplanned pregnancies not high enough for you? It's a womans right to choose. There was a seperation of church and state for this very reason, no matter how they spin it. Not to mention rape victims. Choosing not to give the morning after pill to a woman that has been violated is ridiculous. And, this won't prohibit these facilites from not hiring or firing people. They will find alternate reasons to do it. I hope they have thought of the snow ball effect this will have on a lot of things.
I am on birth control to control a disease. without it I would be more likely to become a diabetic, have high blood pressure, heart disease, and a million other things that would make my health fail. what do you think would be more expensive, birth control or all the other meds and surgeries I would end up having? for that matter, its more expensive to have a baby than to take a pill to prevent it everyday. the percents of children given up for adoption would soar if this law is passed.
advertisement
