iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama's Contraception Rule A Matter Of Life-Altering Care For Some

Obama Contraception

First Posted: 02/10/2012 9:24 am Updated: 02/10/2012 10:08 am

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The debate over President Barack Obama's new contraception-coverage rule has been largely been considered through the frame of religious liberties, federal authorities and electoral consequences.

For Kimberly Dudley, however, there is a significant, often delicate, medical component being lost in the discussion.

Dudley is one of approximately five million women who suffer from Polycystic Ovary Syndrome or PCOS, a complex disorder that is a major cause of female subfertility. The condition affected her mother and her six aunts, all of whom were forced to have hysterectomies before the age of 35.

Dudley, now 35 herself, is threatened with a similar outcome. A hormonal imbalance makes it difficult if not impossible for her body to have normal menstrual cycles. Periods can last weeks if not months. Her most recent one started on October 3, 2011. It ended three weeks ago.

"It almost killed me," she said, "the doctors couldn't stop the bleeding." They tried a number of medications before finding one that worked: a double-dosage of Aygestin, a drug that can be classified as a birth control.

"Had the last one not worked I would have likely had a hysterectomy," she said.

The Obama administration's rule change would force hospitals and schools owned and run by the Catholic Church and other religious organizations to offer health care plans to their employees that cover drugs like Aygestin. There is a year grace period before it becomes law and reports early Friday morning suggest that the administration will alter the language to allow religious groups more leeway in (and distance from) providing such coverage. Even when the new rule takes effect, Dudley won't be directly affected. A self-employed real estate broker, she pays $55 every month for her medication. Her insurance company covers the rest.

But that doesn't mean she doesn't have a deeply personal stake in the game. Her husband is a dean at a local North Carolina college. Were he to get a job offer at a Catholic university in one of the states that don't require those institutions to cover the co-pays of their employee's contraception, with her then being dependent on his plan, they'd be unlikely to move. "It would be sad he would have to make job choices based on something like this," she said.

Dudley brings to the debate a perspective that has been largely absent from public view. When the White House initially weighed the merits of changing federal policy on contraceptives, a cadre of largely female advisers invested in expanding health care coverage for women were pitted against mainly male aides, including several prominent Catholics, who warned that it would cause a political firestorm. Since the former won out, the president has come under intense pressure to reverse course.

Members of the Catholic Church, reportedly prepping for months for the battle, have been vocal with their concerns that the rule forces them to violate tenets of faith. Republicans and even some Democrats have warned that the policy represents a dangerous overreach by the federal government. It has been less common to hear from those whose lives (and not just their sex lives) are directly affected by current law.

"I'm a married woman," Dudley said. "I am a Christian. I don't believe in abortion. But this has nothing to do with any of that. This is a health issue for me and for millions of women."

Kimberly Dudley


The Guttmacher Institute estimates that roughly 14 percent of birth control prescriptions are written for non-contraceptive purposes, helping some 1.5 million women with issues like ovarian cancer, ovarian cysts, endometriosis, and endometrial cancer. Their stories, filled with difficult details of medical trauma and personal sacrifice, aren't usually the fodder for piqued political conversation, at least not until this week.

Dudley, for her part, kept the details of her condition secret from all but close friends and family. She only came forward on Thursday morning, when she sent an email to a wider group after finally hitting a boiling point with news coverage of the controversy. She forwarded that email to The Huffington Post shortly after.

Her first inclination that something might be wrong came when she was 18 years old. She went to the campus nurse at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, who recommended that she see an off-campus doctor. An ultrasound was conducted confirming PCOS. Her life since has been filled with efforts to manage the consequences. She shyly changes topic when people ask why she doesn't have more children (she and her husband have a nine year old.) She misses big events and birthday parties, including her best friend's 40th.

"When you are bleeding that high a volume there are times where you have to wear adult diapers," she says, by way of explaining why she's occasionally housebound.

Even more serious has been the medical complications. One recent large loss of blood resulted in severe iron deficiency and anemia. Things stabilized eventually. But Dudley said her doctor later told her that the doctor had thought she was going to die.

Finding the right medication has changed her life, she says. And she counts herself among the fortunate for having the resources to cover the costs. But she also recognizes how close she comes to being among the cast of the less lucky.

The Church may be sincere in arguing that Obama's new rule violates their consciousness. Lawmakers may be earnest in expressing concerns about the reach of government into world of contraception policy. But that doesn't change the fact that many women suffering from Dudley's condition, as she notes, "do not have access to health insurance coverage to pay for this medication simply because they work at places owned or run by the Catholic Church."

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The debate over President Barack Obama's new contraception-coverage rule has been largely been considered through the frame of religious liberties, federal authorities and electora...
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The debate over President Barack Obama's new contraception-coverage rule has been largely been considered through the frame of religious liberties, federal authorities and electora...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,256
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (15 total)
photo
BiznessLady
Stop the GOP/TP War on Women
02:05 PM on 02/12/2012
Yes they have forgotten the fact that many use BCP's to control very painful and/or out of control periods.
12:56 AM on 02/12/2012
church my foot give me my pills.I want one baby only I can take care of
12:46 AM on 02/12/2012
A question that nags me is why is this president so consumed with birth control and abortion??? Can it be that the circumstances of his own birth have had such an emotional impact on him that he needs to see that women either abort or prevent an unwanted pregnancy? Does he feel that he, himself, was an unwanted pregnancy...and does he need some emotional counseling to deal with this problem? I am seriously concerned with his emotional status and think...with all of the very serious problems here and abroad, he needs to be emotionally healthy enough to concentrate on those huge problems that should be handled by our 3 levels of leadership rather than abortion/birth control. I mean, really, people can handle birth control without prescriptions if they want to and abortion is already "out there" if people really want that. This is a personal choice and/or problem, not a national disaster. Get some help, Mr. Obama!
12:54 AM on 02/12/2012
oh no
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ann Starke
Progressive old broad
01:00 AM on 02/12/2012
Please read the article before commenting.
10:36 PM on 02/11/2012
It seems to be that the HuffPost could do a better job of reporting...the Catholic Church never has had a problem with using drugs to correct a health problem. Just because the same drug may be used as a contraceptive, when needed to address a legitimate health issue, there's no problem...nor would there be in health insurance. The issue is whether we should be covering the cost of drugs used solely to prevent pregnancy...NOT to correct health problems, but to prevent a normal, healthy function. Had the writer of this article done even a small amount of research, they would have been aware of that fact. To imply that the Church's position would deprive women of care for gynecological problems is misleading at best, and deceptive at worst. I suggest you post a correction!
cynt77
Stop The MADNESS!
01:43 AM on 02/12/2012
I haven't heard the Catholics mention "for health reasons", as yet.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spunky2go
Only Mean People Wear Fur
02:00 AM on 02/12/2012
I haven't either cynt..and I keep up daily.
07:00 AM on 02/12/2012
No...because the conversation has not been about the use of particular drugs (which could be used to CORRECT/TREAT a health problem) but about the mandate that these drugs be provided for CONTRACEPTION. That is what they disagree with.
11:29 AM on 02/12/2012
The following is a direct quote from Humane Vitae

Lawful Therapeutic Means

15. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever. (19)
12:10 PM on 02/12/2012
My understanding is similar to sben5's. I know for a fact there was no issue with my daughter, if she chose to do so, taking a drug (forget which one it was), normally used as a birth control pill for the purpose of dealing with a gynecological issue she had. At the time we sought the advice of individuals (both clerical and non-clerical) who strongly agree with the Church's teaching on birth control. Therefore, I would expect and support the ideas that a prescription written for a drug for non-birth control purposes would be covered by an insurance plan provided by a Catholic institution. It does get frustrating to contantly here the media be "shocked" by some new revelation about Catholic teaching that is readily available. Especially, in the age of the internet.
02:00 PM on 02/12/2012
Thanks ChuckD5 for the quote. I'll just add that Humanae Vitae, which means "On Human Life", was published in 1968, so the Church has held this position for the last 44 years. This teaching is in accord with reason, which would suggest that use of drugs (whether contraceptive or not) for the purpose of healing an illness is perfectly moral. Use of these drugs only becomes immoral when used for preventing or ending a life.
nonethewyzzer
Master of neither subtlety nor style.....
05:52 AM on 02/11/2012
I'm pleased that a compromise has been reached, but this particular article is disturbing.

While it's true that some insurance plans don't cover birth control pills for contraception, the denial is diagnosis-driven. The same drug, BC's, will be covered if the diagnosis is for a covered condition other than pregnancy prevention.
05:30 AM on 02/12/2012
Why should you have to have a reason to take them other than pregnancy prevention? It saves the insurance company money to prevent pregnancy. It's what they were made for and are an important service to women.
01:32 AM on 02/11/2012
As a Nurse Practitioner that specializes in Women's Health, I find this article very disturbing. Birthcontrol does NOT reduce ovarian cancer and is contraindicated with any kind of active cancer. Dudley's real issue is Obesity. PCOS is a problem with insulin resistance. Birthcontr­ol may have regulated her periods but it did nothing to improve her health. Her bleeding could have been easily treated with balancing her estrogen and progesterone using a bio-identical progesterone. Regulating her thyroid and changing her lifestyle would result in weight loss and better control of insulin. Women's health is much more than just taking a pill.
05:57 AM on 02/11/2012
Actually you are quite wrong. PCOS affects many normal weight women. Birth control IS a very common treatment for PCOS and weight loss would NOT manage their symptoms. Insulin resistance is not the same as hyperinsulinism. These patients are not diabetics. Not all patients with PCOS fit the same mold. Your statements reveal your lack of education and experience. Try not to diagnose patients without ever having actually seen them or second guessing their medical care when you have no idea if progesterone has been tried for this patient.
06:04 AM on 02/11/2012
Ohhhh...I had to go find this link for you. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/oral-contraceptives

If you are going to hold yourself as some expert in women's health, actually know some facts, please. Birth control pills clearly DECREASE risk of ovarian cancer by decreasing the number of ovulation events. Do some reading.
02:57 AM on 02/12/2012
I guess because the government and drug companies say that a synthetic drug decreases cancer then I should prescribe it to all my patients. I use drugs when they are appropriate but in my experience I have found that they are NOT the answer to everything. Look at the World Health Initiative Study for example. Drug companies assured me that synthetic estrogen made from pregnant horse urine and progestin was safe for my patients? Now they are proven cancerous. I am NOT against using synthetic hormones when needed but for preventative health there are better options. Patients can no longer assume that someone else will take responsibility for their health. If you are not getting results from your practitioner then you need to find one that looks beyond giving a pill.
03:11 AM on 02/12/2012
Here is a link to help you better understand PCOS. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1069067/
01:20 AM on 02/11/2012
Birthcontrol is contraindicated for ovarian cancer. Obesity is Dudley's real health care issue. http://soulcysters.com/weight_loss.html. She needs blood tests to check her estrogen/progesterone ratio and her thyroid. She needs to cut out processed foods and start an exercise program. Birthcontrol may have regulated her periods but it did nothing to improve her health. I could have regulated her periods using a bio-identical progesterone. Her anemia (not life threatening) would be treated by balancing estrogen with progesterone. Regulating her thyroid and changing her lifestyle results in weight loss and better control of insulin. Women's health is much more than just taking a pill.
nonethewyzzer
Master of neither subtlety nor style.....
05:57 AM on 02/11/2012
Oh. My. Gosh. Are you seriously out here on Huffington Post diagnosing and prescribing treatment for a women in a news article?

(By the way, blood-loss anemia certainly is life-threatening. It's the blood-loss part that gets 'em.)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KayJay90
What in the world...?
12:40 PM on 02/11/2012
Are you someone who merely SAYS she's a nurse practitioner? You could easily be sued for malpractice if you really are one, because your ignorance is profound.

I suffered from blood loss anemia for a gastrointestinal condition (that caused "microbleeds", undetectable in gross stool examination) a year and a half ago, and it nearly killed me. After months of gradual weakening and decline, I had a BP of 60/40 and was admitted as an inpatient for 4 units of blood and replacement IV fluids over a 2 day stay, only discharged when my BP and blood count were closer to normal. The condition itself was treated after a stool culture was done, and I finally regained my health.

It's entirely possible the above described PCOS sufferer had blood loss anemia from menstrual bleeding, and that it was life threatening.
12:56 AM on 02/11/2012
Obama does NOT understand women's health. Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome is a problem with hyperinsulinemia (too much insulin). The best treatment is weight loss. The only reason that birthcontrol would be used is to regulate periods. PCOS does not cause you to have to have a hysterectomy. In addition, birthcontrol is risky for many women because of the risk of blood clots and stroke. There are other treatment options available. This is a perfect example of why government should stay out of healthcare. They don't understand it.
11:27 AM on 02/11/2012
PCOS is well known to cause weight gain. It is also known that untreated PCOS makes it very difficult to impossible to lose weight. Please do your research before representing yourself as a professional.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KayJay90
What in the world...?
12:45 PM on 02/11/2012
After reading what utahnurse has to say, I hope some of her patients read here and realize they might be safer to seek medical care elsewhere.

Either that, or utahnurse is one of those right wing trolls who log on with a new identity from AOL every time an Obama topic appears on HuffPo, because they're the ones who usually comment without an iota of knowledge (apart from Googling) what they're commenting about.
01:36 AM on 02/12/2012
So, if what you're saying is true, than I really don't have PCOS... My insulin levels are within normal range, I am 5'5" and weigh 120lb. I work out on regular basis, I work at a gym, and I eat right. I even stopped eating gluten to see if that would help me stay off birth control, but it hasn't. A couple years ago I had to have one of my ovaries removed, due to constant cysts and a final one reaching 10cm (I don't wish that pain on anyone). Right now the only birth control that prevents me from having cysts is NuvaRing, and even with my husband's insurance it's $70/month. If it hadn't been for the doctor I had, I would have never been diagnosed with PCOS because I don't fit the "mold." From what I have read from you, it seems as though you don't understand healthcare.
11:35 PM on 02/10/2012
Mrs. Dudley's condition is a health issue which would be covered under a health plan, and I find it difficult to believe that she is incapable of setting aside the amount needed to pay for her health insurance or medications. Are we supposed to pay for that, as well? Get out of here! She look well off enough to pay for them!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KayJay90
What in the world...?
12:49 PM on 02/11/2012
Up to this year her ailment was a "pre-existing condition", no doubt refused payment by her health insurance company who probably doubled her insurance premiums anyway. Now thanks to the ACA she's covered.
02:22 PM on 02/11/2012
Kay, please read the article again. Her husband is a dean at a local college in N.C. and she is on his plan. My husband is a professor at a local college, and his plan is pretty good. At the bottom of paragraph 6, It says that even when this is enacted, Dudley WILL NOT BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED. This is a very misleading article. Furthermore, they say that if he 'got a job offer at a Catholic University at a state that does not require to COVER THE CO-PAYS of their contraception....(????) Whose health insurance covers the co-pays of any medication??? Her husband is a dean, she is a realtor, and she has the nerve to complain about a co-pay of $50 a month!! There is nothing new about rejecting a job offer that does not offer you what you want!!
Don't let yourself be bamboozled by this deceitful article. There are many ways for people who truly CANNOT AFFORD their medications/birth control to get them. Planned Parenthood receives MILLIONS of taxpayer $$$ every year, to dispense FREE OR LOW COST birth control to women who cannot afford them. Pharmaceutical companies have many programs as well to provide medications to people who need them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ann Starke
Progressive old broad
01:07 AM on 02/12/2012
My guess is that you are one of the newbie paid trolls.
11:27 PM on 02/10/2012
@ Sam Stein, Huffington Post Do you not find your title for this article a little peculiar? Let me give you a hint: When does the leader of a country have the power/authority to issue RULINGS?
Answer: When the leader is a DICTATOR!!! Obama is the president of the U.S.A., and the power/authority to make laws belongs to the Legislature, according to the Constitution.
Why don't you address the REAL issue here, which is that Obama is assuming DICTATORIAL powers, this time DEMANDING obedience from the Catholic church, who refused to obey, so he turned around and issued the ORDER/RULING against the insurance industry, who is less likely to fight?
Make the time you spent in journalism school worthwhile and report the REAL story, for a change. You might feel much better about yourself.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:55 PM on 02/10/2012
Too bad Bush/ Cheney didn't understand before they gave themselves the authority to wreak havoc in the world that has not stopped yet from their actions!
To you---LOL!
12:27 AM on 02/11/2012
I hate what they did as much as you do, but they did not act on their own. They had the consent of the Congress, in case you didn't know.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ann Starke
Progressive old broad
01:08 AM on 02/12/2012
Su Lin is that you?
10:01 PM on 02/10/2012
Regardless of how you feel about birth control the federal government has no authority to tell a private company or individual what to do as long as it doesn't infringe on someone elses freedom.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KayJay90
What in the world...?
01:02 PM on 02/11/2012
Which is not the case in this matter.

Not the "private company" part.

Not the "individual part".

Not the "what to do" part.

What part of "women's preventative health care coverage" don't you understand?

Are you one of those people who favor repealing the ACA that offers that benefit to women, something they didn't get before because of the prevailing excuse of "pre-existing conditions" used by insurance companies for everything from menstrual cramps to cancer?
01:44 PM on 02/11/2012
Beautiful heartfelt speech Kay, I can tell you are passionate about this but you didn't explain how I was wrong. Make no mistake about me Kay, I will never side with the government telling a company or an individual what to do even if it was going to save my life or the life of a loved one.
09:53 PM on 02/10/2012
Somehow I woke up in the 12th century.
12:55 AM on 02/12/2012
lol
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:36 PM on 02/10/2012
Two issues here:

Many Catholic institutions employ many, many non-Catholics. Their non-Catholic employees should do without birth control, just because they were lucky enough to have a job at a Catholic-run institution? That hardly seems like the spirit of "religious freedom", now does it?

The other thing, insurance policies that provide prescription drugs often exclude contraception, which discriminates against women. Why is this still happening, today, in the 21st century? If Viagra is covered, then surely contraception should also be.
11:41 PM on 02/10/2012
Birth control is not exorbitantly expensive, for crying out loud! Give up one weekend at the movies and it is covered. Health Insurance is not supposed to be for routine expenses, but for unaffordable ones. Where is everyones's common sense? This president thinks that insurance companies have pots filled with gold to pay for all the medical expenses of those who buy their policies. The benefits paid to the sick come from the premiums paid by both the sick and the healthy. How in the Sam Hill can they pay for benefits for people who are not paying for them?????
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:58 PM on 02/10/2012
It's obvious you didn't read the comment--your spewing.
Insure pots Are filled up----how can we sell our drugs to other countries for 1/2 to 1/2 what they cost here???? Can you explain that????
12:53 AM on 02/12/2012
FYI, SOME birth control is exorbitant­ly expensive!!! I was placed on a birth control pill for MEDICAL REASONS. That script cost me more to fill (and I have insurance!!) than my car payment!!!!
pfreddie88
Facts drive the GOP crazy...
09:35 PM on 02/10/2012
Every single woman who is catholic and approves of birth control needs to make your voices heard! Stop letting a group of old white men try to keep in in the 14th century! The best way to do this is to pass up the collection plate until they change their mind. That is the Catholic church's true religion: M O N E Y.
11:58 PM on 02/10/2012
Did you read your own posting? 'Every single woman who is catholic and approves of birth control...'
In the first place, a Catholic single woman who approves of birth control is probably already using it without the need of approval from the church. By now, most Catholic women are. The influence of the 'old white men' is a myth, and they cling to whatever the Pope RULES, because they are required to OBEY. The church functions that way, but most Catholics decide on their own whether or not to follow church RULINGS.
The real issue is NOT birth control, health care, or the Catholic church, but the fact that Obama is assuming DICTATORIAL powers, and issued a RULING against the Catholic church, over which he has NO AUTHORITY. Since the Church refused to obey, he then turned around and reissued the RULING against the insurance industry.
Presidents do not make laws/rules. The power to write laws belongs to the Legislature, who has passively yielded it to Obama. Do you understand the seriousness of this situation for the country?

No woman in this country is denied access to birth control. It is available through Health Care organizations, Planned Parenthood, and a private physicians. Health Insurance s/b for things that we normally would not have the $$ to pay for because they are too expensive, not for routine things like birth control pills.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:01 AM on 02/11/2012
That is ALL "organized religions" main motive---money. They sure as hell aren't giving it to the needy.
cynt77
Stop The MADNESS!
02:15 AM on 02/12/2012
They're using it to shuffle certain Priests around.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Querent
I say the things that have to be said.
08:47 PM on 02/10/2012
Now it would be only fitting for all of the hysterical rightwingers who have been screaming that the President was trampling on religious freedom to publicly apologize for their apoplectic outrage. The rule they objected to never went into effect, and now Mr. Obama has altered it to accommodate their paranoid objections. Foremost among those deranged loonies is Joe Scarborough, who has run his mouth on this non-issue to the point where he should be fitted with a gag and required to wear it whenever he's in public from now on.
12:05 AM on 02/11/2012
Do you even understand the meaning of what you wrote? 'The RULE they objected to........., and now Mr. Obama has altered it to ACCOMMODATE ........'
Question: When does the leader of a country have the authority/power to issue rulings/dictates/orders singlehandedly? Answer: When the leader is a DICTATOR!!
The power to make laws belongs to the Legislator, and the President has no authority to MAKE LAWS, much less to issue RULINGS!!
Good grief! Have you EVER read at the Constitution of your own country?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Querent
I say the things that have to be said.
02:03 AM on 02/11/2012
You and I have no basis for communication whatsoever.
mavpay
I am WE THE PEOPLE
02:12 PM on 02/11/2012
Brunilda: Why would a "DICTATOR" be willing to compromise? Why would a "DICTATOR" allow out of control leaders and individuals in another party behave in an uncivil manner toward his own party members and constituencies of his party? Why would a "DICTATOR" allow another party to engage in obstructionist tactics, while placing the economy and the welfare of the general public at risk? Why would a "DICTATOR" allow communications and commercial media outlets to LIE to the general public about his policies and the policies of his administration?

Beware of politicians who proselytize and take the EXTREME position! They often have another agenda. The commercial media will not explain this because they too have a vested interest, which is not to inform the public but to enhance the EXTREME. This is a political season and the president just out manuevered his opponents.



Read the official White House release: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/02/01/health-reform-preventative-services-and-religious-institutions