Moderated by Tom Sabulis
A university professor makes the following argument: Georgia law requires insurance plans that offer prescriptions to include contraceptives. The new Affordable Health Care Act requires all plans to include prescriptions. Thus, some religious institutions’ coverage must provide birth-control drugs they find objectionable. Health care advocates argue that contraceptive equity is important for women, and that it’s a medical — not religious — issue.
Commenting is open below Leola Reis’ column.
By Joseph M. Knippenberg
Georgia’s legislators ought to confront the fact that our churches and other religious institutions are at the moment less free to act conscientiously than most of their counterparts across the country.
The reason? For more than a decade, Georgia law has required all health insurance plans that offer prescriptions to include contraceptives in their coverage. With the advent of Obamacare, every plan in the country has to offer prescription coverage. Thus every Georgia plan will have to offer contraceptives, including the abortifacients — drugs such as Plan B and Ella — to which many religious people object.
Because the Obama Administration hasn’t affirmatively stated that its insurance regulations will supersede more stringent state policies, the currently rather stingy federal exemptions for houses of worship, and the promise of a more generous policy later in the year, won’t necessarily avail Georgia’s religious groups unless — like the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta — they self-insure.
Our churches, temples and mosques may well continue to be subject to more stringent requirements than those currently found in the laws of Massachusetts, New York and California, all of which offer exemptions of one sort or another to religious institutions.
To be sure, the Obama Administration says that it will not permit states to be more generous in accommodating conscientious objections than it proposes to be — so, should its proposals stand, the most generous states will have to fall in line. But regulations in less generous states, like Georgia, might well be left alone.
Isn’t it ironic that our Bible Belt state, with a Republican leadership that has eagerly embraced opportunities to challenge the mandates of the Affordable Care Act, has left its own even more stringent mandate in place?
The easiest thing for legislators who care about religious liberty to do, is to change Georgia’s law. They could simply drop Georgia’s mandate altogether, since it’s superseded by the Affordable Care Act. In that case, our churches, temples and mosques would be subject to the tender mercies of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, perhaps ultimately corrected by federal courts.
The advantage of this approach is that it puts opponents in a difficult position, having to argue that the authors and enforcers of the Affordable Care Act — for the most part their political allies, in other words — were too generous in accommodating religion. What’s more, they would also have to be both for and against national standards in health care provision.
The other alternative is for our legislators to assert the traditional role of states and carve out a more generous exemption for employers who object to providing this coverage.
I think that the Constitution and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ultimately favor the challengers, and that Georgia would be in very good company on the winning side. But in the short term, I’d settle for extending to my fellow Georgians the same conscientious exemptions that most Americans already enjoy.
Joseph M. Knippenberg is professor of politics at Oglethorpe University.
By Leola Reis
Georgia was the second state in the nation to mandate prescriptive equity in 1999 and has since been joined by 27 additional states. It requires that any insurance company that provides prescriptive coverage also include prescriptive contraceptives. This proud health care legacy was reinforced by the Affordable Care Act passed in August 2012, which meant women with insurance were no longer required to pay co-pays for birth control. Greater access to preventive care will go a long way to improving the overall health of the women in Georgia and around the country.
Family planning, like cancer screenings and birth control, are basic health care for women. Birth control access and information help to reduce abortions. Further, access to birth control and emergency contraception is a critical health and economic concern for American women. Prior to prescriptive equity legislation, women paid significantly more out-of-pocket for prescriptions than men.
The birth control benefit of the Affordable Care Act made contraceptives available with no co-pays for many women with insurance. When women have access to a contraceptive that works best for them, they are less likely to face an unintended pregnancy. And access to emergency contraception, which prevents pregnancy following unprotected sex and does not cause an abortion, will further help women to reach their education, career and family goals.
In September 2012, the Guttmacher Institute released findings that showed what we at Planned Parenthood have always known: that women use birth control to achieve their ambitions and plan for when they are ready to be a parent. Participants in the survey said they wanted to support themselves financially, complete their education, or get a job and used birth control to accomplish these goals.
Virtually all sexually active women in the U.S. report using contraception at some point in their lives. The average number of children in an American family is two. This means that most women spend much of their adult reproductive life trying to avoid pregnancy.
Access to birth control is a medical issue, not a political or religious one. The Guttmacher Institute released a report in April 2011 indicating that birth control use and religious beliefs are not incompatible. Sexually active women who do not want to become pregnant use birth control, and the study showed this to be true of evangelicals, Protestants and Catholics, despite the Catholic Church’s opposition to contraceptives. Clearly, what women and families do is not a reflection of religious anti-birth control doctrine.
The independent Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommended that insurance companies cover birth control just like any other preventive prescription. It is good sense and good medicine. And a health care policy of which Georgia can be proud.
Leola Reis is vice president of external affairs for Planned Parenthood Southeast.
14 comments Add your comment
middle of the road
February 1st, 2013
12:03 pm
I am a Jehovah’s Witness. I believe my employees should not receive blood transfusions. That should not be part of our insurance.
mrgiarc
February 1st, 2013
11:15 am
First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… This states that the government business and church doctrine should not mingle to put it simply. The founding fathers knew that if we favored one religion over another and that religion also would have be enforced by the government was no different than the tyranny that they fled. The Catholic Church has no business suing the federal government for any reason. The church needs to worry about pedophile priests and leave women’s health alone. The one that I find funny is that the people leading the charge to deny women birth control coverage are white men and GOP supporters one and all. The so called “War on women “is still ongoing in my book.
First Links — 2.1.13 » First Thoughts | A First Things Blog
February 1st, 2013
8:59 am
[...] The Mandate and State Employees Joseph Knippenberg, Atlanta Journal-Constitution [...]
Numbers on Medicaid add up to savings for Florida – Tampabay.com | Weight Loss Diet Plan
January 31st, 2013
11:12 pm
[...] layoffs and the Affordable Heath Care ActNews 10NBCPeoria Journal Star -Washington Times -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)all 88 news [...]
An observer
January 31st, 2013
9:57 pm
And we complain about health insurance being too expensive!
Contraceptive mandate? – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) | Wayne E. Seelinger
January 31st, 2013
9:54 pm
[...] is the original post: Contraceptive mandate? – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged across-the-country, atlanta-journal, [...]
Out by the Pond
January 31st, 2013
9:28 pm
The law does not force anyone to use contraceptives, it only requires tat they be made available should someone of their own free will desires to use them.
SAWB
January 31st, 2013
7:44 pm
At first this seemed like a difficult issue for me and I suspect most people of faith that have no problem with contraceptives. However, as someone that I also agree with the policy of separation of Church and State this issue becomes a little less difficult. The Church should not tell the Government how to run the affairs of State, and the Government should not tell the Church how to handle their affairs.
So, to me it sounds as if the Government should allow Religious Organizations to make their own polices in this area. If an employee objects they are free to seek employment somewhere else.
mark
January 31st, 2013
7:39 pm
My friend’s dad use to tell us teenagers boys, “What do call someone who uses the rhythmic method of birth control? A parent”
ATL Born and Raised
January 31st, 2013
4:59 pm
Plan B is NOT an abortifacient. It is simply an overdose of normal contraceptives that prevent fertilization. If fertilization has occurred, it has no effect. Therefore, by definition, NOT an abortifacient.
Even if employers object to birth control, employers cannot tell their employees what they can do with their compensation. Employer-subsizided health insurance benefits are a form of compensation. I know my the offer letter from my employer stated this explicitly. This means women aren’t getting anything for free. They work and earn their compensation. Further, they pay their premiums every month.