More

Birth Control Coverage Sparks Fight Between Pro-Choice Groups And Catholics At Hearing

Birth Control

First Posted: 11/ 2/2011 7:25 pm Updated: 01/ 2/2012 5:12 am

The battle between Catholics and pro-choice groups over birth control coverage raged on Wednesday at an Energy and Commerce Subcommittee hearing on conscience protections, which allow some organizations to abstain from providing coverage on religious grounds.

The Department of Health and Human Services is currently considering regulations that would mandate that all private health care plans cover contraception, including birth control pills and intrauterine devices, at no cost for women. Certain religious organizations would be exempt from having to include contraception in their health care plans if family planning services conflict with their teachings and beliefs.

Unsatisfied with the scope of the religious exemption, the Catholic bishops and other Catholic and Christian health organizations have been aggressively lobbying HHS to either drop contraception from coverage guidelines entirely or to broaden the list of organizations that are exempt from having to provide it. These groups hope to add schools, hospitals and charities to the list.

"One consequence of maintaining this narrow exemption would be that Catholic schools that teach abortion is morally wrong could have to pay for abortifacient drugs for their employees," said Jane G. Belford, chancellor of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, referring to the morning-after pill. "And Catholic health clinics that refuse to provide contraception or sterilization for patients could have to subsidize contraception and sterilization for their employees."

Under the guidelines HHS is considering, a Catholic organization would only be exempt from having to offer its employees birth control coverage if it primarily employs and serves Catholics and has the "inculcation of religious values" as its primary purpose, according to the agency.

"Jesus himself would not be exempt, because he treated Samaritans and Roman soldiers," said Richard Doerflinger, Associate Director of Pro-Life Activities at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, in an interview with HuffPost.

Yet supporters of women's right to contraceptive services argue that expanding the religious exemption would unfairly deny birth control coverage to millions of women based on the moral compass of their employers, and that the only "consciences" that need to be respected and protected are those of the individual.

"It is incredible to suggest that a hospital or an insurance plan has a conscience," said Jon O'Brien, president of Catholics for Choice. "Allowing religious institutions to dictate the medical care available to their employees or religiously-affiliated organizations to dictate what services their beneficiaries are allowed to access would encroach on the individual consciences of those seeking care and assistance.

"When codified into law, these 'protections' actually constitute state-sponsored discrimination against women based on where they are employed, where and how they buy health insurance and where they seek to receive care."

Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.), a member of the Health Subcommittee that held Wednesday's hearing, criticized leadership for calling it, saying it was a thinly veiled attempt by Republicans to roll back women's access to contraception.

"That's their slim basis for having the hearing, that they say it violates provider conscience rights," Capps said in an interview. "The real purpose of the hearing is to prevent women from getting access to preventative health care. It isn't a rational hearing, but it's not the first hearing we've had that's not rational."

The House is currently considering legislation that would impose a broad religious exemption on top of whatever HHS decides, essentially nullifying the health department's recommendation. The Respect for Rights of Conscience Act, introduced by Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.), would allow health plans to "decline coverage of specific items and services that are contrary to the religious beliefs of the sponsor, issuer, or other entity offering the plan."

Capps predicted that the bill will pass the Republican-controlled House and then fail in the Senate, as most anti-choice legislation has this year.

"It won't pass out of the Senate," she said. "It's a waste of time, and it's one more attack on women's health and on sound science. Providing for contraceptive services is a way to prevent abortion and give women the opportunity to plan and to be educated about something that is important and sacred in their lives."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
The battle between Catholics and pro-choice groups over birth control coverage raged on Wednesday at an Energy and Commerce Subcommittee hearing on conscience protections, which allow some organizatio...
The battle between Catholics and pro-choice groups over birth control coverage raged on Wednesday at an Energy and Commerce Subcommittee hearing on conscience protections, which allow some organizatio...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,005
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (20 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rockysparks
there's no law against being annoying.
05:42 AM on 11/25/2011
My paternal grandmother died, at age 31, from complications that resulted from an illegal abortion. No matter how I feel about abortion, women will seek them and put themselves at risk no matter what the legislation. While I wish women would choose to have their babies when it is not a risk to themselves or the child's, I also support women's rights to make decisions concerning their own health and well-being. My father and his five siblings lost their mother when they were all children --- if there had been safer alternatives to abortion, family planning and quality of life in Appalachian Ohioi back in 1925, my grandmother might have lived and her 20 grandchildren, including myself, would have known her.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giftsthatpurr
zestful life
12:36 PM on 11/07/2011
In reading comments from others, I can see the solidarity of women who are willing to stand up for what they believe - that women deserve the freedom to make their own choices about their own persons - their own bodies. We are also indignant about lobbying done by any tax free entity - in this case Catholic Bishops.
What I wonder is how these clinics, hospitals, and other health care facilities would deal with needed hysterectomies (when a woman's life/ health is at stake such as uterine or cervical or ovarian cancer) or when becoming pregnant would critically risk a woman's life (such as with brittle diabetes) or ectopic pregnancies which require removal of the fertilized egg from the fallopian tubes (or a woman will die). . . etc. These questions seem to indicate that perhaps women would be expected to become very ill and die if said procedures could not be performed, but maybe there are exceptions?
photo
Razpooten
Nil homini certum est
12:06 PM on 11/07/2011
If contraceptives are not included in health care plans; as the Catholics want, then people would have to pay for them out of their own pocket, or maybe even go into a black market.
photo
Razpooten
Nil homini certum est
12:04 PM on 11/07/2011
The Catholic church should do what Rick Perry recommmedns: Vaccinate them with Gardasil and give them a sermon. ("because abstinence works")
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rose Morris
07:18 PM on 11/03/2011
Whatever happend to the Hypocratic oath? "First, do no harm."
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
AxelDC
06:58 PM on 11/03/2011
Keep 'em barefoot and pregnant. We need to get to 8 billion ASAP!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZeraLee
A Citizen's View from Main Street
06:52 PM on 11/03/2011
The Catholic Church wants radical social re-engineering according to their own church Doctrine.

When do they start up the Heresy Courts?
08:33 PM on 11/03/2011
The Pill is a Group one Carcinogen agent declared July 29 2005 By world health Organization just Like Cigarettes and asbestos Cause s Cancer did you hear anything against By Susan Kormen??
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lady1genius
Little Sister Shotgun
09:24 PM on 11/03/2011
Enough of your nonsense. Link please.
07:48 PM on 11/05/2011
Yep, proof please.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
NikitaAhn
Peace is its own reward.
04:12 PM on 11/03/2011
Ok, Bishops, I'll make you a deal - keep your church out of my reproduction and I won't reproduce in your church. Deal?
photo
Razpooten
Nil homini certum est
12:08 PM on 11/07/2011
Mary conceived without sin; people want to sin without conception.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
NikitaAhn
Peace is its own reward.
03:58 PM on 11/03/2011
What is wrong with these people? How can ANYONE who is against abortion believe that denying women access to birth control is a good idea? Do they not understand that without contraceptives, abortion rates will climb? Have they not learned that the "just don't have sex" approach never works (be it teens in "abstinence only" sex ed, or their own priests who end up molesting kids)?

Not to mention the fact that religious groups are shoving their dogma down women's throats and dictating what they are and aren't allowed to access in regard to medical care, which is absurd. I don't see them complaining about having to pay for Viagra or vasectomies. This is discrimination pure and simple, yet another case of the church forcing their way in between women and their doctors, trying to dictate what we do with our own bodies. They have no right, essentially holding women's sex lives and reproduction hostage like this, putting women in the position of having to choose between risking pregnancies they could easily avoid or giving up their sex lives all together.

When is this archaic and corrupt organization going to GO AWAY and stop attacking our rights?
08:38 PM on 11/03/2011
The #1 pollutant in US streams is EStrogen> hello EPA.... The Pill a Cancer Cwhy do we have to take ausing agent? Gov;t in Obamacare wants to give for Free... why? would you give asbestos Or Cigarettes for Free? IVF is #1 Cause of Ovarian cancer go study the facts..why do we have to Pickup the Broken women From Abortion depression Suicide Breast Cancer.... see www.rachelsvineyrad.org
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lady1genius
Little Sister Shotgun
09:25 PM on 11/03/2011
You don't know how to post a link... do you?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
NikitaAhn
Peace is its own reward.
10:03 PM on 11/03/2011
From what I could understand of that garbled and rambling comment, you think that birth control is some evil form of government control? PLEASE. Oral contraceptives actually decrease the risk of ovarian cancer in most women. And IUDs are non-chemical. The estrogen in our water comes from AGRICULTURE (cattle farms mostly, where they treat animals with massive amounts of drugs). The fact that you can't even string together a coherent sentence doesn't really lend your argument (such as it is) any credibility. Rather than repeating the anti-choice junk science talking points (which have NO basis in reality), try educating yourself with real facts. The Guttmacher Institute reports that there isn't a SINGLE credible study that supports ANY increased health risk or psychological risk in women who have abortions.
photo
Razpooten
Nil homini certum est
12:09 PM on 11/07/2011
They (Catholics) have their head buried in archiac sands.
03:26 PM on 11/03/2011
I wish articles like this would quit representing the views of the Catholic church hierarchy as the views of "catholics". Most catholics according to recent polling, fully support birth control. The chiurch authorities are a couple of hundred years behind their own folllowers. They act as if providing insurance coverae for contraceptives would make someone use them. What nonsense! If you don't want to use contraceptives, then don't get them. But please quit standing on the necks of of other women who may need contraception. Catholic bishops -- your misogyny is showing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lady1genius
Little Sister Shotgun
09:26 PM on 11/03/2011
You need to tell that to your congress critters. Let them know the bishops do NOT speak for YOU.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:39 PM on 11/03/2011
To the catholic bishops, 'pro-choice' means that they choose what their parishoners are allowed to do.
01:19 PM on 11/03/2011
I want these Catholic Bishops & Republicans OUT of my hoo-hoo! They didn't even buy me dinner. :(
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lady1genius
Little Sister Shotgun
01:42 PM on 11/03/2011
LOL. Fanned and faved.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
NikitaAhn
Peace is its own reward.
04:01 PM on 11/03/2011
No foreplay, either - they just marched right in and staked their claim.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lady1genius
Little Sister Shotgun
12:50 PM on 11/03/2011
I wish someone would explain to me why people who have been pretty much wrong about everything in history(Catholic Bishops), have any place at the table when women's health is being discussed.
08:40 PM on 11/03/2011
That is a very Ignorant statement..their would be No Western Civilization without Catholic Church starting with 2011 AD
photo
Razpooten
Nil homini certum est
12:14 PM on 11/07/2011
You got it bassakwards, the Muslimis (Moors) brought Europe out of he dark ages.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giftsthatpurr
zestful life
12:24 PM on 11/07/2011
While I do believe that civilization (as we know it) had a huge contribution from Catholicism, my understanding of history also speaks to some pretty nauseating circumstances perpetuated by the Cath. Church (and terror that other religions also were involved in.) There was a great deal of superstition involved in the darkest of times, and there probably still is. At this time in our history, however, we are more concerned with allowing women to fully participate in our life on the planet, and birth control and abortion seems to help women to find it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mszimmie
12:24 PM on 11/03/2011
In the 1970 case, Walz vs. Tax Commission of the City of New York, the high court decided that it was easier to maintain a separation between church and state via non-taxation, versus taxing the churches thereby drawing a very fine line between the distance of the two. That's all well and good- if we cease to all various religious groups to LOBBY OUR GOVERNMENT. As it stands, the religious organizations are enjoying the benefits of both sides. They wish to maintain the separation of church and state, therefore falling under tax-exempt status, while at the same time they are able to hold sway within our government via lobbyists. I cry foul!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lady1genius
Little Sister Shotgun
12:37 PM on 11/03/2011
I agree. Leave it to the papists to maintain tax-free status with one hand, while with the other, they operate as businesses which recieve a great deal of government funding and spend their endless wealth trying to impose their religious dogma on everyone... by means of these same businesses.
Personally, I think the favored tax status should be sufficient to ensure they keep their noses out of secular government, but apparently not. What's clear is they can't be allowed to continue playing both sides against the middle. They can either be religious entities, or political entities. Not both.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mszimmie
12:44 PM on 11/03/2011
You said it sister. Fanned/Faved.
photo
Razpooten
Nil homini certum est
12:13 PM on 11/07/2011
Amen and amen!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mszimmie
12:16 PM on 11/03/2011
www.taxthechurches.org
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giftsthatpurr
zestful life
12:24 PM on 11/07/2011
Thank you for the link.