President Barack Obama announced late last week that he found a solution to a new requirement for birth control to be provided to women that will protect also religious liberty.
Late last month, Obama announced all employers would be required to provide free birth control coverage ”“ even if it runs counter to their religious beliefs ”“ as part of the Affordable Care Act. The provision is set to go into effect in August.
He amended the decision last week to require health insurance companies to provide free contraception directly to workers if the company has a religious objection.
We’re pleased this part of the Affordable Care Act will be implemented and offered to women who would like to take advantage of it.
Birth control is an important tool for family planning and for young people who are sexually active, but not yet ready to have children. The use and knowledge of birth control also encourages the practice of safe sex, which helps reduce unintended pregnancies and transmission of sexually transmitted diseases.
Oftentimes, those who cannot afford prescription medications go without birth control and end up having children for whom they do not have the capacity to care.
Under this law, women have guaranteed access to birth control without co-pays or premiums no matter where they work ”“ a provision of the act that Obama insisted must remain. Religious universities and hospitals that see contraception as a violation of their faith can refuse to cover it, and insurance companies will then have to step in to do so. This is an important provision, since not all employees of religious institutions, which are often major employers in the area, share the same belief system as the institution.
A compromise was the right thing to do in this instance, but it is unfortunate that many jumped on the issue as an attack on religious freedom and created a firestorm around what should have only been a women’s preventative health issue.
It is telling that 28 states already require health insurance plans to cover birth control, and goes to show the issue was blown out of proportion by people who thought it would hurt the president’s re-election bid to try to make him look like the bad guy.
It seems, though, that common sense has prevailed, as the president’s compromise garnered support from Planned Parenthood and the Catholic Health Association.
The core part of Obama’s law has remained intact, thankfully, and now women will have access through their insurance plans to preventative services ”“ without a co-pay ”“ including well-women visits, domestic violence screening and contraception, starting on Aug. 1.
These services, often skipped due to the cost, can help prevent STDs and lead to early detection of cancers and other health problems that can only be found through gynecological exams and screenings like pap tests.
Now that the battle over religion has been won, we hope insurance companies will get on board.
Contraception is cost effective ”“ by preventing pregnancy and allowing families to plan how many children they have and when. According to studies from the Trust for America’s Health, the return on investment in preventative care programs is $5.60 for each $1 spent and insurers may argue, in the long run, the cost to offer preventative care to women will save them millions in the years to come.
Ӣ Ӣ Ӣ
Today’s editorial was written by City Editor Robyn Burnham on behalf of the Journal Tribune Editorial Board. Questions? Comments? Contact Managing Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski by calling 282-1535, Ext. 322, or via email at kristenm@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less